SW Expert Explores 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 🙂

AWESOME! So glad this was helpful!!

Awesome! Thanks Jason! Glad these are helpful!

lol - yeah!! No lead guitar player ever got people on the floor dancing - that's all the bass and drums!

Thanks John!

Thanks Cal!

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!

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.

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! 😵

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

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)

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.