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.
Comments
@Philip_Thomas_PTC I think that's a very sensible rollout strategy. I don't mean to imply that it should already be implemented, but wanted to add my thoughts now in case there's ongoing discussion for the future, which it sounds like there is! Thanks for the reply
The Onsherpa | Reach peak Onshape productivity
www.theonsherpa.com
Excellent updates! The include properties checkbox is something we have been wanting to help keep our library clean. Is there a way to change the default to leave that box unchecked? That is typically what we want in our workflows.
@Philip_Thomas_PTC
I was imagining that we get a workflow much like creating a new regular variable while in sketcher (or other situations). You could create a QV while in another feature and the QV would be added to the feature tree right before the current feature. This would be an explicit QV. If you delete the feature that was used to create the QV, it would still exist, just like a regular variable.
Evan's second concept is more of a parallel with implicit mate connectors. I could see that being useful to keep the tree less cluttered, but much like implicit MCs, I often later want to be able to reuse them, and there's currently no way to do that. I'd almost prefer that those MCs got added before the feature the same way on-the-fly variables do. It would be more consistent and make them more useful. I suspect that part of the reason for that workflow was that at the time, MCs needed an owner. Now that they don't, I don't see why they shouldn't be created above the feature for potential reuse.
Simon Gatrall | Staff Mechanical Engineer | Carbon, Inc.
Ok, guess my Query Finder isn't deprecated just yet.
I've added an option called "Convert to Query Variable" to the
Set Query Attribute feature. This will let us still use attributes and expressions but convert the results to a Query Variable. Not ideal as it takes extra steps but the functionality is there.
Query Variable Feedback:
These are some important points. If we can't use expressions, it really limits the amount of automation we can achieve.
https://cad.onshape.com/documents/e198b079c4791595b0cdfaac/w/65a5fada7da994fea64570c0/e/0c8a11432c9a0ab7ac…
Learn more about the Gospel of Christ ( Here )
CADSharp - We make custom features and integrated Onshape apps! Learn How to FeatureScript Here 🔴
Great update, congrats to everyone envolved!
In future I would love to see an option to export Document Notes as PDF.
I think it would be pratical as a way of making the Instructions on the Document Notes and then have the possibility to export as PDF, so it can be printed and shared on the shop floor in areas were there isn´t a computer yet.
Is there a way to markup a pic in the "Comments" and add it to the "Document Notes"? They seem a bit redundant. Not complaining, I like them both. I just do better with pictures.
Love querry variables.
I can certainly see use-cases for richer content in this panel. I'd love to embed videos here to include a tour for top-level things in a multi-document top-down model. I'll settle for urls for now.
The Onsherpa | Reach peak Onshape productivity
www.theonsherpa.com
Standard Markdown seems to work for both image and video! https://cad.onshape.com/documents/08af2a4f125a980f501dcc2e/w/026a96708185c5044c9f33f1/e/41b7387412e8ea737fcfedbf
Has the query variable and some other updates not been rolled out to enterprise accounts yet? I see document notes but missing others.
This markdown syntax seems to work so far. I can link to spreadsheets!!!!
https://www.markdownguide.org/basic-syntax/
Everybody should see it by now. Probably, the workspace you are in is at the old version. Try Humburger menu/ Update workspace.
Already getting my mileage out of the new query variable functionality and adding some new functions to it to help clean up some of the topological messes people send my way. I'll probably find some way to shove frame and sheet metal properties in here as things to query by at some point too.
PCB Studio is heading in the right direction. If a full MECAD solution is realized, Onshape really will become an industry staple in no time.
@Derek_Van_Allen_BD
Very cool. I'm very curious how you add the tolerances. I guess I need to look at the official code for the query variables.
I very much want to see a good query that will find all the corners of a sheet metal part that need a corner break (fillet) for handling. Right now I can do a good job with simple parts (convex edges of the part, intersected with matching edges), but I'd like to skip things where there are slightly convex artifacts or tiny steps due to weird relief cuts. I can't see an easy way to do this, but I suspect that someone could write a "Query Variable Plus" or a "Corner Break Plus" to do this.
Simon Gatrall | Staff Mechanical Engineer | Carbon, Inc.
@S1mon like this. There's a flood fill option for qTangentConnectedFaces() that has a tolerance bounds that I'm exposing to the user here. Lets me select one of these wonky edge faces and grab the whole chain without grabbing the bits I don't want. You can also see the start of some of my mesh reverse engineering scripts in some of those other tabs. I have an open improvement request to be able to expose mesh triangles to featurescript precisely because I want to do this sort of power selection of faces into groups and replace them with parametric faces like true cylinders or planes. Can't do that with just vertices.
I got very excited when I saw "import improvements", alas…no SVG or STL direct import options.
Query Variable! Nice!
Now we don't have to write up a niche featurescript for a simple task like this anymore.
I did sometimes finding myself making a one-off custom feature specifically to make one tricky selection never to be used again.
The Onsherpa | Reach peak Onshape productivity
www.theonsherpa.com
"…If we can't use expressions, it really limits the amount of automation we can achieve…."
100% agree.
Which is why I've not understood why simply supressing a feature with an expression is not possible yet? yes there are some work arounds, but why not have "suppress feature" convert to expression option like you do with Booleans?
I think suppression is not easy to make driven with variables because its a different control layer in part studio code representation. Note the if(false) or if(true) wrappers around feature invocations, these true/false values is what defines whether feature is suppressed or not under the hood, and you can see they are not being feature parameters
Thanks @Konst_Sh
We have been cloning native features as a custom feature, then adding a suppression box within them, then converting this to an expression as we need it. The issue is of course they don't update and develop as Onshape adds and improves functionality. So we end up with the Onshape native versions, and our versions, and then they drift apart slowly.