NX7.5 2D drafting Dimension associativity
NX7.5 2D drafting Dimension associativity
(OP)
We are migrating from I-Deas to NX7.5 I am now doing my first real drawing with dimensions and text. Is it better to use the "model" reference set and dimension to the Features Edges, Surfaces Ect. Or is it better to use the "entire part" reference set to associate our 2D dimension to the reference geometry that we made those features from? Which method is more robust to keep dimension from losing associativity? I Started using the "entire part" reference set, but when I switched the reference set back to model all of my dimensions lost associativity
Thanks
Thanks





RE: NX7.5 2D drafting Dimension associativity
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
http://www.siemens.com/plm
UG/NX Museum: http://www.plmworld.org/p/cm/ld/fid=209
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: NX7.5 2D drafting Dimension associativity
RE: NX7.5 2D drafting Dimension associativity
Unless I've got a centerline that is almost impossible to define with Utility Symbols, I've always dimensioned to model edges and faces rather than reference/construction geometry.
You could feasibly remove all parameters and then remove all reference geometry from a model and completely blow up all dims on a drawing - using model edges and utility symbols would more than likely keep that from happening.
I'm sure other users might have different approaches - just my experiences and preferences.
Tim Flater
NX Designer
RE: NX7.5 2D drafting Dimension associativity
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
http://www.siemens.com/plm
UG/NX Museum: http://www.plmworld.org/p/cm/ld/fid=209
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: NX7.5 2D drafting Dimension associativity
Tim Flater
NX Designer