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.
Is "Drawing" the weak point of OnShape ?
We recently had an administrative decision to change our software from Solid Edge to OnShape.
From the beginning, I loved the “Part studio” and “Assembly” part of it. For multiple reasons I prefer it to our former software. Our students learn it faster.
The problem is when we get to produce drawings.
I’ve been teaching for decades, trying to produce good draftsman for our industry (Furniture and architectural woodworking). I’m teaching them good practice on how to communicate efficiently in full respect of ANSI and our industry standards.
With OnShape Drawing, I just cannot do it. I may have to train them on another software, which is not the ideal solution. As I see it, the weak point of OnShape is drawing. The simplicity of Part studio and Assembly do not look like less than the big software (SW, SE...), it looks like “Forward”. The simplicity of Drawing looks like BASIC & nonprofessional.
I looked over the required improvements (IMPROVEMENT REQUESTS) and my dissatisfaction toward Drawing seems to be marginal. I would propose that some people that use drawings intensively are just not members of the club. Maybe, they did not jump into the train because of that. As an introduction, I told you that our switch to OnShape was an administrative decision. This means that I would not have made that choice because of the limited possibility of Drawing.
I really hope that very soon you will give us the opportunity to produce professional drawings that we can be proud of.
It is in our common interest.
Here are the improvements that we really need, to be able to meet the minimum standards of our industry, as well as ANSI’s.
1- Having the possibility to hatch different materials with different hatching symbols.
2- Improving the hatching automatic spacing. Sometimes you get just one line of hatching for a surface. If you cannot get the software to do it right, please give us the possibility to adjust it ourselves.
3- Break view on sections. Details on a small scale views is not a good solution for our type of assemblies. (see provided example)
4- Local sections on an external view. We have to do it several times in a project, and we would not like to see all the section symbols everywhere. (see provided example)
5- The possibility to break a part in a drawing (not for real) to show what is under it. (see provided example). This could possibly be done with the “local section” tool I mention on point 4-
I hope that
I’m not asking for too big issues .
La simplicité est la sophistication suprême.
Léonard de Vinci