Since this topic is about best practices, and I'm self taught in these matters: how frowned upon is it to, say, name a sketch "master" or something along the lines of this, name the constraints for use in formulas, and also use the sketch afterwards? I've been using spreadsheets in the past, but using named constraints seems easier (also, for complex models any change in the spreadsheet would make the whole thing recompute and slow my computer to a crawl, but that was many months ago, not sure if it's still the case).
- Screenshot from 2018-02-22 10-14-35.png (32.97 KiB) Viewed 4824 times
full model (disregard the overcomplicated way I did the initial thing instead of using a revolution in the first place, the principle stands)
Also, is there a way to, say, have multiple parametric instances of a body? e.g. an elastic motor coupler like this one has the ends identical apart from the shaft diameter (5mm and 8mm in my case)
- Screenshot from 2018-02-22 10-29-46.png (30.2 KiB) Viewed 4824 times
The only way I managed to do this was to change the diameter in the pocket sketch and export a new .obj file, which works for printing, but doesn't (?) allow having an exploded view of the whole thing.
model (this is rather disorganized because I was still figuring this method out, i.e. not all dimensions and cross-sections are gathered in a "master" sketch):
)
