We routinely create drawings for hydraulic hoses and a few other parts that are shown as broken parts. No sense in a to scale 100+ inch hose drawing, I guess.
The question has arisen: do we underline the broken dim or not? In Solid Edge you can dimension a broken view and the dim will update if the part changes but the text is not underlined. To get the dim text underlined we have to tell the dim it is nts. That adds the line but breaks the dim. That dim will no longer update if the part changes. The program allows you to change it back to a to-scale dim and then back to nts but they have had issues with that being done. The drawing will then not match the part, which will now be made incorrectly.
So, to ASME Y14.5-2009 1.7.9 (a): Where the sole authority for the product definition is a hard-copy original drawing prepared...on an interactive computer graphics system, and it is not feasible to update the pictorial view of the feature, the defining dimension is to be underlined with a straight thick line.
What we're trying to define is "not feasible to update the pictorial view". If it's done on a pc, why would it not be able to be updated? Since we can, technically, update the view (even though it stays as a broken view) are we covered to not underline the dim text?
The only figure I could find in Y14.5 that shows a broken, nts view is 1-55 (in 14.5) which is actually for repetitive features and dims. It happens to show a part that is nts and the dim text is not underlined. This further proves (to me, anyway) that just because a dim is nts does not mean that it has to be underlined.
What do y'all typically see where you work?
Thanks - Brian
The question has arisen: do we underline the broken dim or not? In Solid Edge you can dimension a broken view and the dim will update if the part changes but the text is not underlined. To get the dim text underlined we have to tell the dim it is nts. That adds the line but breaks the dim. That dim will no longer update if the part changes. The program allows you to change it back to a to-scale dim and then back to nts but they have had issues with that being done. The drawing will then not match the part, which will now be made incorrectly.
So, to ASME Y14.5-2009 1.7.9 (a): Where the sole authority for the product definition is a hard-copy original drawing prepared...on an interactive computer graphics system, and it is not feasible to update the pictorial view of the feature, the defining dimension is to be underlined with a straight thick line.
What we're trying to define is "not feasible to update the pictorial view". If it's done on a pc, why would it not be able to be updated? Since we can, technically, update the view (even though it stays as a broken view) are we covered to not underline the dim text?
The only figure I could find in Y14.5 that shows a broken, nts view is 1-55 (in 14.5) which is actually for repetitive features and dims. It happens to show a part that is nts and the dim text is not underlined. This further proves (to me, anyway) that just because a dim is nts does not mean that it has to be underlined.
What do y'all typically see where you work?
Thanks - Brian
![[smile]](/data/assets/smilies/smile.gif "[smile] [smile]")
) there does not seem to be a way to accomplish this in SE.