Skip to main content
M
mlocascio1-Visitor
1-Visitor
August 20, 2014
Question

Dimensioning Drafts

  • August 20, 2014
  • 52 replies
  • 81191 views
Pete Bokma,



Thank you for the suggestion. I think that what you are referring to would be A) A FAKE dimension on a drawing (if I went that way) or B) additional geometry in the model.



Please keep in mind that this draft is outbound. That may have some bearing on how it displays. Still, I would like to see a better way to display a draft dimension.



Michael P. Locascio



This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.

52 replies

Show previous replies
M
mlocascio1-VisitorAuthor
1-Visitor
August 21, 2014
Donald,



This is the one of the best things written on this elongated thread. It’s good to know what’s going on out there.



I like the song by Tom Petty “I Won’t Back Down.” If I had someone working for me who made it a point to create dimensions, especially if modeled dimensions were available, I would have to give him the baseball option (3 strikes and you’re out). I agree with Donald about the idea that people CAN and WILL “fake dimensions.” You cannot change free agency, but you can work around it.



Michael P. Locascio


N
nrollins2-Explorer
2-Explorer
August 21, 2014
Doug – thanks for saving me the time and consideration to type up my sentiments; they waver between yours and John Scranton’s.



I was going to let it go, but then Doug posted exactly what I have to say – except the god part – even to the 18 years of Pro/E…



There is a reason why PTC gave us both ways – and it wasn’t so we can argue about it. I believe it was so we can get the job done.



-Nate


C
cordeneaux3-Newcomer
3-Newcomer
August 21, 2014
Been on Pro/E since 1993 (no idea what rev that was).
I use and teach both created and shown as needed. Each has their time and place.

But where some of the “shown” guys lose credibility is in their insistence on referring to created dimensions as “fake.” Whatever the feeling is on created dimensions, they are not fake. They update just fine and represent the geometry dimensions. I would define a fake dimension as not representing the actual geometry or not updating when the model changes.

This is a common logical fallacy known as appeal to emotion. Defined as manipulating an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument.

Thanks,
Chris

D
DonSenchuk12-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
August 21, 2014
Just have to say I really love your sense of irony. A little dry, but still nicely done.

I’m referring to pointing out Appeal to Emotion while simultaneously using Argument from Authority. In this thread alone we’ve seen variations on “I’ve been using the software since…” of 18 years, 18 years, version 6, version 9 and 1993, where that person sets themselves up as the Authority portion of the logical fallacy. The second worst Pro/E user I’ve encountered out of hundreds started on version 7. No lie.

And it’s not really the created dimension itself. Though creating a dimension on the drawing that one has already created in the model seems a waste of time, I’ve already pointed out where their use is practically required. It’s really the introduction of a process by which “errors”[1] are introduced into the product creation process.

I realize a lot of people operate on the philosophy of ‘hey, we need to get this done no matter what’. Those that do this and have the integrity not to cheat the dimensions (using @O or even sloppier methods) really aren’t operating to the detriment of that product creation process. Unfortunately, that’s proven to be a minority of users (and even dept heads!) by quite a large margin. That’s really the what and why the shown dimension crowd is generally against.

[1]While calling them errors may not be technically correct, people don’t like it when you point out they took intentional actions to introduce the problem. It’s not like they accidentally made those menu picks.

P
ptc-102921-Visitor
1-Visitor
August 21, 2014
nice thread so far … and another 18 years of Pro/e are missing something.



Most important fact for dimensions is between design intention and the needs of manufacturing. Are they the same – easy doing with shown dims. But what are you doing if the basic datum’s for design are different with the datum’s for manufacturing?

- you can redefine all features and reference to the manufacturing datum’s – and waste your time

- you can redefine the features you need for drawings and add reference dims - some time my favorite with a mapkey to remove the ()

- you can create the dims in the drawing – without cheating

Do it right the first time means to know the later needs. In mechanical design may be. For real development of new design – where do you from? Maybe you don’t know the technology or you have rapid prototyping with less need of dims = dims from design intend. And then you have to redesign for later samples – now you need more dims for mechanical manufacturing …

I could write much more, but I would not waste your time …



It all depends from what you need and from the trust in the skills of your Pro/E-worker(s) – there is no silver bullet.



Uwe


StephenW
StephenW23-Emerald III
23-Emerald III
August 21, 2014
Wait a minute!!! You’re saying the vast majority of people who use created dimension also use the @o to “cheat the system”?? Are you sure you really mean that??
Only people who live in the shown dimension world are honest?? REALLY?? That’s a pretty high horse you’re on right there.

I usually show dimensions. I also spend the time to correct my models when I realized I can’t show the dimension as I want to detail it on the drawing as long as it doesn’t mess up my design intent. I use created dimension also. I TRY my best to have my model represent my design intent AND also manufacturing. Sometimes those things don’t mesh well.

I have never used @o to “fix” a dimension. I have used @o to make a cool dimension looking note and to denote a symbol for some reason or another. In my 19-20 years of experience (said with an air of authority, haha) I have only come across a handful of user who have tried to game the @o to shortcut the work.

I have also come across a handful of users who have SHOWN a FAKE dimension. They sketched something in the model so they could show a dimension that didn’t define the geometry so they could have their precious shown dimensions and still say they are of the high and mighty shown dimension only group.

So, they showed a FAKE dimension, do they still belong to the club??



D
DonSenchuk12-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
August 21, 2014
No. Poorly worded on my part there. I’m saying that, in my experience, giving users carte blanche to use created dimensions leads to far more use of @O dimensions than using shown dimensions. Also in my experience, users that defer to the created dimensions side of the scale that can be trusted not to screw it up are by far in the minority.



C
cordeneaux3-Newcomer
3-Newcomer
August 21, 2014
Sorry, but I disagree. In this type of discussion, I find a person’s experience relevant. Maybe not an absolute, but certainly relevant.
So it doesn’t really fit the appeal to authority fallacy. But thanks for clarifying my rank on the worst Pro/User list and which version I started.

I maintain that referring to a created dimension as “fake” is an appeal to emotion. IMHO, “fake” has a misleading, negative connotation.

If you’re having success with either or a combo or both, great job. If you’re really slow and/or making lots of mistakes, it might be time to reconsider your process.

(disclaimer – I am not an expert on anything. I may or may not have any idea what I’m talking about.)

D
DonSenchuk12-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
August 21, 2014
Oh. I thought you were trying to inject a little light-heartedness into this topic. The fact that it’s people self-establishing their authority using either years of experience or version doesn’t change the fact that’s it’s an appeal from authority. I’m also confused as to where I clarified your rank or which version you started. But oh well. Just to clarify, the best Pro/E user I’ve come across also started way back in the single digit version days (IIRC).

Fake dimensions are bad. Non-fake ones aren’t.


M
mlocascio1-VisitorAuthor
1-Visitor
August 21, 2014
I just think that it would be WONDERFUL to have a Pro/E job where I could spend all of this time emailing.


Show more replies
Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement