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.
Assembly Planes - Where are they?
Answers
-
No update. It's one of the strangest product decisions that I had to get used to in Onshape. I usually create an assembly mate connector at the origin to make it easier to mate parts or sub-assemblies. If it's helpful, it's not hard for this "origin" mate connector to have its Z axis pointing in the direction that makes the most sense for your subsequent mates.The most challenging issue of not having assembly planes is taking cross sections when there isn't a good reference to start from. It's even worse on mobile.Perhaps you can explain what you're trying to do with assembly planes and we can tell you how to work around it?
Here are some past discussions (which you may have seen already):Simon Gatrall | Product Development, Engineering, Design, Onshape | Ex- IDEO, PCH, Unagi, Carbon | LinkedIn
3 -
When designing furniture style objects, or other things that are to be set up on some kind of floor, I usually work around the missing 'ground plane' by adding a floor plan model which may be nothing but a sketch.
1 -
I couldn't agree more on the mobile experience regarding assembly planes & cross sections.S1mon said:No update. It's one of the strangest product decisions that I had to get used to in Onshape. I usually create an assembly mate connector at the origin to make it easier to mate parts or sub-assemblies. If it's helpful, it's not hard for this "origin" mate connector to have its Z axis pointing in the direction that makes the most sense for your subsequent mates.The most challenging issue of not having assembly planes is taking cross sections when there isn't a good reference to start from. It's even worse on mobile.Perhaps you can explain what you're trying to do with assembly planes and we can tell you how to work around it?
Here are some past discussions (which you may have seen already):0 -
Not sure if helps with mobile (if it's been implemented or not) but the new "mate connector at origin" of part should help provide at leas some point to start a section.
On top of adding a mate connector(s) at the origin, otherwise adding a couple explicit mate connectors to your part can usually solve the problem, or inserting a layout sketch in the assembly is also a good option for more complex cases.0 -
The reason there are no assembly planes is because Onshape does not use planes to mate parts together. It would promote the old "3 planar mate technique" rather than a single mate/connector.Senior Director, Technical Services, EMEA1
-
@NeilCooke I get that planar mates are typically not necessary... however, sectioning without default planes is often a huge pain, if not impossible, if your models are not simple orthogonal shapes. There are also many times when a ground plane and a planar mate would make a ton of sense for laying out equipment or furniture. Having to jump through hoops to do these basic activities does not win the hearts of new or casual users. Without adding sketches, helper parts or mate connectors to an assembly, I can't send most of the projects I've worked on to someone and expect them to be able to take a section. This is one of the most user hostile design choices that Onshape has made.
Simon Gatrall | Product Development, Engineering, Design, Onshape | Ex- IDEO, PCH, Unagi, Carbon | LinkedIn
12 -
I find it interesting to see this discussion still going around. When starting with OS I initially found myself wanting assembly planes because of the previous tools I'd worked with. However, I haven't missed it at all once I spent some getting used to OS methods and that didn't take long. The biggest problem was to align non uniform shapes but once I got used to the multipart studio and inserting in place the problem really didn't exist. Maybe some more instruction in the basics to handle conversion for those that have used other tools?2
-
In any new assembly I immediately place 3 Mate Connectors at the origin, with their Z-axes pointing along the X, Y, Z axis of the view cube. I even name them "X", "Y", "Z"! You can "lock" the Z-axis to different directions using the Shift key as you hover over the origin during Mate Connector creation.This way I have the usual planes for section views (select the MC you want before you invoke the section). Mate Connectors behave like Coordinate systems, axes, and (1 xy) planes, all in one element.For most default component positional mates, I make sure to select the Z mate connector from the instance list - since it's tough to pick from the display area. These mate connectors are also fantastic for any patterns that you need to create in the assembly - the Z-axis defines the "direction".4
-
This is a good work around, but it seems like something should be built in.romeograham said:In any new assembly I immediately place 3 Mate Connectors at the origin, with their Z-axes pointing along the X, Y, Z axis of the view cube. I even name them "X", "Y", "Z"! You can "lock" the Z-axis to different directions using the Shift key as you hover over the origin during Mate Connector creation.This way I have the usual planes for section views (select the MC you want before you invoke the section). Mate Connectors behave like Coordinate systems, axes, and (1 xy) planes, all in one element.For most default component positional mates, I make sure to select the Z mate connector from the instance list - since it's tough to pick from the display area. These mate connectors are also fantastic for any patterns that you need to create in the assembly - the Z-axis defines the "direction".There are no part studio or assembly templates, and no assembly feature scripts, so there's no quicker way to add those 3 MCs. You could duplicate a tab, and move it to another document, but that seems more awkward.Simon Gatrall | Product Development, Engineering, Design, Onshape | Ex- IDEO, PCH, Unagi, Carbon | LinkedIn
3 -
Yep - it's a total workaround. At least it can be quick if you remember to:
- hide the first MC you create (so you can select the origin for the next one!)...and
- remember to use Shift to lock to the axis you want,
- Shift+N to name each one as you create them, and if you
- remember to use Shift+Enter to save each one and keep the dialog open to make the next MC (see - this has already taken longer to type than to add them).
1 -
If you are as obsessive as I am, you'll also want save some time by creating the MCs in XYZ order, so that they are in order in the mate features list (or you'll just have to reorder them afterwards).
Simon Gatrall | Product Development, Engineering, Design, Onshape | Ex- IDEO, PCH, Unagi, Carbon | LinkedIn
1 -
I fully agree that these are workarounds and there should be a built in solution.S1mon said:
This is a good work around, but it seems like something should be built in.romeograham said:In any new assembly I immediately place 3 Mate Connectors at the origin, with their Z-axes pointing along the X, Y, Z axis of the view cube. I even name them "X", "Y", "Z"! You can "lock" the Z-axis to different directions using the Shift key as you hover over the origin during Mate Connector creation.This way I have the usual planes for section views (select the MC you want before you invoke the section). Mate Connectors behave like Coordinate systems, axes, and (1 xy) planes, all in one element.For most default component positional mates, I make sure to select the Z mate connector from the instance list - since it's tough to pick from the display area. These mate connectors are also fantastic for any patterns that you need to create in the assembly - the Z-axis defines the "direction".There are no part studio or assembly templates, and no assembly feature scripts, so there's no quicker way to add those 3 MCs. You could duplicate a tab, and move it to another document, but that seems more awkward.
I'd really like to see a mate connector which behaves as a full coordinate system (3 selectable axis and planes), so we don't have to add 3 of them every time. If it then would be placed at the origin as default, that would be even better.2 -
I have a folder named " templates " that I have stored starter part studios just like you've described above - where you create blank parts set up how you like them, then later you copy workspace & move to your project (using them as templates) It is a workaround but is worth it (and is faster than creating from scratch).I also have one set up with 3 sketches with one construction line in each one, that defines x,y,z, axis ( this is a throwback to working in inventor ).The upshot is, if you think you'll use it a lot - make a your own template.2
-
Adding to the conversation - I would like to define a plane in my assembly that is a symmetry plane. This way I can measure the distance between anything and the symmetry plane to get the overall dimension (I have only one side detailed out).
0 -
Planes in assemblies would be much needed! I can't believe this is not an option…at least there should be the option to be able to see visible planes of parts, in assemblies, so as to be able to use them to section views…c'mon!
2 -
I believe mate connectors are essentially your assembly planes
2 -
The mating process is fine, but there needs to be some way to address the sectioning, especially when you can't use a mate connector as a "plane".
2 -
Mate Connectors can be used to create a section view. Just select the Mate Connector, and the section plane will be defined by the XY plane of the Mate Connector.
1 -
Ultimately at the least the Section creation dialog should have an option to run thru the origin aligned with XYZ with angle control.
This is the type of stuff that has our more advanced users not consider Onshape as a serious engineering toolAdrian V. | Onshape Ambassador
CAD Engineering Manager2 -
I think it’s very limiting having no planes in the assembly. I have rounded parts such as stacking cups,
I couldn't section view about the front/side plane.
1 -
You should be able to pick any cylindrical or conical face for a section view, it creates the section along the axis of the face "snapping" to the nearest XYZ planes.
1 -
If you need planes visible or usable in an assembly, here’s a simple workaround I`ve tough about:
- Create a Part Studio with a flat surface.
- Insert that surface into your assembly and position it at the origin.
- Use that surface to create X, Y, and Z reference planes as needed.
- Save the assembly as a template so you can reuse it for future projects.
If you want a part’s plane to be visible or referenced directly in an assembly, you can also create a surface in that part that coincides with the plane you want to use. Once inserted, that surface will be visible in the assembly where that part is inserted and can serve as a reference just like a plane.
0 -
After some experimenting, I found that creating a part that’s essentially an extrusion of 0.00001 mm works better than using a surface. It behaves just like a plane but provides more mating options in assemblies.
0
