In an assembly I wanted to test the drilling series, so that was no problem, but I wanted to be able to repeat it afterwards and control it by equations, except in assembly we can repeat that the components unless I am mistaken. Of course I can do the repetition at the part level but I have to do the same thing for each of the parts that my piercing series goes through for the time being.
To sum up my need, I make trunks and so my drilling goes through a high angle - > top panel -> bottom panel -> low angle for example.
diameter 6mm for the angles and 5mm for the wood.
I wanted to re-test the sketch repetition but not constrained (unlike the circular repetition that we saw a short time ago)
Sketch repetition should work; You just have to give a dimension between two diam to constrain and then you can control this dimension with equations as you wish
@gt22 was only valid for empty crates;) or drawers is like that I do but it forces you to export the volumes afterwards which is not the most practical to do the nesting afterwards.
Hello, I'm a little late but I'm sending you my answer anyway.
I made an assembly with a board and a lid connected by a hinge. This one has n holes made by drilling. His sketch of points that is used for drilling is recovered as a derived sketch on the board and the cover to drill the pilot holes. Making a derivative sketch allows you to be insensitive to the number of holes in the hinge. She is the one who steers everything. By going to its design you change its number of holes, their position and it is automatically transferred to the board and the lid. I've done several tries, it works but it's not said that there will be a case for which SW will crash.
By the way, I learned something with your self-answer thank you and have a good day
Thank you I will study the derived sketches it can be nice, only thing that bothers me in your example is that it is not constrained and therefore movable and therefore have holes where it should not be.
In addition, if we change the repetition qtes, I have reference losses from the 1st piercing.
As for my solution, if my repetition is =1, it forces to 2. (not to mention the lack of function to round up or below and even or odd... but that's another story)
So let's explore the derivative sketches, you never know.