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.
What is the best organization of my project? A single Part Studios and multiple Assembly tabs?
christopher_johnson425
Member Posts: 7 ✭
I’m still very new to 3d modeling and ONSHAPE, but I’m learning quickly. Right now I have two completely separate projects to build two different versions of a V8 engine intake manifold, but I want to re-organize this to have only one set of documents but two different outcomes. After a lot of thought, I think the right approach is a single Part Studio and two assemblies. I am not married to this though. I want to do this the right way, not necessarily my way.
The manifolds are identical except for the carburetor mounting flanges. The manifold will support either of two models of carburetors, both of which are two-barrel downdraft types. The difference is the barrel center-to-center spacing, one is 90 mm and the other is 120 mm.
My thinking is that I could use a couple of configuration list variables to control this. One specifies the carb barrel spacing dimension, and the other specifies a lower level Part Studio which contains the appropriate carburetor flange sketch. This sketch would be derived into the upper level Part Studio and would take on some sketch mods for a common flange reinforcement. This part of the effort is complete and appears to work. I have created a new sketch of the selected flange using USE so that I can make the appropriate geometric changes to the carb flanges.
So, here’s what I hadn’t considered. Changing the derived sketch on the fly breaks all the constraints between the derived sketch and the sketch generated with USE! Whoops! Right now, I have no idea how to work around this, so I’m looking for some advice.
Thanks in advance!
Answers
It's a bit hard to follow what's going on without seeing your document, are you able to share?
You talk about "changing" the derived sketch, if you are using a different sketch it makes sense that it would break, but if you are just changing the dimensions of the sketch (via configurations), it shouldn't break as long as the sketch entities are still all the same.
I did have one thought about this. Perhaps there could be two target sketches for the manifold-to-carbs flange and the same configuration list control could suppress the one that wasn’t being used in the current configuration. Would this prevent all the projected constraints in that sketch from being broken?
No, swapping out the sketch will break references for sure!
Projected constraints are fairly "brittle", there's probably a better way to do this but hard to tell without a visual example of what you are trying to do.
Deriving "faces" instead of sketch entities might be an option, or including more the required geometry into what you are deriving