Видео

In fact it works on all history states that are automatically created every time you do anything. This is the superpower of Onshape, you don't need to explicitly "save" anything. All of the actions you take, edits to a dimension, hiding of an instance, etc etc are transactions to the database. We keep them all.

In fact, it lets you compare the actual broken state with the previous unbroken state so you can quickly see and fix the problems.

Indeed - and as mentioned in other replies the fact you can compare to any state that has ever existed makes it very powerful.

Onshape has had for some time now a PCB Studio, which is a collaboration tool between ECAD tools (like Altium, Cadence, Eagle, KiCAD etc.) It is *not* a PCB layout tool in itself, it facilitates the collaboration/co-design between teh MCAD and ECAD teams.

Thanks! I have a big backlog of guitar-related things - amps, guitars, effects, midi controllers. I know I will never get to them all, but will try to share things when I can!

This is a cycloidal gear. What you are thinking of is a cycloidal drive.

Indeed BS 978-2 has all the gory details knowledge.bsigroup.com/products/specification-for-fine-pitch-gears-cycloidal-type-gears?version=standard

Yeah a labor of love for sure - but through the course of it I've managed to test and experiment with a lot of new and upcoming Onshape features. I'm thinking about refactoring it again...

A really good comment - thanks for the suggestion. It is pretty hard to generalize completely the approaches. There are some nice guides (especially the Alias Golden Rules -- this one has been duplicated in various systems but the approaches are all equivalent) but it's going to depend on the part you are designing. A toaster, a cell phone, a car will have different challenges. There are nice "patterns" (approaches) you can utilize to tackle specific challenges - the topology you end up creating will make or break the design. I'll think more on this and see what I can come up with.

Yes there is a world of difference between drawing and designing. For many people this is what CAD still means, and that's fine: Computer Aided Drawing, or Computer Aided Documentation. However there is clearly more to Computer Aided Design... On a side note, it is 2024 (last time I checked), and isn't everything Computer Aided?? Perhaps we should upgrade our acronyms?

They will/can give different results as they are doing quite different things topologically. In my case an extrude would have worked, since the underlying sweep path was tangent at the ends. However in different situations, such as a simple arc, the move face and extrude will look quite different... The extrude will be by definition a normal direction from the end face, while the move face will keep the curvature of the side faces (thereby extending the arc) Here's a quick example cad.onshape.com/documents/b9b52e11d7266e5ed655ab50/w/77611edca52037d2e35267c5/e/9ed093d8a42d4ae0dbb4e479

This is Onshape. My playlist here is all focusing on various Onshape capabilities.

Thanks for this wonderful comment - I’m with you 100%. I’d be happy to start a series with this engine and dig into those topics and more.

I just made a public version available for you! cad.onshape.com/documents/117ebf5924e35f3871c8e6d5/w/6ddb0cd91f2377e06e55ada6/e/665c31713a0909595ff09e24 There are some linked docs that you won't be able to open, but they are just to standard componentry that I don't really want to make public just yet. I think you'll find the Crankcase Part studio the most interesting anyway. If there are confusing things in there, please drop me another comment and I'll be happy to (try to) explain PS in the version I provided the carburetor is not complete. There is a neat sliding/rotating aspect which is only in my private version. I'll hopefully get around to updating this in the public one. (It took a bit of disassembly of the actual OS MAX-46FX which is sitting on my desk here to understand how it works!!)

@@gregbrown-onshape7555 epic thank you I’ll check it out!

Yes I do intend to do this follow up - lots going on as always, but it's firmly on my to do list.

Sounds like I should do a quick demo of named positions. Watch this space!

@@gregbrown-onshape7555I would be very interested to see your preferred method for establishing the positions.

Great to hear from a fellow South Aussie. There's a lot I miss about the place, having been overseas for decade(s) now(!) There are people in all sorts of out of the way places using various means to get onto the internet, so I'm sure something will work out for you.

Thanks for sitting through it! I know it was a long journey...

Thanks for the comment, and the reminder :) I'll get to that for sure - I'l love to work in this full time, but I do have another job in the organization! But I realize (and that's why I'm doing these) by speaking to many customers and prospects on a daily basis that there is still a lot to teach and learn from both sides.

Yes, the Onshape Vision app is available in the Apple App store.

While that's not the message I was trying to portray, I apologize if that's what came across to you. For the vast majority of mechanical CAD users, the topic I was covering is not so relevant and the complication of projected or intersected curve may not indeed be of any downstream consequence. However as Onshape grows, and the customer base expands, there *are* indeed people to whom we are talking, learning from, and reacting to, that this topic is of great importance. So: 1. it's important to understand that the foundations of Onshape do not preclude such advanced modeling. Under the covers is a fully capable NURBS modeler. It is up to us to decide how and when to present this via features in the UI. 2. FeatureScript is a huge differentiator for Onshape, in that it is the language we have developed ourselves to create the features we ship as part of the standard package. If anyone is interested, the standard library is publicly viewable. If you want to see how we use FeatureScript to deliver things like loft or patterns, or in fact anything in the part studio, then you can do so. The important aspect here is that it allows us to prototype new approaches on top of the foundational capabilities, for example the approximateSpline function has been in the std library for some time now, and opCreateBSplineCurve even longer. With the latter you can completely take control over everything in the NURBS curve you are building. 3. for advanced users, understanding FeatureScript is extremely useful (and I recommend it!) as it helps to know what the part studio is doing. This can lead to a better appreciation of how to approach regular modeling tasks, optimize for performance, and more.. Even if you don't intend to write you own custom features. So I'd prefer the take away to be much more optimistic: that we are rapidly building an extremely powerful application (Onshape) which is applicable to more and more users and use-cases. Along the way, and before we commit to shipping certain things, we are able to experiment, collaborate, iterate, and improve. There is ample evidence of this in all aspects of Onshape, and particularly with surface tools. The last two years have seen unprecedented expansion across wireframe/surface modeling, & diagnostics, with much more to come.

@@gregbrown-onshape7555 Thanks Greg for your considered reply, I appreciate the effort. I should explain I've been using Onshape for about 5 years, and have been a subscriber to your channel for ages (not sure exactly, but have learnt a lot from your videos). I absolutely love the product, and you'll get no argument from me on the unique extensibility offered by FeatureScript. Normally, I find the message in your videos clear and straightforward (I especially like your face-blend tutorial, clear, concise and comprehensive), but I found this one troubling, even after re-watching. Anyway, I won't waste your time by labouring the point, just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to reply. Cheers

Thanks for the comment! I'll try to make things public when I believe they are ready and robust. Some are undergoing rapid iterations still, so I'd prefer them to settle down a bit first. I'm always thinking about how Custom features can be made more discoverable, ingestible, manageable. Believe me (it's probably clear) that this is a personal interest topic of mine... and I do follow closely the tickets, improvement requests and comments on forums and elsewhere related to this.

I have a number of these type of "digital versions of analog devices" demos....

Yes, if you have cross sections then indeed a loft feature could be used

Thanks for the note - yes I guess this demonstrates the power of custom features: that users or developers (internal or external) can experiment, get early feedback, iterate... and make decisions about whether it lives on as a custom feature (which is a perfectly valid outcome) or becomes part of the native code base.

Yes that is my intent - I'll get a couple more sets of eyes on what I've done and then release it in early form. If it is making sense to people I'll "publish" it for easier discoverability. The choice of whether something belongs in the native tools versus remaining as a custom feature is a bit nuanced. The voice the customer plays a bit part of course, so let's see!!

I've been messing around experimenting with this sort of thing for some time, and only now decided to show my work ;) One of my use cases for tweaking a curve, is when building from side/front/top views. The side view can start as a nice clean Bezier on the plane, but then you might want to tweak it from the top/front view. Alternatively if you build clean curves on both side and top, then the Approximated projection can give you a clean curve directly. And then you can further tweak it. Perhaps after Elevating or Reducing it. The point being: I wanted to make myself a toolset where all of these are possible. After all, a hammer, chisel, screwdriver, spanner, hacksaw... etc all have places in a toolbox. Nice to hear you are putting isoparametric curves to good use already. I had one more example to show that took my Approx projection, built boundary surfaces from it, then create isoparametric curves which I used to split the boundary surfs.... and so on and so on. But this was going to make my video too long. If you're interested, let me know. The Reduce feature currently reduces degree by one. You could repeat the feature as many times as you like I guess, until you are down to a degree 1 line... I coded the Elevate to take a target degree as an input parameter, so I guess I could do the same for Reduce, though my own use case was 99% just to bump it down by one. Finally (sorry for such a long reply!) what is the 'approximate Bezier' you mention? We do have (and this is exactly how I implemented the Reapproximation features already described/demoed) an approximateSpline function in FeatureScript (cad.onshape.com/FsDoc/library.html#approximateSpline-Context-map) but this is not Bezier specific.

@@gregbrown-onshape7555 I meant your reapproximation where I wrote approximate bezier

Yes we consolidated the analysis toolset to the lower right - including zebras, but also for example curvature color map, dihedral, and more.

Yes! Here it is: cad.onshape.com/documents/1bda657a1041f59966643bca/w/ab4191fe18ac7ce49974bfd7/e/d22fe898a6d0bffdcb16564c Note there are two part studios - I just created the second one as we added something last year (in the Sept 1st, 2023 release 1.169) that might be worth looking at. Rather than configuring the text directly (you can see that in the config table for the first part studio), we added a very powerful capability across the product to "convert to expression" (for boolean parameters in features, or text) Thus I could use an expression for the text contents. In this case I used toString(#VALUE) to convert the variable called #VALUE into a text string! For those playing along, yes this means you can open it up to very fun and sophisticated expressions pulling on the full power of FeatureScript. You can encode logic into the text string, just for starters...

@@gregbrown-onshape7555 Thank you for sharing your Onshape skills. It really helps me out greatly!

You're very welcome!

Thanks - yes it is always a good idea to flex a model as you go. The CAD equivalent of "measure twice, cut once"

Thanks so much! More to come shortly....

100% agreed 👍🏼

Great idea - in fact I've made a bunch of updates and now the wing is looking pretty good. I just experimented with washout and looks like it fit right into my process. I'll cut an updated video tonight.

Here is a beta version, I'll clean it up further and publish shortly - as mentioned, it is pretty simple stuff, but really useful: cad.onshape.com/documents/20afd0071b1fd882855e31f3/v/a861552f5b8dcff963345bfe/e/fc706ce0880ab89b509732af

Thank you so much for the comment. I started playing the violin in elementary school and have been fascinated ever since. Various school projects, university projects, and now tinkering around for work I'm still hooked. If you have any questions or follow ups for your own work I'll be happy to try and help.

@@gregbrown-onshape7555 I'm thankful for that. I would love to move on to help when my question(s) mature. 🙏

Specifically, I can't get the circular pattern of scallops to adjust correctly and move in synchronicity when the number of sides variable changes. Seems like it might involve a constraints issue, but for life of me I can't figure it out.

Let me take a quick look at what I did... does this help? ruclips.net/video/UHOtGRvQihs/видео.html

Great to hear!

Thanks for the comment. The Face blend is designed primarily for "smooth blending" between faces, but in theory there is no reason why it could not support a convex profile. We've implemented "chamfer" profile (linear blend) so one might argue this is not exactly "smooth blending" ;)