[ Outline ] · Standard · Linear+ 3D Smart Dimension Behavior, Some Questions

[Cary OConnor]

Hi All,

I wanted to ask some use model questions about the current 3D Smart Dimensions to find out how well it works today and what can be improved for future changes.

Today, I believe many existing users understand our 3D Smart Dimensions and how to apply them to get the objects to move. So the goal is to look at this from a different perspective and see if we can find out the best solution for all. For these questions, we will only discuss the dimensioning between Parts/Assemblies.

Background - Today, the 3D Smart Dimension are applied to the selected or highlighted object (Owner) and to another object. The Owner is the one that will try to move when the dimension is edited. If no objects are selected, the dimension is placed on the Part Level of the hit object when applying the dimension (not the assembly levels above).

Good: It is clear on how to get a specific object to move. Select the object and apply the dimension to it to be the owner and one to move.

Bad: When nothing is selected, it seems odd that it goes to the part level when there are assemblies. Also, new users may not understand this concept when coming from other systems.

Questions:
1. Is it clear to you that there is this owner concept and how to move objects?
2. Would it be better to have a command browser that shows who the dimension is related to (shows the owner and object at the opposite end of the dimension)?
3. If the command browser concept was used, should it allow the ability to select to any level of the assembly (so you start the command, pick an assembly, list the possible options to connect the dimension too - assembly, sub-assembly, etc, part)?
4. Would it be confusing if by default, the smart dimension selected the top most level of the selection? For example: Nothing is highlighted and you select on a part. It would by default find the top most object (the assembly) and apply the dimension there by default.

Background #2 - Today, the solving of the Dimensions in IRONCAD are primarily unidirectional. This means that the Owner is the one to move. If the owner cannot solve (or cannot move), the system does not try to see if the object at other end of the Dimension can move to solve the dimensional change (Bidirectional solving - more real world).

Questions:
1. If Bidirectional support is added, how will this affect your current understanding of the dimension relations? For Example: In some cases, the other end of the dimension will move if the owner cannot solve the dimension. Is that expected?
2. When you create the dimension, it is understood who the owner or preferred moving object is. The other end of the dimension will be the shape at the common parent level (for example: You select on the part, it will move up the tree to the parent that is at the same level. So say you have Part 1 in assembly 1 and you select Part 1 as the owner. Next you select Part 2 with is under Assembly 2. The dimension will be actually to Assembly 2 since it is at the same parent level as Part 1's parent assembly.

Please let me know your thoughts.
Cary

[dhovatter]

I agree in big part with Carlo.
It seems that over time the imphise has been placed more on keeping up with what the other Cad systems had. If they have a cool too get it no problem. But cosmetics is not why I like IC. Down and dirty is fine if it is functional and fast.
I can still produce a part faster then some other Cad systems but that speed has been greatly reduced by the hunting for the tools. And by the time my speed has built up after getting accustomed to tools or setting hot keys, the new version comes out and I need to start hunting al over again.
Like Eric says moving to look more like a windows program is not necessarily the best thing in all areas.
I have always thought that the problem is that the ones doing the software are more then likely young non users who have not needed to produce parts for a living just computer code. Granted you guys help direct them and use the input from users but I do not know what you use as judjement tools in whose suggestion you listen to. I some times think that it must be people who are new to doing Cad.
Like when the version came out where when you export part it was default linked unless you deselected that, you had to fix that, and now when you offset a curve it is constrained unless you deselect (which needs to be changed. and when you project in 2D you need to pull down menu and select the project because the default is Project constrained.
When are you guys going to get it that the majority of users do not link everything and do not want things constrained!
Dallas