Logical and orderly explanation! Excellent job! Thank you.

muy buena, me aclaraste un monton.. gracias!!!

wow, very helpful. I have never seen a comparison like this, really clears up my confusion

Excellent vid. I think its worth noting here in the comments, that the fillet tool in sketch : the fillet size depends on where you click the two lines. Click close to the corner to keep the fillet tight before you dimension it 👍. I mention this, cos I have found clicking far from the corner can add a massive fillet that can cause the sketch to collapse.

Just a note on your counterbore operation, instead of creating a second sketch and pocketing for the counterbore you can instead use the hole operation with you first sketch and use the counterbore setting included in the hole function.

Appreciate this. I've never really attempted to use Part workbench. This confirms that I'm not missing out on anything. 😆 One production note, the mouse click audio was way louder than the voice-over.

Hey there. I just wonder how did it happen(@8:12) that the hole size shrunk-comparing to the sketch you made to something much smaller? (The sketch nearly touched the bottom fillet of the center "boss". The hole counterbore is a lot smaller...maybe 2/3 off the Dia! Other then that it is a good explanation between the two WB. Then I wonder if there is some kind of macro(?) which could convert the geometry object of Part WB to a part geometry, compatible with Part design, so I can continue my work on that piece(object ) in Part Design WB? Can you show an example, where using Part WB would be more efficient then Part Design WB or where Part WB could do something Part design cannot do, hence Part WB would be necessary to have and use.

Now try doing it using only the part workbench, no sketcher or draft workbenches, but using only primitives.