Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.
First time visiting? Here are some places to start:- Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
- Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
- Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
- Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.
If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.
transform by line with constraint by axis or parallel surface distance
nathan_shaffer
Member Posts: 10 ✭✭
Frequently I have been coming across the need to transform while constraining to an axis. Often I have a part that I need to align one surface to another surface without moving in any other axis. I know I can use a distance parameter along an axis using transform by distance/axis, but that results in a hard coded distance, rather than deriving from features. I could also create a guide sketch with a line that uses those constraints, but that seems rather inelegant. The ideal solution would be to be able to constrain to an axis when using "transform by line" when picking 2 points, or if one could pick 2 planes in "transform by distance", letting the tool calculate the parallel distance resulting in co-planar surfaces and transforming along the normal axis.
Comments
Have you tried transform by mate connector?
or use measured variables to determine the distance?
Yes, and it is good for some situations. but there are many other times that there are no two suitable mate connectors available
I hadn't thought about that, I still don't love that it pollutes the feature tree with more items, and it requires a few more steps. but at least it would allow for a feature based constraint.
I hadn't thought about that, I still don't love that it pollutes the feature tree with more items, and it requires a few more steps. but at least it would allow for a feature based constraint.
You can create mate connectors on the fly with the tool they don't have to be "available"
Of course, but a mate connector in part studio must constrain in all 3 axis. When I say 'available' I mean any of the mate connector suggestions to be created on the fly. I don't want to move the part in 3 axis, I only want to move it in one axis, the normal axis.
I don't know what your trying to do but I feel like it sounds like there might be a simple solution.
I thought I had marked this as a feature request, but maybe I didn't. It's not that I can't make it work, It's that it involves more steps than I would like. would'nt it be nice to just translate a part by selecting 2 faces and letting the tool calculate the distance between faces, or to select 2 points and let the tool constrain to an axis. essentially the same as the measure tool where you can constrain to an axis rather than measuring the minimum distance.
If I understand you correctly, you can solve at least one situation (transforming from point to point) using the standard transform feature, but you have to use transform by mate connector. Then you can use two implicit mate connectors, one for the “from” point and one for the “to” point. It’s too many clicks, but it doesn’t take any extra features.
Simon Gatrall | Product Development Specialist | Open For Work
How do you keep it from moving in more than one axis using mate connectors? Like, lets say I have a cube that I want to move along the y axis, but I want to keep its position in the x and z axis. I have two points or mate connectors that are the correct distance along the y axis for the translation, but they themselves are not on the same y axis. if I move between them, then the cube will translate x and or z as well, which I don't want. I find this to be the case when I am importing parts that have filleted edges and odd geometry. Take this example I created for this discussion.
Let's say I want to move the motor on Y-Axis so that the end of the shaft is flush with the front surface of the box, but I don't want the motor to move from its z position. And I also want to move the left face of the motor on X-axis to be coplanar with the left face of the box. Any mate connector I place on the end of the shaft will move it down so that it is buried in the box. Same with the left face. Of course I can measure the directions I need to move in each direction, but those values might change if I edit something further up the tree. Or I can create measurement variables, but that is 2 variables and 2 transforms just to get it aligned and just feel clunky.
2 measured variables that go into 1 transform (translate by x,y,z) could do in this case.
Better yet: draw the box, put it in an assembly, import the motor into the same assembly, mate it as you wish, and edit the box in context.
When you (mis)use part studio to make your assemblies, the functionality won't align with your needs…
Oh I understand now. Thank you for clarifying. Yes I've reached for similar functionality only to have swung and missed. Basically your asking for the program to do the math for you instead of measuring something and then using transform by direction. Doing an XYZ move after creating a variable or taking a measurement is limited to orthogonal intents and requires that extra step of taking a measurement. What if your object and references are skewed? Gotta enter all three measurements..
I agree it would be a nice addition. There would be a few ways I could see that implemented. You could create a feature request for it. I'd vote for it.