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.
Building a full model with featurescript?
tim_hess427
Member Posts: 648 ✭✭✭✭
Out of curiosity - does anybody here use featurescript to build "full models" rather than well... just features? I haven't really dug into featurescript myself, but plan on it when I have some time. I have found many custom features created by other users extremely useful, but I don't really know what I'd try to use it for myself. So, I'm just curious, and also maybe looking for a little bit of inspiration.
Or, to put it another way. I see lots of custom features that automate repetitive things, or fill gaps that the development team hasn't gotten to yet. So, what are the things I could do with featurescript that can't be done with ANY CAD package?
Or, to put it another way. I see lots of custom features that automate repetitive things, or fill gaps that the development team hasn't gotten to yet. So, what are the things I could do with featurescript that can't be done with ANY CAD package?
Tagged:
0
Comments
-
It's not too efficient building full models with FS generally, nowadays you can configure part studio and link it in any place in any configuration - just like feature call, but before standart content appeared I used "Cap screw FS" to generate fasteners for example, or I heard Airfoil FS was used to generate wing shapes.>So, what are the things I could do with featurescript that can't be done with ANY CAD package?Most of CAD's have automation instruments of different levels - macro, journals, API's. The difference of OS is that you can start using it only reading through not so big single level standard library documentation, there is no need to be a pro in application programming or spending years for learning API. Featurescript is a pretty friendly and compact instrument - it is the difference from my point.
0 -
Thanks, @konstantin_shiriazdanov. That's helpful for putting it into perspective.
Like I mentioned, I think its awesome and looking forward to jumping into it myself.
0 -
Here's a "full model" type approach that Kori, one of our software engineers, is using to design her house: https://www.onshape.com/cad-blog/exploring-the-power-of-custom-cad-features-for-furniture-first-design
Ilya Baran \ VP, Architecture and FeatureScript \ Onshape Inc0 -
That's the kind of thing I was looking for! I love that she flipped the idea of a custom feature from "generic geometry feature" to "design intent feature". Even though she was still using really simple geometry, the "design language" as she put it is a lot easier to understand when inspecting the feature tree. I wish I could see some of the code that went into her scripts.0
-
Yes, exactly! The source is available here: https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/comment/56736/#Comment_56736Ilya Baran \ VP, Architecture and FeatureScript \ Onshape Inc0


