vista simmetrica

[blackwing]

Good morning,

I have a 2d view (of a 3d model) that I detailed with a sketch (associated); Would someone tell me a way to create a new symmetric view of the first?
maybe to detail further.

Thank you.

 

[ceschi1959]

Good morning,

I have a 2d view (of a 3d model) that I detailed with a sketch (associated); Would someone tell me a way to create a new symmetric view of the first?
maybe to detail further.

Thank you.

Can you please explain yourself better, maybe by posting an example?
grits hello

 

[The_Matrix]

Good morning,

I have a 2d view (of a 3d model) that I detailed with a sketch (associated); Would someone tell me a way to create a new symmetric view of the first?
maybe to detail further.

Thank you.

A big mess.. .
I fear that nx for these things "2d" is not exactly indicated.
I think you should mirror the 3d, update your view and mirror the sketch.

 

[blackwing]

thanks matrix,

but how do you mirror the sketch?

 

[ceschi1959]

thanks matrix,

but how do you mirror the sketch?

with the appropriate command.
I'll put an image on it.
the datum with which you will mirror the solid must be before the sketch that mirrors naturally.
Hi.

 

[blackwing]

with the appropriate command.
I'll put an image on it.
the datum with which you will mirror the solid must be before the sketch that mirrors naturally.
Hi.

thanks to the suggestion, but yes the sketch with which I detailed the first view belongs to this there is no way to mirror it/associate it (maybe associately) to another...

Am I wrong? ?

 

[jumpy]

The one who says ceschi1959 is inside the sketch.
but if I want
1) do the sketch
2) do the extrusions or everything that goes behind and
3) at some point I would also like the mirror of the sketch (but not inside it, much earlier in the timestamp order, after)
How do you do that?
I usually do a group (array or mirror is group and not feature).
I tried again this time, but the mirror does not come: the mirror feature is there and does not give error, but the mirror sketch, there is! :
It looks like you do it.

Hi.

g.

ps I nx4

 

[blackwing]

The one who says ceschi1959 is inside the sketch.
but if I want
1) do the sketch
2) do the extrusions or everything that goes behind and
3) at some point I would also like the mirror of the sketch (but not inside it, much earlier in the timestamp order, after)
How do you do that?
I usually do a group (array or mirror is group and not feature).
I tried again this time, but the mirror does not come: the mirror feature is there and does not give error, but the mirror sketch, there is! :
It looks like you do it.

Hi.

g.

ps I nx4

thank you for the detailed description but it is not my case.
My problem is exquisitely detailed 2d
and use 6.0.5

And I don't get my legs! !

 

[ceschi1959]

dear blackwing and jumpy, describe procedures as if they were 'normal' in nx. Actually it seems to me, and excuse me if I look arrogant, that you are using one of the most 'powerful' software in the 3d world in a totally improper way.
I renew the invitation to post some examples so, perhaps, I will understand something.

greetings and good work.

c.

 

[IPdesign]

I would like to say that we are not going to be able to do this.
nx is not autocad or me10 where we can get used to drawing lines in a table and then stuffed with comanti for that specificity.
nx is a 3d cad accompanied by a good drafting section, but not a pure 2d cad.
The drafting section is linked to the modeling part, attempting to use it stand alone never brings concrete benefits in terms of tempering.
means that if you have to make a view of a particular symmetric, perhaps it is the case that you enter modeling and do with the simple command of solid symmetry, what you will get will serve to make its view in the table.
If the particular mirror has further work, better make it in 3d and see the table updated, without losing time in the change for lines in 2d.

I am of the idea that everything in the world can be done, but the effort to do so leads us to think that that is a bad cad

 

[blackwing]

I would like to say that we are not going to be able to do this.
nx is not autocad or me10 where we can get used to drawing lines in a table and then stuffed with comanti for that specificity.
nx is a 3d cad accompanied by a good drafting section, but not a pure 2d cad.
The drafting section is linked to the modeling part, attempting to use it stand alone never brings concrete benefits in terms of tempering.
means that if you have to make a view of a particular symmetric, perhaps it is the case that you enter modeling and do with the simple command of solid symmetry, what you will get will serve to make its view in the table.
If the particular mirror has further work, better make it in 3d and see the table updated, without losing time in the change for lines in 2d.

I am of the idea that everything in the world can be done, but the effort to do so leads us to think that that is a bad cad

thank you guys, I understand the sense of advice.. .

that with noug you pay much more to do things in the 3d I knew already....it is that I had proposed to thoroughly investigate the potential of the "new" 2d (especially that of the 7.5, that I installed and in parallel to the 6 I am testing).

this morning I did the same thing again using the usual 3d street and voilà: everything very clean and fast.

I am probably not up to height or I have not investigated/experienced in the best way the pure 2d: but in many years that I use ug/nx I feel like saying, that even with the undeniable improvements of these years, this part of the program is the oldest and most distant both from the other cad but also from what users expect.

Thanks again for advice

 

[The_Matrix]

this part of the program is the oldest and most distant from the other cad but also from what users expect.

Allow me to disagree. . .
are in contact with hundreds of companies and expectations go a different direction.
if you want I tell you the expectations of the most important customers (and that are also those that eventually, willing or nolent, direct product development)

 

[The_Matrix]

is that I had proposed to thoroughly investigate the potential of the "new" 2d (especially that of the 7.5, which I installed and in parallel to the 6 I am testing).

Let me know how you find yourself...
I used it a bit, but it's not what I mean as a 2d "powerful", but it's a personal opinion. . many others like it.
I have a particular concept of 2d.

 

[IPdesign]

Allow me to disagree. . .
are in contact with hundreds of companies and expectations go a different direction.
if you want I tell you the expectations of the most important customers (and that are also those that eventually, willing or nolent, direct product development)

I do not want to trigger flame, even because my official dress imposes me a certain count; So I'm going to be biting my tongue about what I would say about the siemens development address.

But I have to give reason to matrix,
trying to use a cad like 2d pure I know so much about returning to the origins.
a little like getting back to the tecnigraph pulling lines
After doing a beautiful 2d table, what do I pass to the workshop? paper?
In order for the cadcam operator to model the particular from me, or why should this be programmed on board the route?
let these things be done with dedicated software that cost the right and executed with equally cheap machinery .

if purchase nx with the costs that we all know, surely the investment is made with the certainty of having to provide to others something that allows to reduce the time to market.
If this wasn't the purpose of the investment I was wrong and I must take note of it.

 

[The_Matrix]

I do not want to trigger flame, even because my official dress imposes me a certain count; So I'm going to be biting my tongue about what I would say about the siemens development address.

Paolo, it's long and difficult to talk, you know... We've talked about it so many times in the past.
Unfortunately the needs of fiat/gm/nissan/ge/boeing/etc do not always correspond 1:1 to what a "small" user expects (and with small I do not refer to 1-2 tws, but to the mentality from "small" company).
catia has the same "problem"... they invest tons of € on "cloud computing" and maybe many users asked for improvements on the 2d...

 

[IPdesign]

Paolo, it's long and difficult to talk, you know... We've talked about it so many times in the past.
Unfortunately the needs of fiat/gm/nissan/ge/boeing/etc do not always correspond 1:1 to what a "small" user expects (and with small I do not refer to 1-2 tws, but to the mentality from "small" company).
catia has the same "problem"... they invest tons of € on "cloud computing" and maybe many users asked for improvements on the 2d...

Yes, it's been a long time since I understand certain business choices.
I obviously don't have to share them, but I fully understand them.

 

[blackwing]

Yes, it's been a long time since I understand certain business choices.
I obviously don't have to share them, but I fully understand them.

and I subscribe.

I add that regardless of how the cad is used I think it is legettimo that a high-end cad also has a 2d "decente" (and I think siemens noticed if it launched 7.5)

greetings

 

[The_Matrix]

This is not how things work, but it is useless to continue the discussion here.

 

[IPdesign]

Guys, we went too far.
if you want to open a tread on how to compare working methods, and possibly move messages, but we do not continue in this section

Thank you.

. .

open tread and move the mexes.