In the past, we’ve always referred to the robot like a vehicle, left/right when viewed from behind… which is opposite of the view cube on OnShape. So from a cad perspective, viewing the right side is the left side from the build/drive perspective.
Does anyone else have this issue? Is it better to try to retrain build to understand left/right when standing in front of the bot?
I suggest looking through the settings in onshape and looking around onshape forums. (Or waiting until someone here with onshape finds it.) There’s most likely a way to reverse how the cube works.
For example, in inventor the zoom always bugged me because it felt backwards so I changed it and I was annoyed at having to touch my keyboard when orbiting (without a 3d mouse) so I changed it to just be scroll wheel.
You may be out of luck, though.
Regardless, what in having a different CAD orientation than a real life orientation will cause issues? Obviously it’s confusing, but beyond that?
Off the top of my head, designing the robot will be exactly the same, save for maybe some people coming from a different software other than onshape. There shouldn’t be errors based on the cube from there – your robot should be designed just as well.
The only issue I see is assembling it. But depending on how you name your parts (e.g. if you call it top-right-intake-side vs 03-045-078 or something with then a document describing what 03-045-078 is) this shouldn’t be too much of an issue either.
Maybe I’m overlooking something large, though.
Thanks. I couldn’t find any way to change the view cube either.
We just refer to “robot left” and “robot right”, it hasn’t been much of an issue that the view cube is labeled the other way.
I don’t think there is an option in onshape for this at the moment. It may be a bit disorienting, but re-training your brain is probably the best immediate solution.
It’s really all subjective anyway. If you wanted to you could model your bot with the front being the floor.
This sounds much easier than changing the basic conventions of orthographic projection and the relationships that have been established drafting standards for longer than most of us have been alive.
Another option would be to model the robot so the front view is looking at the back of the robot. That would maintain the same spatial relationship that is attained by calling the front of a robot the front and right and left according to that named front.
The views as they are now don’t correspond because they aren’t object oriented, they are directly related to planar surfaces that objects are created on.
Appreciate the responses, confirming that the app can’t be adjusted, and it’s just something you deal with in the cad department.
Thankful for CD today !
This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.