Feature Request: Offset Edge should constrain to original shape

Feature requests
1

When testing with offset edge, it looks like it just creates a new shape. But then this shape is fully unconstrained in all dimensions. If I were to adjust the size of the original shape that was offset, then the offset sketch doesn’t move with it. This is not ideal

1 Like
2

Agreed, that’s a big limitation. We plan to improve it and make it a real constraint in a few weeks.

3

Awesome. Great to hear

I would love to switch from fusion now that parametric is in beta but there are a lot of features still missing for me to make the switch

4

What else is missing for you?

5

Ouch, I only found out about this AFTER making the switch from fusion to shapr and it’s making me seriously re-consider…

I’ve seen a few forum posts about this and the response has been that it’s work in progress, but it’s a huge deal.

For context, I discovered this while going through the first shapr video tutorial doing the motorcycle cover.

I realized after the first video on it that I had the orientation backwards - I had the big circle on the right and the small one on the left instead of the other way around.

No problem, I thought to myself, Shapr has history. I’ll just go back and edit the radii of the circles and everything should fix itself.

BIG NOPE.

All of the following steps were based on the offset tool and it wasn’t until I dug into it further that I realized this is a big hole in the functionality.

I was eventually able to come up with a solution by (1) setting variables for the two radii and the offset, (2) projecting the extruded body into the new sketch, (3) creating an arbitrary offset, (4) using the variables to set the radii of the offset arcs, (5) adding four construction lines - 2 to constrain the tangential lines and 2 to constrain the apex of the arcs to be equal to the offset.

That’s a LOT of manual steps to preserve what should be handled by Shapr3D.

Is there a realistic timeline on when this issue will be resolved? I don’t understand how it can be considered a truly parametric modeler with a big gap in functionality like this…

1 Like