Connect in sketches?

[VABiker]

Reviewed this:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=208631,

and its associated FAQ prior to posting.

Okay, have two lines crossing at an arbitrary angle on a coincident base plane. There was a connection between the two lines at their vertex to start. I then apply a radius to those lines. The radius is applied, but there are not connection relation indicators. I try to apply "connect" zoomed in as far as possible. This is wonky stuff. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If it doesn't, I've found a work around by applying a "trim corner", having the lines revert to their vertex configuration. Viola! Tangency indicators show up. I trim the line segments and the previously applied radius is connected tangent.

So, SE allowed the construction in the first place and nothing changed, why would there be connections in one instance and not the other? This is the bane of my SE experience so far, making connections borne from converted geometry that was previously connected.

Supplementally, why do IntelliSketch/relation indicators show only one size? Are they adjustable based on zoom level? My default has them be the same, relatively thick-lined, indistinguishable icons regardless of zoom level. On a close, multi-lined sketch, it's really tough to sort things out.

For the most part, I've grown to like SE pretty well. Still learning. I'm not averse to being told how wrong I am, either.

Thanks!

ST3, MP8
Dell Precision 490
Intel Xeon 5160@3.00GHz
4GB RAM
Win XP Pro 32-bit

 

[beachcomber]

If you use the fillet command to apply the radius you will see a fillet constraint applied to the curve (a small arc located at the middle of the fillet). This has tangency built-in, so no need to apply that seperately. All you need to do is dimension the radius of the fillet.
Do you have 'maintain relationships' and 'relationship handles' on?

bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

Where would we be without sat-nav?

 

[VABiker]

BC, maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree. First to answer your question, yes, I'm maintaining my relationships and handles are on.

This latest discovery for a work around came from me getting an error message upon trying to select tangent faces in cam/follower definition. The message was about needed to select coinciding tangent faces. I was sure I had done so. I went back to the sketch and saw the fillet constraint with no connection or tangency markers. I performed the previously described process and with tangency definitively called out. After that, I had no issues with the cam/follower definition.

So, that's what brought me here to ask my question, but maybe there's nothing broken in sketching, rather something is not quite right with cam/follower?

 

[beachcomber]

I've never had to use cam/follower so can't say if the fillet constraint is sufficient - it should be, but that's no guarantee.
I can only suggest you do a test and create a profile using fillets and see if it works.
If not, then get rid of the fillet constraints and apply connect and tangency constraints as required.

bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

Where would we be without sat-nav?

 

[av8errr]

VABiker,

I've not used the cam/follower function yet, and don't have much use for it at this time.
However, I have had issues with tangent and "connected" relationships when I used chamfer and radius in the past.
Many times, when I would create a dxf drawing to upload to a machine, the generated dxf would have non-connected arcs and line segments.
I have resorted to either drawing the two lines first, and then drawing a circle, forcing the circle tangent to the lines, and then trimming the circle and line segments to create the radius I need.
I have also had sucess with using the tangent arc command.
I also find it comforting to actually see the endpoint connected markers and tangent markers.



-av8errr
Solid Edge ST3 MP5
xw4600
3GB RAM
Core2Quad CPU 3.00GHz
NVIDIA Quadro FX4800