Lost in Euclidian Space.

[Jabberwocky]

Assuming we're dealing with Euclidian geometry here in SWx...

I have three orthogonal planes, but I can't directly put a reference point at their intersection.

I have a plane and a non-planar axis, but I can't directly place a point at the intersection of the two.

I'm aware there are various work-arounds and offset projections one can perform to get the same result, but does this upset anybody else?

 

[TheTick]

Not good.

I would resort to 3D sketch like I always did before.

 

[dgowans]

I've found some of the reference geometry commands to be sadly lacking myself. I don't recall the specifics, but I know my blood pressure has at times risen to dangerous levels when trying to generate a reference plane or axis. As you state, there are workarounds available which yield the desired result, but who likes those?

Enhancement request time.

 

[Heckler]

From What I heard at the 2006 rollout in an unspecified time frame (could be 2007) we will be sketching in 3D so those 2D limitation will not exist. Free you mind and open a 3D sketch.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

I have a plane and a non-planar axis, but I can't directly place a point at the intersection of the two.

I'm aware there are various work-arounds and offset projections one can perform to get the same result, but does this upset anybody else?

Not me ... sorry, but I've never needed to do that and it would be a very simple thing to do in both a 2D & 3D sketch. If it was important to a lot of people, I'm sure ERs would have been received and acted upon by SW.


Helpful SW websites FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions FAQ559-1091

 

[dezignstuff]

What you say about a reference point is true, but in a 3D sketch you can make a sketch point "on surface" to all three reference planes.

In a 3D sketch you can make a point coincident to an axis and on surface to a plane.

I don't know what you're trying to acheive, but workarounds are a way of life. If you can conceive of the geometry, there's a workaround somewhere to do it. If you're offended by workarounds, you're going to have a hard way to go in any CAD software. I try not to think of workarounds as sloppy backup techniques, but as a way you can get something done as opposed to not getting it done.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Thanks for the input. I'm not offended from the design side, workarounds are indeed how things get done.

I'm offended from the simple geometry side. I think my problem is that I first learned on graphics programs like Lightwave and 3DS Max. They're built for animation, thus allowing for some very simple solutions in this regard. Trying to get SWx to meet those needs (currently imposed by my friendly neighborhood employer) causes these headaches.

Of course, I can't model worth a damn the old polygonal way anymore. Parametric for life!