Message 1 of 13
In Config/2D, I switch on Auto Constrain & Auto Dimension.
Now, in a sketch, I choose the parallel curve command and add some parallel curves.
Funny thing is, the lines are not constrained or dimensioned. Yet, I have just told the sketch I want the lines parallel and certain offset from the originating curve.
How come, Auto constrain and Auto dimension is NOT applied? How come the curves have no parallel relationship with the parent curve? If I change the length of the original the children are abandoned? (Modern parenting methods have no place in CAD)
According to the Online Help:
Auto dimension sketch
When checked, dimensions will be automatically created and placed with new sketch geometry. This is referred to as "Auto Dimension."
This is what I want but I just cannot get it to happen. How do I get it to work????
Message 2 of 13
Message 3 of 13
There is an "Offset curve" command under "Through point curve" and 2 Parallel line commands on the Line command. It seems like you want the latter. This does add parallel constraints.
There is already a PCR requesting an offset parameter be added.
Message 4 of 13
Offset CURVE command is the one in particular. It is the nicest of the two - more options does ALL curves and lines.
However, the LINE segment command, (only ever used occasionally and IMO should be redundant), shows the dims, lets a length be set but doesn't applied the dimension.
For lines, in most cases (perp. excepted, , you are actually better off to use Smart Draw and choose the Focus before the end point. At least you get some auto constraints but NO auto dimensions.
Two issues remain.
AUTO DIMENSION does/does not????
AUTO CONSTRAIN does not work/apply with the either the line commands or the curve offset.
Message 5 of 13
Auto dimension and Auto constrain do work where they were designed to work. Open a sketch and draw a 2 corner rectangle out in space but let one of your picks line up with (0,0). You will see dimensions and constraints. UNDO. Now, edit preferences and turn those two options off. Draw the same thing. Notice there are no dims or cons.
Try inserting a circle using the Radius option. Not all commands generate both constraints and or dimensions. Some commands, like Line, create constraints but not dimensions because there are so many ways you could add dimensions.
Message 6 of 13
I do use the rectangle command and LOVE the dimensions being added AUTOMATICALLY. This is exactly what I would expect to see for ALL sketching when the global setting AUTO DIMENSION is active
Rectangle provers it is doable.
If I am cynical (I am not really) I would say Woopee, we turn on auto dimension and it works for the rectangle command!!!!!!!!!!
Off course there are many many ways to dimension BUT, in MOST cases we would be happy with a normal dimension. e.g. length for lines, dia. for circles, radius for arcs, distance for offset.
What is frustrating is that sketcher previews all this stuff but doesn't AUTO Dimension. It is really easy to delete a selection of dimensions we don't want. It is tedious to add dimensions the system would have done for us.
IMO it should be possible to streamline the sketcher experience and eliminate some of the icon driven common tasks. Seems the sketcher solver is now up to the task, so why not. I don't want to redesign VX, just enjoy using it and get some value from the surplus computing power provided by Mr Intel and his multiple CPU's and endless Hz's.
I will do another post with a sample of those ideas this thread over the next day or so.
Message 7 of 13
Take a look at the file for PCR23637, Parallel Offset Lines. More of the same do you think? In the case of drawing a single line, I think that should not be dimensioned or constrained (except as it is now, end point constraint in relation to existing geometry). If a single line were dimensioned and constrained on-the-fly, 3 lines drawn and you could end up with an over constrained Sketch - which is the "enemy" of Sketch definition.
Message 8 of 13
re the parallel lines etc. I think if AutoDimension and AutoConstrain actually ADDED the previewed constraints and dimensions, then all would be well.
However, there is more and I am not sure expending effort with potentially redundant ICON driven commands is good resource use. See below. Same deal could/should apply to parallel lines and others.
Draw(LightBulb) nearly does it all (or at least has the potential to do it all).
I really like Draw.
But some of the effects are mysterious AND it is incomplete like we had this great idea, but never finished it.
e.g. Initiate Draw, RMB, Focus, pick a line, I would expect ALL constraints (C), dimensions(D) etc, to be restricted to the Focus entity, including angle and dimension from etc, maybe an additional control key to filter choices, then when the desired arrangment is approved by LMB point selection, the previewed constraints and dimensions are applied AND added to the sketch.
At present some are added, some are not and there is no apparent user control of this.
If you have used Googles' Chrome browser you will know it is very fast BUT more importantly it is CLUTTER free. Almost disturbingly so.
Things not needed or immediately useable are absent until needed. A little awkward at first but very good once you are familiar.
VX sketcher is a LITTLE bit like this but seems to have some serious clutter hanging around.
If Draw was enhanced(finished), a significant amount of clutter could be eliminated. I cite one obvious example.
ie.g. Select two or more lines, RMB and the Fillet option should be there instead of having to select the fillet ICON. Select 3 or more lines and the fillet command (obviously a chain fillet), but no seperate chain fillet command required.
This means we have ONE intuitive action on the RMB menu, two different commands in the background and two ICONs, now redundant, relegated to the clutter department and removed altogether.
This is but one example of how existing commands can be integrated into the user focus (Cursor) via the intelligent RMB interface.
Once you start this process you see that many sketcher menu icons can be integrated and decluttered.
I see this a s a major opportunity to bring more consistency to the interface, a very slick and more intuative experience, as IF VX knew what your are going to do next, and a more inviting and readily learnt interface.
I spend more time in sketcher than anywhere else. It is the first place user needs to achieve competency so why not make it the best sketcher out there. There's still space for that and the sooner the better. So lets finish the great idea.
Message 9 of 13
Thats an instant 20% real estate gain for free!
A step further in 3D, manager would hide like Task bar and pop out when in zone.... this is a bit more complicated as there is some interaction between the two spaces at present.
Please excuse all the ideas - a warm fire and cold wind outside do stange things to the mind.....Planning on watching Koyaanasqatsi tonight so it might improve....
Message 10 of 13
The question is, does the rest of the world like the idea of a Sketcher interface that works that way? I have met a lot of VX customers, most rarely use the quick draw command, it simply does not suit their way of thinking. On the other hand, those that do use it could not live without it. I myself like the screen to be relatively un-cluttered once I have made a choice, but beforehand I like to see every tool that is available to be sure of using the best one for the task. The VX right-mouse menus do second-guess User actions and I agree we could smarten that up a lot - but as another means to an end rather than as a replacement.
I think we could get too clever with auto dimensions and constraints and in so doing end up with something that at best has to be edited to suit your needs and at worst becomes too confusing and distracts your mind from the engineering. In my experience, drawing the profile required first and then applying dimensions and constraints is the quickest approach for all except the most basic shapes (and those are delivered by ReadySketch) because the User is always in control that way.
Message 11 of 13
the issue is time AND the user has a choice via config. If you set AUTO Dimension & AUTO Constrain then thats' what should happen.
No ifs, No buts.
OK, your way - you draw the profile you want - then what? Add dimensions and constraints individually? Then adjust them? OK, use Auto constrain. Spend do battle spending oodles of time fiddling dimensions that fight constraints etc.
Alternative as I suggest. (AUTOMODE) Position cursor until the desired or close to desired outcome, confirm, see Ds & Cs. Edit/or not the ones you need. Unwanted dimensions - select all then delete in one go. Easy - Fast.
Does the rest of the world want it? Do you get a choice? Synchronous Technology suggests you don't care about the sketch t0o much until you are in 3D anyway then just drag and re dimension on the run. At least thats the idea. Coming ready or not.
IMO If you want to stay in the game sketchers gonna have to get reeeeaaaal slick. That's ease of use and speed.
RMB is correct: Once I have selected an entity, RMB offers (or should) ALL the options. It ain't going to replace all the menu icons, just those that can be and are intuitive.
Lets consider parallel lines again.
Select a line or curve, RMB, choose Parallel/Offset and ALL the Parallel/Offset tools pop up AND when you apply the choices, the constraints and dimensions are applied (as they are now, AND added to the sketch as they do and do not now.) Bronze whaler technology - predictably unpredicatable is not the wave of the future.
I am not sure I see such a BIG change here...
First off, user choice at config. There now.
Second, it's being done now - sometimes.
Visually hunting through acres of icons is no fun and it's slow. Looking at a relevant selection (RMB) right on your focus point is a lot quicker and easier.
I have met a lot of VX customers, most rarely use the quick draw command, it simply does not suit their way of thinking.
Why don't they use it? Same reason they don't use quick dimension in V13 - it's not consistent. They are forced to use the old ways.
Give them better tools and they'll use them. Promise.
EASY means predictable - predictable only comes with consistentency.
Consistently GOOD, not consistently BAD.
Message 12 of 13
"My" way works like this:
1) Apply the dimensions that are critical controls for the purpose of the Sketch, together with the constraints that ensure those dimensions work in the way I require.
2) Apply one-click auto-constrain and dimension for everything else, if the Sketch needs to be fully constrained.
That is not time consuming or difficult to do. It is easy to understand and the User is always in control of the outcome. You may recall that I've applied this method to a few of your problem Sketches........
I think our Sketcher can be further improved and we will improve it. Your comments about a smarter RMB menu are particularly relevant. Slick? This time around, I think we have delivered slickness and robustness. Change the way people prefer to define their Sketches because others find that a different method is more intuitive? Never going to happen. I have to break the no animals rule here - you can take a horse to the water, but you can't make it take a drink.
Message 13 of 13
FYI:A bronze whaler is a shark.
For straight forward sketches - no problem.
However... from a design point of view:
In the early stages of design I use Sketcher to figure out all the interactions between components. This can mean very complex sketches or in some cases multiple sketches that interact with previous sketches via equations, dimensions and references.
So lots of dimensions and lots of constraints.
Entire days can be spent in sketch mode tweaking this and that to get all the components interacting in the right way.
Once underway the sketches' typically have relationships with either the original development sketches or subsequent geometry - getting these working so that upstream changes produce predictable and intended outcomes can be a complete mission - (maybe V14 fixes a lot of that.)
I can only repeat the desire for Predictable and Consistent outcomes for the user interface for all the commands. I think you have acknowledges the opportunity for improvement certainly exists.
However, the question remains - When will full Auto Dimension and Auto Constrain be functioning?