Creating an exploded assembly configuration (Named Position) with instances created from a pattern

StephenG

I have an assembly that contains a number of instances (7) that are the result of circular patterns. Moving the parent or child instance produces uncontrollable position movements that make it impossible to arrange the instances in a way I want to represent the exploded assembly.

Is there a way to use the assembly pattern feature to create instances where the resultant is unique instances not tied to the pattern feature?

Should be  

Seems like there should be an check box option in the "Assembly linear/circular Pattern" feature to "Create unique instances".

Or, once the pattern instances have been created an option (RMB Menu) that allows uncoupled movement independent of the instance from the other pattern instances. Since there is already an option to "Fix" a instance into a position maybe the option should be call "Float" which causes any assembly constraint to be ignored it may have which would allow the instance to be freely moved.

Or, add a property (checkbox option called "Ignore/Disable assembly/mate constraints") to the "Name Position".  

StephenG

I just discovered a what I think is a clever work round. 

1) Select all the instances in the assembly that has instances created from patterns with other mate constraints.
2) Use the RMB "Copy x items"
3) Create a new assembly tab
4) Open the new assembly tab
5) Use RMB "Paste x items"

The resultant is no patterns and no mate constraints, just the instances which are free to blow in the wind.

This isn't an optimal solution, but at least I can make an assembly drawing with an exploded view.

NeilCooke

Hi Stephen, if your look in the AppStore there is an app for creating exploded assemblies which will help you in this situation. 

StephenG

Looked at it.... the name says is all: "Onshape Explode Sample". This is not a useful tool but a intellectual exercise that highlights FeatureScript's capabilities.

Obviously, the FeatureScript's author has expended a lot of effort on it, but unfortunately the author has made the same basic flawed assumptions and failed to jump the hurdles that would make the end product usable. I have never seen an automated assembly explode function produce anything that could be used without having to correct what it did. So it always boils down to the question: would I rather manually position the instances myself and get exactly what I what, or light the fuse and deal with the bomb shrapnel of the explode function?

Even if the automatic explode function might give me most of what I want, the unpredictable behavior of it causes me to always pick a path that has a clear predicable path to the desired end state.

The thing that everyone seems to forget is that an exploded assembly configuration is observer dependent; you need to have a somewhat uniform visible white space between the various elements of interest and that white space is very much a function of the observer's point of view. This is why once the desired 3D layout of the instances on the screen has been achieved a "Named View" is created to capture the observer's point of view so it can be leveraged in creating a drawing view of the exploded assembly (currently not possible in Onshape).

I see the FeatureScript author employed the same workaround I used to get arbitrary orientation control over the instances. This shouldn't be required; there needs to be a option/property added to "Named Positions" that "sleeps" the underlying assembly constraint solver when that "Named Position" is active; this cannot be that difficult to do. There is also one assembly "Triad" transformation method that needs to be added: translate radially about an axis.

Have you noticed that one cannot reference an assembly's "Named Position" when creating a drawing view?

So until the option to turn off the constraint solver for a "Named Position", reference a "Named Position" in a drawing view and create views from "Named Views" are possible, I cannot see how it is possible to create drawings of exploded assemblies.     
       

 

ilya_baran

Just to clarify, the exploded view app has nothing to do with FeatureScript (which only lives in Part Studios, not assemblies).  It is an example of using the Onshape API and sometimes useful as a workaround while we build real tools to help create exploded views.

StephenG

I should have recognized the UI difference between a "FeatureScript" and an "App". Excuse: New User.

I am not sure I comprehend what you meant by "FeatureScript (which only lives in Part Studios, not assemblies).". Do mean that a FeatureScript's scope is limited to just to Part Studios?

So it appears there is another customization level beyond FeatureScript that can be used to manipulate/interact with Onshape data. Would this be akin to using a classical general purpose programming language with Onshape provided API libraries? I imagine the API's are only available if you sign a NDA and pay a licensing/royalty fees.

Regardless of what Onshape has planned for providing a "Push Button Solution" to generate exploded assemblies the focus should be to first address the significant short comings with "Named Position", "Named View" and leveraging that information to create drawing views. The Onshape user base will be far better served addressing those limitations before giving them an "Explode Assembly" function.