reuse sketches and planes in other parts studios

daniel_weseman

Hello
Im a OnShape newbie ,and so i have made some data management errors . I basically modeled way to many parts in one studio,so want to go back and reorganize. I want to reuse several sketches and planes I created in the new parts studio to contain only the Master sketches. 
I know this must be really simple, and wanted to give support a brake,as well and try the forum. Thanks for any Advice

Dan

3dcad

You can use 'Derived' to insert part or sketch from another studio.

https://cad.onshape.com/help/#derived.htm?Highlight=derived

daniel_weseman

As i understand it if i use derived then the studio I remove from will then be in"control" of the sketch? I think maybe it is simplest to "copy the studio, and then delete all my other actions except the sketches and planes? 
Thanks

3dcad

I'm not sure if I got the main point here, but if you derive the original sketch will be in control and derived one is driven. If you copy/duplicate there will be no strings attached and you are free to alter studios as you wish.

Going forward, if you spread assembly across documents be aware that you need to create a version before you can use part / subassembly in another doc (higher level assembly).

Jake_Rosenfeld

I think the concern @daniel_weseman is trying to get at is that 'derived' must completely rebuild the Part Studio it is deriving from, even if you only take one sketch or part.  I think the plan to just 'Copy Workspace' and delete what you don't need sounds like a good plan.  Although @philip_thomas may have an opinion.

daniel_weseman

The bigger picture ... I have about 30 parts (many are sheet metal) in one studio,which is drastically hindering refresh performance. What I want to do is save the sketches and planes I have created, In one "master sketch studio" then rebuild the parts ,one per studio,using derived etc. Then I will sub-assemble /assembly etc to create the entire project. I would really like to get it "clean" with no time line. I will keep fumbling until I take the boot camp next week...

michał_1

I would create "MasterSketches" Part Studio with basic sketches. Then I would create "Auxiliary" Assembly, insert all sketches from "MasterSketches" and then from that "Auxiliary" Assembly I would use "Create Part Studio in context". This way you should avoid problems with derived Part Studios being rebuilt. The downside is that you must remember to update context relations if any changes are performed on "MasterSketches" Part Studio. Another downside is that you will rather need another "Main" Assembly to build the design (also it could be an option that you will need to create some new contexts to the "Main" assembly, then you have to craft new skill of managing in-context references)

brucebartlett

michał_1 said:

I would create "MasterSketches" Part Studio with basic sketches. Then I would create "Auxiliary" Assembly, insert all sketches from "MasterSketches" and then from that "Auxiliary" Assembly I would use "Create Part Studio in context". This way you should avoid problems with derived Part Studios being rebuilt. The downside is that you must remember to update context relations if any changes are performed on "MasterSketches" Part Studio. Another downside is that you will rather need another "Main" Assembly to build the design (also it could be an option that you will need to create some new contexts to the "Main" assembly, then you have to craft new skill of managing in-context references)

Michal this is an interesting way to solve the problem, I'd never thought of using in-context this way. However, a cleaner way would be deriving from a version, which I think gives cleaner control with the same outcome. 



and you can always go back and edit which version you're derived from if need be.  

michał_1

You're right, I've mentioned that possible workflow only because Jake raised a problem of derived rebuilding whole Part Studio. If we can be sure that main Part Studio will be relatively simple that derived should be faster and less (much less) confusing.