cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Add Mate and Align back into Constraint Types

Add Mate and Align back into Constraint Types

Product Idea:

Add a config.pro option to add “Mate” and “Align” Constraint Types back into the dropdown (in addition to Coincident).  Then people who want to use Coincident can, but people who want to define mate vs. align can do it up front.

  • Mate
  • Align

Mate_Align.jpg

Justification:

  1. In 100% of the cases the user already knows whether they want surfaces to mate or to align.  Why do they need to perform an extra operation (even in the graphics window) to Flip the coincident constraint?
  2. The software is going backwards from less clicks and picks to more clicks and picks because they need have to check to see which mate/align the software chose and flip it if it assumed incorrectly for their design.
  3. Per PTC, the logic behind the software on whether coincident assumes mate vs. align has to do with the orientation of the csys of the assembly and the csys orientation of the component.  75% of the time, the assumption is incorrect.
  4. For 75% of the cases the user has to perform a secondary operation to flip the constraint
  5. And because it assumed the wrong mate/align, it makes the preexisting constraints in conflict which gets more confusing for the user on where to go to fix the conflict (not realizing the software assumed the wrong type of coincidence)
  6. Why not just have the option up front preventing any confusion and conflict?
1 Comment
Contributor

In my experience the mate/align/coincident constraints are the most used (almost 80-85% cases). So why not make more usable these operations?