×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Unassociated dimensions & the reasons why

Unassociated dimensions & the reasons why

Unassociated dimensions & the reasons why

(OP)
Hi folks,
   I've just been tasked with writing up a short paper describing the various reasons that drawing dimensions get unassociated, in an effort to cut down on the amount of re-detailing that is involved by the drafters.  I'd like some input from the community as to my suppositions, as well as any reasons that I have missed, and some possible solutions.
   My reasoning is basically as follows: Dimensions typically become unassociated because the unique ID that the dimension uses to the feature that it's attached to has been deleted:
1) The designers/modelers are creating the models in a less than efficient manner with respect to future changes.  Either sketches aren't being used, or are used in a manner that isn't conducive to changing (too complex, confusing, using obscure geometric constraints, etc).  Thus, when a change comes along the person updating the model winds up blowing away the original feature(s) and re-creating what is needed (thus hosing the dimensions/drafting objects associated to tthese faces/edges).
Solution: Sketches should be simple and straight forward with the minimum amount of complexity required and with some thought put into the 'design intent' before hand.  Arcs shouldn't be used in sketches when a later blend will do, Never use the 'fixed' geometric constraint and minimize the 'point on curve' constraint.
2) No realistic effort is put into updating the existing features as required before deleting and re-creating the feature(s).  All too often I've seen EC's come through and bosses, blends, pockets, etc. are deleted and re-created when simply modifying the feature would have been preferable and thus would allow the drawing to update without re-associating the dimensions.
Solution: Don't delete features...modify them when possible.
3) Utilize centerlines to dimension to, not the arc center of a feature.  Quite often I've found dimensions associated to the arc centers of features and not to centerlines.  It's easier to re-associate a centerline than it is to re-associate a mass of dimensions.
Solution: Dimension to centerlines associated to arc centers, or axial centerlines associated to a cylindrical face and not the arc centers (ie section cuts).
4) Blends blow up during updates, and are thus deleted and re-created (with unknown consequences to the drawing).
Solution: Prior to deleting the blend, reset your current feature to the blend and re-associate the edges defining the blend. Walk through the model updating blends as necessary.  Refrain from blending the part until last, using edge blends before resorting to face blends.
5)Much of the problems associated with un-associated dimensions could be alleviated by checking the electronic file for adherance to existing standards and approved modeling methodologies.  The 'anything goes as long as the drawing depicts what we want' attitude and culture must change.
Solution: Enforce standards and change the existing culture so that the electronic model is the document of record versus the plot of the drawing.  Checking and enforcing standards and methodologies will get everyone doing things in a more congruent manner, even if the methodology is less than ideal.

These are just a few that have popped to the front of my noggin, I'm sure there's loads more reasons.  So how do these sound and can you think of any others?  I'm looking forward to your response and TIA...

SS

RE: Unassociated dimensions & the reasons why

Shoot, if you could get your folks to follow your guidlines, like would be good. Problem I've found (in my neck of the woods)is many designers and modelers are self taught in UG. They will use gorilla modeling techniques to make deadlines. I've found those that had modeling classes at UGS tend to follow those rules (at first anyway). Bottom line when designers are pressured - technique goes out the window.

--
Bill

RE: Unassociated dimensions & the reasons why

Use faces for the dimensioning not the edges,edges will fail many a times.

RE: Unassociated dimensions & the reasons why

If you can fix problem 1, problem 2 will be greatly reduced.

Another potential problem with dimensions is section views; if the section cut moves or becomes unassociated the dimensions will do funny things (sometimes they don't unassociate, but it is no longer the dimension you are interested in).

I'm a big fan of using what's there rather than deleting/recreating but I would be careful about making this a hard rule. I once had a coworker who was (in)famous for creating obfuscated models that required dozens of features for relatively simple part geometry. Redoing all or part of his files would reduce file clutter and make the part easier to modify in the future. I would much rather clean up a file like that and then deal with the 2 second job of reassociating dimensions (one of the easier jobs I've run across in UG) than slog through what was already created and have the benefit of dimensions updating themselves.

amatmay,
would you elaborate on dimensioning to faces? I don't seem to have the option of picking them for dimensions while in drafting (I'm still on NX2).

RE: Unassociated dimensions & the reasons why

Cowski,

Dimensioning to Faces

If you turn off all the icons on your snap toolbar so they are not highlighted it will be easier to select faces when dimensioning.

You can also wait for the ... to appear and cycle through the selection options by using your <- & -> keys while looking at the message bar until you see the proper face highlight and see face as the entity type.

Michael

RE: Unassociated dimensions & the reasons why

mjcole,
Thanks for the tip!

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources