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
and for that reason I shall not get up from my seat.
CONFIGURATION PANEL SEARCH FILTERS looks great. I would like the same for variable studios.
this actually looks really cool
Wow! Too many good feature improvements. Onshape team is spoiling us! Assy Cross Section In-Context and Sweeping changes are nice QOL. I'm excited and curious about MBD with STEP 242, does anyone have recommendations for using that capability with 3d printer slicers which don't natively process PMI from 242?
For example, on my Bambu 3D printer, holes come out undersized by about a nozzle diameter. It is easy enough to compensate in CAD by using an equation so the step file is larger and prints at my desired tolerance. However it gets messy when trying to remember what has /hasn't been compensated as not every feature requires this precise adjustment and sometimes multiple prints are needed to dial in the proper correction for irregular features. It seems like a better approach is possible but I'm not sure how / if I'm missing something.
Non critical example of this recurring problem today. Non-issue since this hole is for sewing thread (a pants button of mine broke. I blame Fat Tuesday)
But how can we have both shaft and hole tolerances? for example Ø40H7/h6
Love MDB!!!
This is an impressive update. I need to play with the individual improvements before commenting on details, but from what I see upfont, I expect it to have a big impact on my everyday work.
Wow what an update…thank you Onshape MBD is going to make a real difference.
So many great updates in this version
Thank you for starting on MBD! Now just need to add this to assemblies/weldments. And integrate with drawings for given parts.
To @arturas_malinauskas542 's point, it would be fascinating if, with tolerances, we could export a model at LMC or MMC.
Simon Gatrall | Product Development, Engineering, Design, Onshape | Ex- IDEO, PCH, Unagi, Carbon | LinkedIn
Yes. This would be epic!
Maintaining the section view when editing in-context is proving to be a real time saver….who knew! Brilliant.
Anyone else having a problem moving parts in an assembly after this update? If I add a revolute mate, and only that mate, the part shows that there are degrees of freedom (i.e. rotational) but I cannot move the part. Or if the part has a slider mate, and only the slider mate, it does not translate along the axis if I try to drag it. Neither mate has any limitations so they should move and they both show in the tree as having degrees of freedom. This just started happening after this update.
This is a huge update. Looking forward to more updates like MBD on drawings - and tolerance stack up analysis!
We know the Onshape team is just getting started on MBD.
Please file a support ticket on this so our team can investigate.
Done. This seems to be an issue in existing files only. When I build a new assembly there are no issues.
Awesome stuff!
I have to keep bugging about this: Any ETA for CAM to work with nesting?
If you mean making a nesting function for CAM Studio, it is not being worked on at the moment. That is its own bear of a project, and we're focusing on the core functionality right now.
Twist in sweep is a big deal for me - I can finally model wire rope. Works flawless - thank you OnShape team.
The Renaissance app only supports multi-face exports of .DXF files, not nesting capabilities. The dream would be to allow for true shape nesting in 3d format, since my parts are complex enough that they physically cannot be represented by a .DXF or any other 2d layer based export but I know that's a long way away from happening. The Auto Layout feature is a decent stopgap like you say but for now my company is sending everything to either CAMWorks or Alphacam to get processed for manufacturing.
There are a lot of other improvements I'd like to see from CAM studio before nesting is near the front of my personal wishlist too though, like strategy saving or the ability to automatically recognize more features - like the hole features got an update for choosing things of similar diameter. If nesting were prioritized over the basics everyone would go nuts from all the manual steps they'd be repeating across a whole nest.
Derek Van Allen | Engineering Consultant | MeddlerMBD - it took 10 years but patience gets rewarded. This is huge for our paperless workflow.
Rendering getting there too .. Great improvements!!
Just a bit of feedback… Starting to get a lil crowded in that dimension input box. would be good to default a bit bigger and/or allow resizing to help with data entry like formulas that contain variables or even some basic math based inputs.
Pretty cool to see MBD built in now — awesome work! I had a few ideas that came to mind:
The last two would pair nicely to support more complex geometry and their associated inspection tools.
If anyone is interested (and I suspect some of you are already hard at work doing this anyway) here is an example Custom feature that includes MBD dimensions. This is the
Slotfeature that I showed in my demos:You can examine how the dimensions were set (line 408 onwards) - this section also shows how queries need to be formed in order to perform the
setDimensionedEntites. Line 85 has an example of one of the feature parameters being made tolerant.This is only meant as an example, perhaps to trigger others to have a go at leveling-up their own Custom features to include MBD. I'm not publishing this just yet as a lot more I'd like to do to it before that milestone is reached.
Yes please. This was my first thought: They don't mention in the video how to apply those tolerances in the drawings. I better test this before I go and tell my coworkers that they need to do this new workflow that will ease the tolerancing.
Being able to Auto-dimension and -tolerance the drawings based on what has been assigned MBD tolerances in the 3D CAD is important as it will otherwise force us to do double-work and may end up as us having two different tolerances applied.
MBD great news. I can't wait to start using it.
Twisted cables :) there have been a custom feature for a long time, but had limitations, looking forward to incorporate this
Loving the additions to MBD!
Is it feasible to use ordinate dimensions in sketches? It seems like that would map better with drawings.
I love the MBD feature, but when I think as an educator, OnShape is becoming harder to learn when changes like this permeate a sea of dialogs.
The simplicity of the OnShape interface is being crowded by the features. I understand and accept this is a tough balance to strike and there's no perfect answer. Still, at our university we teach 100% of engineering students CAD, but only the 1/3 of them are mechanical engineering, and the majority of ME students will not use tolerances in their careers. So MBD is a very useful tool for a small subset of drawers— for the rest it would be great if I could somehow hide it on a case-by-case basis.
No idea how this could be done without breaking innumerable things, so consider this a wish and not a complaint.
What sort of ME doesn't use tolerances in their career? I agree that things are getting a little more busy and complex, but if an engineer doesn't have the basic concept of tolerances, they can't design or really work on much of anything. Even if all you do is model a couple parts and 3D print them for fun, if you don't understand that there are tolerances on everything, you won't be able to make two parts fit together.
Simon Gatrall | Product Development, Engineering, Design, Onshape | Ex- IDEO, PCH, Unagi, Carbon | LinkedIn