mirror sketch 3d...

[peppo82]

possible that it is impossible?
It seems strange because the 3d sketch is an indispensable tool for rapid and flexible design.
in practice in my case I only had to place points in space, I did it by changing their coordinates in their properties.
Then I expected that with the total definition tool of the sketch, the quotas would be fixed directly compared to the plans, but nada, is not available in the 3d sketch, I had to put all the quotas, then after I expected to be able to at least mirror the sketch, but nada, I should draw new points, and insert new quotas, practically double of a useless and alienating fatigue. . .
Today I discovered that in 3d sketches it is not possible to use the automatic definition tool of the sketch, and even more serious, it is not possible to mirror them compared to a plan! ! !
This is true, or is it possible to overcome somehow?
less bad than with solidworks I only use it for teaching purposes, if I worked on it I think I would be a poor person :d

 

[re_solidworks]

I do not use 3d sketches so heavily and 3d sketch has always been limited in some ways compared to a sketch.
If you have proposals and have a subscription contract you can report them to your var: solidworks is very attentive to user requests.
To give you some tips on how to overcome I should be well in hand with your problem.

 

[Kakisan]

Hi.
I sdw use it (even too maybe) but remain quite jovial.
so on two feet I can't tell you how to continue, rather tell us what you have to do, because it is not said that the mirroring of dots in sketch is the only solution of your problem.
if on those points you have to make a surface you can mirror that seems to me (I use little surfaces then take my statement with pliers).
yellow

possible that it is impossible?
It seems strange because the 3d sketch is an indispensable tool for rapid and flexible design.
in practice in my case I only had to place points in space, I did it by changing their coordinates in their properties.
Then I expected that with the total definition tool of the sketch, the quotas would be fixed directly compared to the plans, but nada, is not available in the 3d sketch, I had to put all the quotas, then after I expected to be able to at least mirror the sketch, but nada, I should draw new points, and insert new quotas, practically double of a useless and alienating fatigue. . .
Today I discovered that in 3d sketches it is not possible to use the automatic definition tool of the sketch, and even more serious, it is not possible to mirror them compared to a plan! ! !
This is true, or is it possible to overcome somehow?
less bad than with solidworks I only use it for teaching purposes, if I worked on it I think I would be a poor person :d

 

[marcof]

possible that it is impossible?
It seems strange because the 3d sketch is an indispensable tool for rapid and flexible design.

3d sketch is indispensable if you routing, for the rest not that it is the main tool.
depends on what you have to do.

then I expected that with the total definition tool of the sketch, the quotas would be fixed directly regarding the plans, but nada, is not available in the 3d sketch

I do not use the automatic definition of sketch 2d because I know what and where I have to quote, let alone automatically quote a sketch 3d. Do you have any idea how many combinations of different odds can you put to define the same 3d sketch? iho would be a delusion.

I had to put all the quotas, then after I expected to be able to at least mirror the sketch, but nada, I should draw new points, and insert new quotas, practically double of a useless and alienating fatigue. . .

I have no idea how many points and how they are arranged, but I would have tried to catrure a simple feature passing through those points then I would have mirrored that, using the vertices (corresponding to the points of origin and mirrored) as reference for the construction of the rest.
I wonder, if you need mirrored points, you can't build half of what you need with those points and then mirror the result?
I ask you because I never needed the 10 years I use swx to mirror a 3d sketch.

less bad than with solidworks I only use it for teaching purposes, if I worked on it I think I would be a poor person :d

In fact, as you see us here we are all unhealthy: alcohol:

If you specify what you have to do, we know if it's swx that pisses you off, or you're the one that pisses him off. :wink:

 

[Kakisan]

beautiful this...
Actually sdw this morning spit me in an eye a couple of times.. .
Today he is the poor one against me. . .

If you specify what you have to do, we know if it's swx that pisses you off, or you're the one that pisses him off. :wink:[/QUOTE]

 

[peppo82]

ah but every person is a case in itself, I didn't say that those who work with solidworks must be bureaucratic, only that I would be:wink:
However, I explain why it seems to me a useful tool, my aim is to obtain a stylized model of a 3d structure of which I am only interested in bond points, which are then all spherical constraints. I am now on paper to make a maximum estimate of the measures that will have the various organs in the first instance, especially copying them from those who have already done the job before me. But then I must be able to intervene on these measures so that the structure is rough and moves as much as possible to how it would please me. ok I stop doing the mysterious, the structure is a car frame, and the intent is to find the roll axis and to make it as stable as possible. I know, there are programs that do this very job :biggrin: but I think solidworks can still help me so much.
anyway the easiest thing to do would have been to build triangular surfaces until you touch all the points in question and then mirror everything, I had not really thought about it.
marcof is true that there are infinite ways to fully define a sketch in space, but there is always the simplest and easily meccanizzabile way iho, that is to define it regarding the absolute quotas of the points of control, and if there were this function, it is not that you would be forced to use it, and sometimes it is really comfortable, of the rest if it was not they would not have developed imho.
thank you anyway, once again I was irritating solidworks