Angular Dimensioning
Angular Dimensioning
(OP)
Hello All,
Using NX 7.5.
I have a general question about dimensioning that has been frustrating me for a while now. Why does angular dimensioning in the drafting environment function different than angular dimensioning in the sketching environment? In sketching, if I dimension two lines that are acute with respect to eachother, I'm given the smallest angular distance between them which is ideal in pretty much every case. In drafting, however, if I select the exact same two lines, one of the lines is projected through the intersection point of the other line and I'm given either the compliment of the angle (180 degrees - sketch angle) or by selecting Alternate Angle I get the cyclic compliment of that angle (360 degrees - (complimentary angle)).
e.g. Imagine two lines that are dimensioned in the sketch environment to be 45 degrees from each other. When I attempt to dimension them in drafting, all I can get are 180 - 45 = 135 OR 360 - 135 = 225. The arrows only point to one of the lines I selected while the other arrow points at the projected extension of the other line. This is absolutely NOT what I'm trying to show.
This is consistent whether I'm dimensioning centerlines to features, features to features, lines to feature, whatever to whatever. Its frustrating because in order to get the dimension that I'm trying to represent, I have to draw a line on the sheet that drafting will dimension "properly," dimension from that, then hide that line.
Is there something I've been doing wrong here or a work around that isn't as sloppy as what I've resorted to? Any advice would be appreciated.
-R
Using NX 7.5.
I have a general question about dimensioning that has been frustrating me for a while now. Why does angular dimensioning in the drafting environment function different than angular dimensioning in the sketching environment? In sketching, if I dimension two lines that are acute with respect to eachother, I'm given the smallest angular distance between them which is ideal in pretty much every case. In drafting, however, if I select the exact same two lines, one of the lines is projected through the intersection point of the other line and I'm given either the compliment of the angle (180 degrees - sketch angle) or by selecting Alternate Angle I get the cyclic compliment of that angle (360 degrees - (complimentary angle)).
e.g. Imagine two lines that are dimensioned in the sketch environment to be 45 degrees from each other. When I attempt to dimension them in drafting, all I can get are 180 - 45 = 135 OR 360 - 135 = 225. The arrows only point to one of the lines I selected while the other arrow points at the projected extension of the other line. This is absolutely NOT what I'm trying to show.
This is consistent whether I'm dimensioning centerlines to features, features to features, lines to feature, whatever to whatever. Its frustrating because in order to get the dimension that I'm trying to represent, I have to draw a line on the sheet that drafting will dimension "properly," dimension from that, then hide that line.
Is there something I've been doing wrong here or a work around that isn't as sloppy as what I've resorted to? Any advice would be appreciated.
-R





RE: Angular Dimensioning
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=336276
RE: Angular Dimensioning
By selecting the Alternate Angle option, I get the entire circle excluding the angle I'm actually interested in...
RE: Angular Dimensioning
In this picture, the angle of interest would be the blue angle, but the angle returned by the angular dimensioning tool returns the green angle. Selecting the Alternate Angle button returns a value for everything except for the blue angle.
RE: Angular Dimensioning
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
RE: Angular Dimensioning
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: Angular Dimensioning
Autocad always required a specific order of picking in ccw directio. But I'd be suprised if that was an issue in any nowadays systew. But I seem to remember what looslib is getting at although it was more of an issue with Start, End chain selection. Try all the possible location of line seletion and placement click combos and one is bound to give you the correct result.
Does UGNX allow for doing Angles as center point point 1 and point two for angles? or start center end for angle or do you get Arclen?
This should be possible to achieve without your workaround method.
"It's not the size of the Forum that matters, It's the Quality of the Posts"
Michael Cole
Boston, MA
CSWP, CSWI, CSWTS
Follow me on !w¡#$%
@ TrajPar - @ mcSldWrx2008
= ProE = SolidWorks
RE: Angular Dimensioning
But thanks to WolframAlpha, I have a more accurate graph.
The line at 45 degrees is a feature on a part and the +x axis is a centerline through a hole that doesn't actually extend far enough to interesect with the feature. I want the 45 degree representation, but no matter what order I select: CW, CCW, farthest from intersection, closest to intersection, combinations of the possibilities: NX projects the centerline through to the other side of the feature and gives me the 135 degree angle shown. If I select Alternate Angle, I get 225 degrees.
I apologize for the confusion, maybe this graph will clear things up.
RE: Angular Dimensioning
Tim Flater
NX Designer
NX 7.5.4.4 MP8
WinXP Pro x64 SP2
Intel Xeon 2.53 GHz 6GB RAM
NVIDIA Quadro 4000 2GB
RE: Angular Dimensioning
What is weird is that I only see the second image posted by rhobere on 29 Mar 13 16:30.
The images posted in notes on 29 Mar 13 16:26 and 30 Mar 13 16:14 show up as a box with a red X.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
RE: Angular Dimensioning
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: Angular Dimensioning
I've given up. Thanks anyways.
RE: Angular Dimensioning
See attachment
Regards,
Tomas