ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 ก.ค. 2023
- In this video #TooTallToby continues to work with his first assembly by adding mates between #mateconnectors and setting up the box of his assembly to hinge open and closed at 90 degrees!
Subscribe for more: / @onshapeinc
☑️ HOME ● www.onshape.com
☑️ Create a Free Account ● onshape.com/Free
☑️ BLOG ● www.onshape.com/en/blog/
FOLLOW US
/ onshape
/ onshape
/ onshapeinc
/ onshapeptc
#CAD #Onshape #CAM - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
Quick Tip: When selecting a mate connector press SHIFT key to lock mate connectors
Aww yeah - that's a great tip - I think I saw that in Neil Cookes mate connector video too but it was after i made this video 🙂
you explained the topic perfectly. It became clear to me how mates and connectors work and I was able to connect my parts in a correct fasion. Thank you so much
AWESOME! So glad this was helpful!!
We are currently learning Onshape in CAD class. Your video was very helpful. Thank. you. :]
Awesome! Thanks Jason! Glad these are helpful!
Useful video. Please keep them coming
Thanks John!
I knew there was a reason I liked this guy. Bass players are always smarter than the rest.
lol - yeah!! No lead guitar player ever got people on the floor dancing - that's all the bass and drums!
Great tips, great guide as always!
Thanks Cal!
The third Green brother.
Good job @tootalltoby!
PRO tip #☝️:
When hovering the geometries, you're not "creating" Mate connectors, you're "highlighting" existing Mate connectors and you just can use them. They are called "implicit" Mate connectors.
PRO tip #✌️:
In a Part Studio, there is a Mate connectors feature that allow you to create a Mate connector associated to a part, this is an "explicit" Mate connector and it will be part of the part when you use the part anywhere.
PRO tip #🤟:
Some features allow you create Mate connectors "on the fly" like the Hole feature for example. It's like allowing you to use an implicit mate connector and modify its position and/or orientation.
There is so much more to say on the Mate connectors but if I tell you all now, I will loose my "expert" side too soon! 😂
lol - nice - For Pro-Tip #3 - you mean "explicit" right? Hole feature allows you to create an explicit mate connector?
@@TooTallToby That's a tricky one to get used to! Generally speaking, pretty much everything that uses mate connectors in Onshape allows you to use either implicit or explicit mate connectors.
Furthermore whenever you use an implicit mate connector, you can add "modifiers" to it just like when you create an explicit one (which I think is what @servicestechniquesericgauthier is referring to when he says "create Mate connectors "on the fly"..."). It's semantics but my interpretation is that a mate connector is only "created" when you can show it and use it directly at a later point.
So I think the word "create" is the issue in tip3, if it's implicit then it's not "created", just "used"*.
* Except for mates; mates do create "explicit" mate connectors (that can be shown and re-used directly), I actually ramble on about eactly that in my first tutorial!
@@TooTallToby since English is not my first language, I might use wrong words sometimes but the hole feature allow to use an implicit mate connector and modify it directly from the feature dialog and this mate connector is only visible within the hoel feature. Hope this is clearer😁 now.
@@airwick5083 your explanation sounds correct. Sorry for my English mistake. Thanks!
Hello. I need some help adding an image which is an outline of a dog head to a file a made in Onshape
Something that isn't obvious to me at the start of the video is what the point of having these parts move around in onshape is? Ultimately I'm manufacturing this thing and doing this feels like I'm just building myself a little virtual toy.
Is onshape doing any sort of collision detection to help me validate the physical constraints or does this merely help me set up a visual aid to eyeball that parts aren't going to intersect / interfere as different parts of the assembly move / rotate through space? Can I have onshape automatically explore the various degrees of freedom offered by the assembly to help automatically validate the fitment of my design?
That's a fair point Jacob - this is my first assembly in Onshape, and it took me some time to conceptualize the idea of mating with MATE CONNECTORS (as opposed to mating using faces, which is how I worked in my previous CAD package). So the goal of this video was to help other newer Onshape users get an intro to this idea of mating using MATE CONNECTORS.
Great ideas too - in future videos we will cover things like interference detection to help guide your assembly designs in Onshape! Thanks!
This is a good question, but there are lots of reasons why you might want to fully replicate all the real world motions of an assembly within Onshape. You can even add simulations directly within the asms, so you can see stresses and displacements on the parts
Nice!
Putting zero limits on a revolute mate results in the exact same as a "fastened" mate which I'm sure you already know! Note that you can change the mate type by editing it (no need to delete and start over).
Incidentally, I just started a tutorial "series" on my channel focused on mate connectors and mates and just posted the first episode yesterday. It will be more of an "in-depth" look at specific areas for already "fluent" Onshape users so very different. Also nowhere near the same "production quality" as your videos 🤣!
lol - I was totally think of you, specifically, at 4:58 😀😀😀
Also - I'm excited to start watching your series!! Thanks for always being will to share tips and tricks with the community!!
@@TooTallToby LoL!
Don't get tooooo excited! I'm a total noob at making videos and it takes a lot more than just knowing how to use the software to create a (good) tutorial (as you are well aware)!
@airwick5083 adding "0" limits to a Revolute Mate seems to do the same than using a Fastened Mate but on the computing side, it is an error to do so and you will find why when creating larger assemblies. 😊
@@servicestechniquesericgauthier I am aware limits are "expensive" to solve but I would hope the solver would be able to recognize when both sides are set to the same so it shouldn't be nearly as much impact as actual different limits from a math perspective. But yes, best practice is definitely to use the correct mate type to start with and only use limits sparingly where they add value!
@@airwick5083 I agree the solver capability to recognize this particular situation would be a great improvement. But don't forget when you open an assembly designed by another Onshape user and you see a lot of mates which are supposed to give freedom to the assembly but end up understanding nothing is supposed to move there and a single Group would do the job! 😵
Great video, but how do you mate arrays of objects that already has established spacing relationships. There should be an elegant solution instead of mating each component one by one.
What do you mean? Like if the components were already positioned in a part studio and you just want them locked together in the assembly?
Not exactly clear what you are asking... This video is just an introduction showing one (well two) mating examples. Onshape does support grouping parts (locking them relative to each other) as well linear, and circular patterns and a "replicate" feature to create instances of parts based on underlying geometry.
So what happens when the surface geometry changes, say you chop off one of those pin splines?
If that happens, a simple change of the mate reference would be required. To prevent a change in the first place, a more stable mate reference like the center of the edge of the part or a pre-defined mate connector at the component level.
@TeachingTech just did a video on "shadow lines" which is effectively putting a lip and groove between the box and the lid. However he manually sketched out all this additional geometry. This made me wonder whether Onshore has a more idiomatic solution. If you get a lid and box to mate through a hinge, can you then create "features" between the parts, like a lip and groove, without having to go back in and sketch it all out?
I guess another way to ask the question would be: is it possible to mate two parts and then add "features" between them, rather than designing the features into each part? Mate connectors seem to partially solve this problem, because rather than joining parts themselves, you have this mate connector abstraction and you join the mate connectors with one another instead. So can you take it a step further and define "how" the two parts should mate geometrically? It would be rad to take your box and say "by the way, at this mating surface, also create a lip and groove such that the lid snaps onto the box"
Failing that, I'm very curious to know how the pros tackle this problem.
I also watched that video and he does create both sides of the box in a single part studio so he uses the same sketch to create the features on both parts so really pretty straightforward. One thing I notice with TeachingTech, he is definitely not an Onshape "power user" so he does get the job done using simple steps but not necessarily in the most efficient way. The general "concepts" presented are excellent but unfortunately the example of execution isn't necessarily the best way to do it in Onshape.
For example for the "planar" box, you could just use the edge of the mating box directly with an "extrude thin" to create the lip and do a boolean with offset to create the groove: 2 features, no sketch required! It's not quite as simple when it's not planar and his approach is pretty good (although a boolean for the groove would be simpler).
This is something that should be able to be automated using Featurescript but it's likely not "trivial" to make it robust enough to handle every case. But to answer you question: yes. In Onshape anyone with some basic programming knowledge could create a custom feature that adds a lip and groove to a selected interface between two parts based on whatever inputs it takes to fully define what you need! The only limitation is that you would need both parts to be in the same part studio (but there are workarounds for that too).
It can also be tricky to make sure you have the right clearances in case of a hinged part etc... That said in the "professional world" when making a custom plastic enclosure, they tend to be complex enough that manually creating the lip and groove is pretty trivial compared to everything else so not a huge overall time saver unless you are doing it all day!
If you started with parts in different part studios, you could actually create the lip on the one part and use an in-context edit from the assembly to boolean remove the lip from the other part so not much difference actually... That would be a fun thing for @TooTallToby to demonstrate with this assembly actually!
@@airwick5083 As a newbie to Onshape but a 'pro' after 30 yrs of design, I find simple concepts are what gets you going up the learning curve. And that sophisticated 'power user' methods will just pop into my head as I use the product more and more. Baby steps grasshopper. Then big leaps.
@@mpart_woodlathe-stuff I agree with what you said "in general" and @TooTallTogy intentionally keeps things simple and builds over time but in this case, the more efficient method for creating that lip is also simpler so in my opinion it would make more sense to show it
@@airwick5083 My hope is our discussion gets read by newbies to realize there's more than one way to skin a cat and to realize there's always a faster way.
FWIW, I did find it maddening(?) that TTech drew out everything but that's one way I judge my progress as I go down the path to Onshape Nirvana. hehe
And apologies to @hagus42 for pirating his comment.
I’m new to design but old to software (30 yrs), so my problem is my instincts screaming at me “there’s *definitely* a better way to do this” and it drives me nuts, lol. After you’ve seen the same kind of movie so many times you kinda want to skip to the end. I prefer an expert-teacher to expert-learner fire hose, if I don’t walk away slightly befuddled then you’ve probably not told me anything new! Try finding this kind of content on YT however, it’s in very small supply 😬 I quite like @TooTallToby’s content because it’s short and to the point, by the time his lesson is over most creators would still be stammering through the various shibboleths handed down by the algorithm gods (someone tell me the % engagement difference between “smashing” vs “clicking” a subscribe button, I’m dying to know)