Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.

First time visiting? Here are some places to start:
  1. Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
  2. Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
  3. Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
  4. 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.

Specific entities required to define a feature

Ahlam_QattanAhlam_Qattan Member Posts: 2 PRO
This is common across most features in OnShape but it's easier to explain with one example.

Example - when you're trying to generate a plane, rather than it asking for 'entities' its should specify exactly what entities it needs to create each type of plane. Otherwise you, as a user, need to know exactly what type of geometry is needed for evey different type of plane. 

A dialog border on the bottom of the screen could also aid this with a little more information to help you select the correct entity.


Current OnShape window, it can be unclear or misleading exactly what geometry is required. You can even tick the green arrow and the incomplete plane will appear on your feature tree.


The type of definition box that would be more helpful (pulled from CATIA). Here, as you scroll through the different plane types, it updates what geometry is required. If the incorrect geometry is selected or a geometry it cannot solve, it will explain why, to allow you to change your selection. If it cannot solve it, it will not let you create it. 

Thanks!!

Comments

  • owen_sparksowen_sparks Member, Developers Posts: 2,660 PRO
    edited January 2018
    Hi

    I agree with all of this with the exception of prohibiting the creation of features with missing parameters. I like the fact that currently we can get part way through creating a new feature and then save it with missing parameters and return to it later once we have created what we need to complete the feature rather than have to start all over again.

    Cheers Owen S.
    Business Systems and Configuration Controller
    HWM-Water Ltd
  • michael_mcclainmichael_mcclain Member Posts: 195 PRO
    I agree with both of you. Sometimes plane creation can confuse me on exactly what I'm able to use as a reference, so I typically select the entities before the command and it figures out which one to use for me.

    @owen_sparks I do love the fact that you can create failed features and come back to them later. In Creo, I have so many times when it will just start failing everything and I cant get my idea across at the time of creation then finish the idea later
Sign In or Register to comment.