sketch and capture geometry together

[marcof]

I also read the other posts, confirm that the vertices are not taken and you have to manually align the edges

Soccia... What a break:
I also confirm that by dragging the various sketch entities to the nodes, are the constraints captured dynamically? I was hoping for some sort of snap setting that got away from me. . .

I also share the fact that for simple questions it would be very useful to answer directly here on the forum.
maybe on the alibre forum you find something extra, if you have no problem with English.

we have a forum attended, among others, by a retailer of alibre. You don't have to go on that ammeregan :wink:

Thank you for the answer!

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

ah ah ah this discussion makes me disappear from laughter!

 

[SAUZER]

Soccia... What a break:
I also confirm that by dragging the various sketch entities to the nodes, are the constraints captured dynamically? I was hoping for some sort of snap setting that got away from me. . .



we have a forum attended, among others, by a retailer of alibre. You don't have to go on that ammeregan :wink:

Thank you for the answer!

not that I know, but I must admit not to be a tried user:biggrin:
As for the forum I can only agree with you, it doesn't seem difficult to say whether you can do it or not (for a dealer).

 

[cacciatorino]

ah ah ah this discussion makes me disappear from laughter!

What's so funny about you?

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

What's so funny about you?

that for such a trivial thing is discussed from 3 pages, that you have to know that version you are using otherwise you can not understand, that you have to open a "incident" because here you can not answer.
I don't cry.
but no offense to anyone of course my is not a criticism, i.e. I think of marcof and blasphemies that is pulling for a caxxata like that.. .

 

[RS4]

Hello marcof...

I'll follow you. I am curious about what is strange very strange that it has problems even if and free;

you can't make an explanatory video of a few seconds to understand.... time permitting

Hi.

♪

 

[cacciatorino]

Hello marcof...

I'll follow you. I am curious about what is strange very strange that it has problems even if and free;

you can't make an explanatory video of a few seconds to understand.... time permitting

Hi.

♪

You can do the projection of the sketches on other parts, and it's associative and the changes spread. Marcof's criticism of what I understand is that the command is not very ergonomic.

 

[RS4]

You can do the projection of the sketches on other parts, and it's associative and the changes spread. Marcof's criticism of what I understand is that the command is not very ergonomic..

do you mean?? or that does not work as it should??

 

[marcof]

Hello marcof...
I'll follow you. I am curious about what is strange very strange that it has problems even if and free;

Actually I'm trying to demo version 12 professional, and for little that costs (900 €) is not free. for now the greater limitation that I have been eyeing (from a few) and left me base is the lack of configurations, in the sense that you have to buy the expert, which in addition has a cam, pdm, surfaces and tools for motion and costs double.
do not implement configurations in a parametric cad that brings the suffix "professional" does not seem a great idea . It was enough to make him pay 100 euros extra and no one would complain to have them.

 

[marcof]

You can do the projection of the sketches on other parts, and it's associative and the changes spread. Marcof's criticism of what I understand is that the command is not very ergonomic.

That's the question.
I understand that you should try to use a new cad not like what you know (and I try), but in this case the painstakingness of the sketcher really seems excessive.
I attach a video, just to give the idea. in the video you do not see, but when you make rmb on a hospice to project it on the sketch plane every time you use the command you have to put the flag back to tell him to make it associative because by default it creates it unseen. not within the merit of the absurdity of projecting non-associated geometry in a parametric cad, but at least leaving the default set option as the user wishes.
in the video, until the minute 1:00 design lines that do not feel the underlying geometry, so I have to bind a vertex at a time. from 1:00 minute drawing a line that regularly attaches to the geometry drawn before. 1:15 drawing a free line that then dragging it unnecessarily tried to attack the geometry that within the command "line" was captured. per minute 1:20 The pointer's movements are explanatory of the words that you cannot hear :tongue:

 

[Er Presidente]

That's the question.
I understand that you should try to use a new cad not like what you know (and I try), but in this case the painstakingness of the sketcher really seems excessive.
I attach a video, just to give the idea. in the video you do not see, but when you make rmb on a hospice to project it on the sketch plane every time you use the command you have to put the flag back to tell him to make it associative because by default it creates it unseen. not within the merit of the absurdity of projecting non-associated geometry in a parametric cad, but at least leaving the default set option as the user wishes.
in the video, until the minute 1:00 design lines that do not feel the underlying geometry, so I have to bind a vertex at a time. from 1:00 minute drawing a line that regularly attaches to the geometry drawn before. 1:15 drawing a free line that then dragging it unnecessarily tried to attack the geometry that within the command "line" was captured. per minute 1:20 The pointer's movements are explanatory of the words that you cannot hear :tongue:

I heard today a suspicious noise, then they started to whistle my ears! You moved the Earth's axis of some decigrade!
:smile:

 

[RS4]

That's the question.
I understand that you should try to use a new cad not like what you know (and I try), but in this case the painstakingness of the sketcher really seems excessive.
I attach a video, just to give the idea. in the video you do not see, but when you make rmb on a hospice to project it on the sketch plane every time you use the command you have to put the flag back to tell him to make it associative because by default it creates it unseen. not within the merit of the absurdity of projecting non-associated geometry in a parametric cad, but at least leaving the default set option as the user wishes.
in the video, until the minute 1:00 design lines that do not feel the underlying geometry, so I have to bind a vertex at a time. from 1:00 minute drawing a line that regularly attaches to the geometry drawn before. 1:15 drawing a free line that then dragging it unnecessarily tried to attack the geometry that within the command "line" was captured. per minute 1:20 The pointer's movements are explanatory of the words that you cannot hear :tongue:

Hello marcof

as I seem to understand correct me if I'm wrong ... while you're in part design activated in a right assembled item... you can't extrapolate the associated edges but they're among them untied so isolated, and you can't tie any line you created, but you have to bind it one by one.

Hi.

♪

 

[marcof]

Hello marcof

How do I feel about correcting me if I'm wrong? while you are in part design activated in an item assembled a giust... you can't extrapolate the associated edges but they're among them untied so isolated, and you can't tie any line you created, but you have to bind it one by one.

a "as if he were antagonists" don't you put it? :tongue:

apart from the jokes, I described the problem and made a video. That's enough.
It is one of the limits of the cad and it is necessary to settle for what the convent passes.
Perhaps if they sold enough they could also care to optimize the ergonomics of the controls and there would be no need to change every single feature or sketch to change the odds, there would be no need to change part in the axieme tree to see the features that make up that part etc.