Diameter dimension in Drawings

[ptc-2993521]

I'm having trouble turning a "created" dimension from a radius to a diameter in drawings. How do you do this in Pro E?
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.

[HatimAbdul]

You can eith delete it and recreate it or you can select the dimension, right-click. From the popup menu select (edit attachment). Click twice on the arc/circle and middle click to obtain the diameter dimension (rad dimension is by one click on the arc/circle).

[ptc-2993521]

That did it, Thank you. I'm coming from a SolidWorks background and pro-e goes about alot of things completly different from SW. I'm sure I'll have plenty more questions like this that aren't in the help menus or tutorial books we have in the office here.

[BalachanderVenu]

Welcome to Pro/e.. Good luck with the tutorials and help pages from PTC. You will find lot of information from the search pages from PTC.com. -Chander

[DELETEME]

"Michael Artegian" wrote:

That did it, Thank you. I'm coming from a SolidWorks background and pro-e goes about alot of things completly different from SW. I'm sure I'll have plenty more questions like this that aren't in the help menus or tutorial books we have in the office here.

[JNiessen]

I,m not trying to steal this thread but it appears Michael has the right answer. However I do have a question for CM and the last reply. I have not used Solid Works, although I just got a demo copy to try out, and I have been using pro-E for about three months now. I do find it frustrating but I will put that down to the new software learning curve. Eventually it will get easier. Our schools district is looking at new software and both SW and Pro-E are two options. I was just wondering why CM referred to switching as a "step up". Why is Pro-E better? In this area of Richmond British Columbia it sounds like SW has a pretty good foot hold in the local industries. It also sounds like Pro-E is stronger in Europe although I noticed a long time ago that the vast majority of threads and answers to threads come from the USA (pat yourself on the back).

[JNiessen]

BTW, after three months on Pro-E and using this forum this is the first post I had the correct answer to. I really am getting better.

[JonathanHodgson]

"Jim Niessen" wrote:

... I have been using pro-E for about three months now. I do find it frustrating but I will put that down to the new software learning curve. Eventually it will get easier.

[DavidButz]

Jim, I'm also leery about initiating a big Pro/E-SW debate, but just a couple of remarks. I have used Pro for many years (since Version 12.0), was a contract instructor for 6 years, and love it (in spite of frequently wanting to throw a brick through the screen for various reasons of interface obtusity). I've also used SW on a more limited basis. Either package is fully capable of modern modeling to a high level of complexity, and I agree with many who find SW in some ways "friendlier". However, (1)Pro is more deeply capable of mathematical control, complex feature creation, and many other subtle aspects of design, and (2) Pro's insistence on properly controlled dependencies means that complex designs are much easier to modify and much less subject to chaotic undiagnosable failure. David

[JNiessen]

Those are two excellent responses. I love it when you receive factual information and not just, as one of my students just said this morning, SW looks childish. I just set up three of my better students with demo copies of SW to get their impressions. They haven’t started doing much on them but soon will. So thanks for the input. The only formal training I had was a two day instructor training session. It took us through the water bottle tutorial with lessons on Pro-E from the instructor. Completing the two day even gives us the ability to posses a lab set of Pro-E. I have also completed about 3 -4 other tutorials that go from parts to assemblies. I would love to take a couple months off and get proper training but at this time we aren't too sure what software we will be using for the next 5-6 years. IF we go with AutoCAD it will probable be Inventor, Arch Desk and Mech Desk. If we go with something like Pro-E we will still have to find an Architectural program. OOOOH the dilemmas we have. Time to go to work.

[krichardson]

In my opinion, you really cannot compare SolidWorks to Pro/Engineer. The only similarity is that they both use a sketcher, a model tree and are parametric / relational (parent / child). After that, both software packages differ hugely. SolidWorks is designed for a mid-level engineering department with a fairly non-complex product line. It is advertised to be easy to get new users up to speed on and indeed the learning curve for beginner CAD engineers is very fast. It most cases, it will model CAD and produce drawings quite adequately. That is fine as some companies only require a solid modeling package like SolidWorks. Pro/Engineer is a much more capable and advanced package – it simply has a great deal more functionality than SolidWorks will ever have. And yes, Pro/Engineer is difficult to learn – ask anyone of us who go back to 2000i or beyond. That learning curve is very steep which is why many managers avoid Pro/Engineer like the plague. I really didn't get my head wrapped around it until I took a semester class at the local community college. However, there are many more things I can make Pro/Engineer do that SolidWorks just can’t do. I see it every day – we have both packages here where I work. What I hear is that it is difficult to transition from SolidWorks to Pro/Engineer. Pro/Engineer forces you to think ahead in your design, where SolidWorks allows ‘sloppy’ modeling. What I see is a tendency for SolidWorks models to never get cleaned up to produce a workable design. I also haven’t found many Pro/Engineer users that like SolidWorks. For myself, using SolidWorks is like drawing with a crayon as opposed to being used to using a fountain pen. I find the SolidWorks interface to be crude and yes, ‘childish’. Btw, I am also an experienced Catia 4 and Unigraphics CAD Engineer. The only legitimate comparison is Pro/Engineer to Catia 5 and/or to Unigraphics. If you take into account Dassualt makes both SolidWorks and Catia, you can bet that the SolidWorks functionality will never increase to become any competition for Catia and hence Pro/Engineer. Kathy

[ptc-5168838]

I used ProE for ~10 years, switched to Solidworks for the last 3.5 years and now I am back using ProE.

The biggest difference between Solidworks and Proe is that Solidworks is very intuitive and easy to learn/use. ProE is very nonintuitive and difficult to learn/use. I am having more trouble relearning ProE than to pick up Solidworks from scratch. If I had the choice for most things I would definately use Solidworks rather than ProE.

[krichardson]

I've had to use SolidWorks for the last 6 months and I hate it! The worst software package I have ever used excepting Shoptech E2.

I'll take Pro/E, Catia or UG any day.