Why must I beg?

[MJuric]

Really I don't understand why SW just can't fix one thing that would save me half my life?

Figure out a way to more intelligently assign ID's or whatever SW uses to keep track of things. Today I had to re-dimension nearly two entire views because I got rid of a hole in a face and all the dimensions related to that face and all the mates related to that face just exploded...that's just STUPID!

[Frederick_Law]

This problem is fixed by using Inventor.

I don't think SW use unique ID. Looks like they use "creation sequence" or item number in the list/array.
Hence if you delete something, everything after that get blow up.
It doesn't explain why adding thing blow up the list. Unless it doesn't add at the end.

[matt]

Really I don't understand why SW just can't fix one thing that would save me half my life?

Figure out a way to more intelligently assign ID's or whatever SW uses to keep track of things. Today I had to re-dimension nearly two entire views because I got rid of a hole in a face and all the dimensions related to that face and all the mates related to that face just exploded...that's just STUPID!

No, no no... See if they fixed that for you and gave you back some of your life, they'd retroactively owe me back to when I was 35. I've spent so much time fixing flipped features and lost references in surfacing parts. It wouldn't be fair if they fixed it now.

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

Really I don't understand why SW just can't fix one thing that would save me half my life?

Figure out a way to more intelligently assign ID's or whatever SW uses to keep track of things. Today I had to re-dimension nearly two entire views because I got rid of a hole in a face and all the dimensions related to that face and all the mates related to that face just exploded...that's just STUPID!

I feel for you. I can identify...

[mattpeneguy]

Don't get me started on the Item numbers in the BOM...We have some long BOM's here and I'd like to be able to automatically have the BOM Item number in the part view title. THERE IS NO WAY TO AUTOMATE THIS!!!!
Yeah, you can kludge something together and it will update if the BOM changes, but you have to do this kludge for EVERY SINGLE VIEW!!!!
Try sorting through a 100 item BOM looking for a part called "Set Screw" or "Clamp Collar", instead of going directly to Item 67 or 23...

[Frederick_Law]

I just remove ITEM Number in BOM.
Balloon with part number.

[Jim Steinmeyer]

Related, sort of.
I removed a fillet and replaced it with an undercut on this hub and lost the diameter dimension and now need to reattach it. If one leg is lost it is no problem. However I have NEVER been able to reattach if both legs of the dimension are lost. Is there a secret handshake I need to know to be able to do both?

[Glenn Schroeder]

I've been asking for us to be able to set the display style for detail views in Document Properties for a very long time (I always use "with Leader"), and it seems such a simple thing. I've probably had to make that change when making a new detail view a few thousand times in the last 12 years. Am I the only one who gets torqued every time he (or she) has to change that when making a new detail view?

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

Or why doesn't the sort feature work????!!!! BOMs in SW suck out loud!

The sort feature actually works in SE!

Here is the Parts List option dialogue in SE in tab order.

I was only able to attach 9 pics, will attach the rest in the next post...

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

Here are the rest of the screenshots...

[Jim Steinmeyer]

I don't know. SE appears to have quite a bit more functionality, but the sort option in SW seems to be able to do what ever I have needed so far.

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

I don't know. SE appears to have quite a bit more functionality, but the sort option in SW seems to be able to do what ever I have needed so far.


Capture.JPG

It works for "Top level Only" and "Parts Only" BOMs but not "Indented" BOMs.

Edit: And, unfortunately, we use "Indented" BOMs a fair amount.

[Frederick_Law]

Is there a secret handshake I need to know to be able to do both?

Yes, you need to know how you dimension it before. You need to pick the same feature.
If you picked line-line before, you need to do the same.
If you picked point-point, same thing.

Sometime, it's faster to delete.

[mattpeneguy]

Related, sort of.
I removed a fillet and replaced it with an undercut on this hub and lost the diameter dimension and now need to reattach it. If one leg is lost it is no problem. However I have NEVER been able to reattach if both legs of the dimension are lost. Is there a secret handshake I need to know to be able to do both?

Capture.JPG

@Jim Steinmeyer,
I think @Tom G had a solution to this. I think it involved showing the actual endpoints of the dimensions some kind of way...Or maybe it only had to do with a dimension that is to something outside of the "clip" of the view? Anyway it was in the old forum, so good luck finding it.
Maybe he'll weigh in...

[Uncle_Hairball]

No, no no... See if they fixed that for you and gave you back some of your life, they'd retroactively owe me back to when I was 35. I've spent so much time fixing flipped features and lost references in surfacing parts. It wouldn't be fair if they fixed it now.

We all are OWED reparations! We've been oppressed!

[matt]

@Jim Steinmeyer,
I think @Tom G had a solution to this. I think it involved showing the actual endpoints of the dimensions some kind of way...Or maybe it only had to do with a dimension that is to something outside of the "clip" of the view? Anyway it was in the old forum, so good luck finding it.
Maybe he'll weigh in...

Are you talking about the dangling dimensions (brown) where you click on it and it has a red handle on a leader or dim line? You drag the red handle back to the same kind of entity it was connected to originally (edge, vertex, axis, etc.)

[Glenn Schroeder]

Are you talking about the dangling dimensions (brown) where you click on it and it has a red handle on a leader or dim line? You drag the red handle back to the same kind of entity it was connected to originally (edge, vertex, axis, etc.)

. . . and sometimes that works, and sometimes it doesn't.

[JSculley]

Related, sort of.
I removed a fillet and replaced it with an undercut on this hub and lost the diameter dimension and now need to reattach it. If one leg is lost it is no problem. However I have NEVER been able to reattach if both legs of the dimension are lost. Is there a secret handshake I need to know to be able to do both?

Capture.JPG

The secret handshake (sometimes) is that you have to drag one witness line to the correct location. Note that SOLIDWORKS will make it seem like it didn't work. Then immediately drag the second witness line to the correct location and voila. I created a little video of this in the 'Have you ever been given a SW tip that you didn't know existed?' thread in the old forum, but that thread has been obliterated by the SWYMp.

[jcapriotti]

Related, sort of.
I removed a fillet and replaced it with an undercut on this hub and lost the diameter dimension and now need to reattach it. If one leg is lost it is no problem. However I have NEVER been able to reattach if both legs of the dimension are lost. Is there a secret handshake I need to know to be able to do both?

Capture.JPG

It's hit or miss, some manner of how many versions back the dimension was created along with what type of geometry it was originally attached to seems to effect your ability to reattach it.

When that happen, I create a new dimension then use the Format Painter to copy the settings, then delete the old dimension.

[Jim Steinmeyer]

It is things like Format Painter that I have never seen anyone use and have no idea of the time and effort it could save me.

[Tom G]

I think @Tom G had a solution to this.

It wasn't me. I usually recreate them instead of: fussing with reattachment, not succeeding, and recreating them.

[MJuric]

This problem is fixed by using Inventor.

This is definitely one thing I miss about IV. I'd say the number of things that blew up because of minor feature changes was a fraction of what it is in SW.

[MJuric]

Related, sort of.
I removed a fillet and replaced it with an undercut on this hub and lost the diameter dimension and now need to reattach it. If one leg is lost it is no problem. However I have NEVER been able to reattach if both legs of the dimension are lost. Is there a secret handshake I need to know to be able to do both?

Capture.JPG

That's exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about. The OD of that feature didn't change, the fillet changed. If you had dimensioned the fillet, yes I'd expect that dim to be nuked...but not the OD.

Changing anything that effects a feature changes that features "Identity" and all the dimensions drop off...that's nightmar'ish.

[mbiasotti]

per this discussion about reattaching dimensions (and trying to reattach both dangling) whether they are smart or ordinate. If you are having trouble reattaching a dangling dim. try selecting either a vertex or a line; SW doesn't like to identify both but needs the specific entity type to reattach. The trick is that both need to be the right entity before the dim is corrected. That said, there are some types of dims that I find almost impossible to attach namely hole callouts...

[HerrTick]

Maybe if you name the face before deleting the hole?

[Damo]

Really I don't understand why SW just can't fix one thing that would save me half my life?

Figure out a way to more intelligently assign ID's or whatever SW uses to keep track of things. Today I had to re-dimension nearly two entire views because I got rid of a hole in a face and all the dimensions related to that face and all the mates related to that face just exploded...that's just STUPID!

I feel this pain.. Modifying a face can have disasterous consequences in the model tree downstream
Adding or removing a hole, fillet, chamfer, or extrude cut.
It's not all doom and gloom. It is possible to make changes to a face that does not "create a forest fire in the feature tree" .
But, it is also true that it doesn't seem to be very intuitive. Nor have I yet worked out exactly when to expect these failures.
I just fix 'em and move on.. Usually gurning, growling and swearing under my breath.
What else can one do..? There's work to be done..!

Imagine if your hammer only hit the nail 3 outa 4 times, regardless of how well it is swung..
You'd throw the damn hammer, right..?!

[Peter De Vlieger]

. . . and sometimes that works, and sometimes it doesn't.

That's my experience as well.
One caveat : most times it doesn't work.

[MJuric]

try selecting either a vertex or a line; SW doesn't like to identify both but needs the specific entity type to reattach. The trick is that both need to be the right entity before the dim is corrected. That said, there are some types of dims that I find almost impossible to attach namely hole callouts...

This describes exactly why it's almost always better to delete the dim and redo it. You have two choices.

Choice 1 - Take the dangling dim and try one vertex on a line and then then try it on another vertex. Maybe that works, maybe it doesn't. Possibly, even though the other vertex is not showing dangling you may need to try that vertex in a line and then a vertex. After trying all of this it might not work anyway and you will then have to delete it and put on a new dimension anyways

Or

Choice 2 - Assume that it won't attach and just delete it and add a new one.

Choice one does nothing but send you thru a psychological tail spin. First there is denial - "This can't be happening. I must be doing something wrong. This worked 30 years ago in Acad V3, honestly this can't be happening".

At some point you become outraged - "Attach DAMNIT! I pick this, I click this JUST @#!@#% ATTACH. How hard can this be!!!"

Then bargaining - "Please, Please, PLEASE attach. I just want to get this drawing done, please just re-attach. I'll be good, I never curse you again, please just attach."

Then Depression - "OMG, I just want to go home. I've re-dimensioned this same drawing five times today and these dimensions keep falling off. I want to stick a pencil in my eye. I can't go on like this"

Finally acceptance - "Yep, DSS doesn't really care that this it sends me into this emotional tail spin 10 times a day. I have to deal with these shite tools I pay for because they know I have no choice and they don't care. I need to just accept that they don't care and that attempting to re-attach dims is a waste of time. Delete them and move on"

[sergio.monti]

When I find one or two dangling dimensions only, I try to reattach them. If doesn't work - 50% of times - I delete and re-dimension.
If I have several dangling dimensions in the same drawing, I direclty re-dimension just over the dangling dimensions using them as reference, without deleting them. When finished I use a macro to "select all dangling dimensions" and hit "del".

[zxys001]

..agree..the time spent trying to fix a broken dim is not worth it. (the old acad radicals are winning)

[jcapriotti]

I tried this in Inventor and it works much better. No issue reattaching any dimensions and they detached less often. SolidWorks would dangle dimensions that made no sense but it was almost always fillet edges that were edited. Some dimensions I could reattach and some I couldn't. Seemed to work best if I could select a vertex to reattach to, didn't always like selecting an edge.

[MJuric]

I tried this in Inventor and it works much better. No issue reattaching any dimensions and they detached less often. SolidWorks would dangle dimensions that made no sense but it was almost always fillet edges that were edited. Some dimensions I could reattach and some I couldn't. Seemed to work best if I could select a vertex to reattach to, didn't always like selecting an edge.

I think Frederick would attest to that. I haven't been a regular user of IV since 2016 but if memory recalls I don't remember dims dropping NEARLY as much and re-attaching them was much more successful. Successful enough that it was something I actually did regularly.

The only dims I'm aware of that were difficult to re-attach are angle dims. But that's was also true for Acad V3 way back in the day.

[bnemec]

Can I just leave this here or am I out of turn?

[matt]

This takes a little thinking ahead, but if you've got something you really want to be able to reattach, you can just name it.

[MJuric]

This takes a little thinking ahead, but if you've got something you really want to be able to reattach, you can just name it.

image.png

So wait...are you saying that if you name something it won't lose it's ID/Mind but if you don't it will just change it's ID every time something in the model get's a hint of a change?

[mike miller]

So wait...are you saying that if you name something it won't lose it's ID/Mind but if you don't it will just change it's ID every time something in the model get's a hint of a change?

Yep. That's a fatal flaw with Delete/Keep Bodies.

I hate to keep bringing up SE, but just last week I had an interesting thing happen. I had accidentally deleted a part file that had been created by Multi-body Publish (SE's version of Save Bodies). Of course this caused an error in the assembly. (This was a test run for migrating parts en masse from SWX to SE and I was playing with breaking up multi-bodies.) Anyhow, I went back to the master part, regenerated the derived part, broke the link to the master, converted it to sheet metal, and opened the assembly. All the mates had reattached and there were no errors. With SWX, just converting to sheet metal will break all mates on a good day. On a bad day, merely changing the size of an unrelated hole will change a face ID for a Jog feature which will cause errors.

[matt]

So wait...are you saying that if you name something it won't lose it's ID/Mind but if you don't it will just change it's ID every time something in the model get's a hint of a change?

This is a trick question, right? No, I think what I'm saying is that if you name it, you know what it's called, so it's easier to reattach mates. Not really related to the dangling dimension issue. Sorry, false alarm.

Aw, well, it's broken anyway...
https://customerportal.solidworks.com/s ... Id0=VRId-0

https://customerportal.solidworks.com/s ... Id0=VRId-0

[bnemec]

This takes a little thinking ahead, but if you've got something you really want to be able to reattach, you can just name it.

image.png

We tried that. It's like putting a label from a can of corn on a can of tomato soup. We found that is does next to nothing to keep mates and annotations intact. Coloring the face in the part file is ok indicator to all that a face is special, do not destroy it.

[MJuric]

This is a trick question, right? No, I think what I'm saying is that if you name it, you know what it's called, so it's easier to reattach mates. Not really related to the dangling dimension issue. Sorry, false alarm.

Aw, well, it's broken anyway...
https://customerportal.solidworks.com/s ... Id0=VRId-0

https://customerportal.solidworks.com/s ... Id0=VRId-0

Ok Good. I was going to have a baby cow if it was as simple as "Renaming". Then I would send a letter to my VAR asking "WTF, how hard would it be for SW to just name everything"....then I was going to set about figuring out how to write a macro that automatically renamed everything...but alas, false alarm.

[Lapuo]

Only reason why i am trying to re-attach is because i am curious will it work (usually it does not)
If i am under pressure , or have tight deadline , i will never try to re-attach , deleting and adding new dimension is easier.

[SPerman]

My favorite is when I try and reattach it, and a horizontal dimension flips to vertical.

[MJuric]

My favorite is when I try and reattach it, and a horizontal dimension flips to vertical.

Or disappear entirely. This happens to me fairly regularly. I'll think I have gotten it to re-attached, zoom out and the entire dimension is gone. Do a rebuild and nothing. However if you do a cross window in the general area of where the dim used to be....guess what, it's there...just can't see it anymore.