NX6 Move Object & Transform

[PHayden]

As a UG user since the 80's, it was hard enough to keep from reaching for the Transform button to move or copy, but why couldn't NX keep the move/copy pick choice at the end?
Countless undo's because the last one was set for copy, or trace lines, or 12 copies when intention is a simple move etc.

The one thing I would wish to change (back) is to choose move or copy as an entry complete rather than return what ever I did the last time, and maybe default back to one copy & no tracelines.

Sorry, just venting, but a lot of time is wasted checking the list before completing a simple move or copy, then breaking my train of thought having to undo and set it up again.

-ph-

 

[JohnRBaker]

If you use the Dynamic Motion option (which is the out-of-the-box default), you can perform incremental movement in the direction of any of the drag handle axis, rotation about any of drag handle axis, point-to-point using the drag handle origin, alignment using the drag handle axis, etc. and you will be able to perform as many of these motions as desired WITHOUT having to reselect the object(s) being moved.

As for the "extremely slow drop-down menus", starting with NX 6, virtually EVERY drop-down menu found inside one of the new style dialogs, you now have an option to see those options as either a drop-down menu OR as a small panel of icons (toolbar) of the most commonly used options instead, which means that if you tend to only use a couple of different methods, these will be the ones always available, using a single pick, if you turn this option on. Note that this is controllable by the user on a dialog by dialog basis and the settings are captured by dialog memory. To change any dialog drop-down menu to a 'panel' of icons, just open the drop-down list and select the last option, 'Show Shortcuts'. Later, you can return to a drop-down only scheme, by selecting the 'Hide Shortcuts' option.

Also note that in NX 6.0.2.8, we have made several improvements in the way some of the options are labeled and how they work together as well as adding an explicit 'Delta X,Y,Z' Motion option, which will support entries relative to either Absolute space or the current WCS, although if you're creating an Associative move, the Parameters (Expressions) created will be relative to the absolute frame of reference since that is the only scheme used by the database for any 3D data points/distances.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[abboberg]

John Baker said, "...OR as a small panel of icons (toolbar)".

True - but you only get 4 at a time.

 

[abboberg]

Well, I spent a bit of time with 3 different GTAC people to get to the bottom of the Move Object function in NX6.
In this example I am attempting to rotate a bunch of objects around and arc center, then changing to rotating them via the three-point method:

> Edit object display (change color of items to move beforehand
> Ctl-Shft-M to enter "move Object" dialog
> Pick the objects that were re-colored
> Move eyes to dialog box to scroll down to "Dynamic" mode
> Check "move handles"
> Move eyes from dialog box to model to drag and slide origin of active CSYS. -continued
> Move eyes back to dialog box to uncheck "move handles"

 

[abboberg]

...continued from last post
> Move eyes back to model to click on proper csys "ball"
> Zoom in to view motion
> Mouse over to register to type in an increment to move
> Hit enter button multiple times until object is moved to the right position
> Move eyes over to dialog box and mouse to "apply"
> Re-select objects that had the color change (now you know the reason - NX6 does not "keep" the selection.
> Move eyes back to dialog box to scroll down to "Three Point Method"
> Start picking points and changing selection intent by taking eyes off model and toggling on and off various points
> Scroll down to deep menues for any points not appearing on intent manager toolbar. continued...

 

[abboberg]

I think this speaks for itself. Without trying to hijack this thread, I want to briefly review what would be done in NX4/NX5:
> Ctrl T
> Pick Objects, middle mouse button when complete (eyes on model)
> 10-key pad 3-7 (eyes still on model)
> Pick arc center
> enter angle increment in default pop-up
> middle mouse button until objects reach destination
> shift-middle mousbutton (back)
> 10-key pad 3-2 (two point method) - eyes still on model
> select 3 points and move

In summary, NX6 - 16 steps, 6 back-and-forth eyeball moves
NX4/NX5 - 9 steps, 0 back-and forth eyeball moves - continued

 

[abboberg]

I am very disappointed that all of the menu accelerators have now been deleted from the dialogs. I am guessing that 90% of all design activity occurs within these dialogs.

My only question to the NX6 developers is "why"? Why couldn't you keep the accelerators there? Clearly, the back-and-forth eye movement, the broken up flow, the "scroll-downs" and lack of object retention has severely impeded day-to-day productivity in the "move object" function.

 

[abboberg]

Sorry - I left mousclicks out, here is how the work analysis should read:


Nx6 - 16 steps, 6 back-and-forth eyeball moves and 17 mouse clicks
NX4/NX5 - 9 steps, 0 back-and forth eyeball moves and 5 mouse clicks.

 

[JohnRBaker]

Let's see, 12 key strokes, divided into the number of key strokes it took you to write these past several comments. You should break even sometime next week ;-) by which time the latest MR will be out, NX 6.0.2.8, which has several improvements for the Move Object command.

Now I'm not claiming that we've addressed all of your issues, but we have responded to many of the issues we did get early feedback on and we feel that things are now better in terms of usability. However, that being said, despite what you've claimed, the old Edit Transform code was some of the oldest in NX as well as having perhaps the worst user interface design left in the product and anyone trying to use it for the first time would not be impressed that he was using a modern up-to-date CAD package. It was based on a menu style and an interaction scheme that was introduced during an era long before Windows came on the scene.

I'm sorry, but you need to take the changes made to any one functional area in the context of what's happening with the rest of the product since consistency and common tools are always a desirable goal.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[ErikvD]

I have installed NX6 next to NX5 and for me it's so important to have the possibility to make multiple move's or copy's just by simple mouse clicks that i am not going to work with NX6 until Siemens fixes this issue. For conceptual modeling it's one of the best tools NX5 (and earlier) has on board even if it's not dynamic or has an old interface, it's functionality counts for me…….

Erik van Diepenbeek
freelance design engineer

http://www.zebra-cad.com

 

[JohnRBaker]

Let me repeat, there are NO plans to alter the behavior of the NX 6 Move Object when it comes to the issue of whether selected objects remain selected AFTER the function has been completed. We have moved to an interaction model where we are depending more and more on dynamic operations utilizing previews. In these situations, the effect is to allow the user to continue to refine the operation of the function without having to reselect the objects of interest until he achieves his final desired result, at which point he confirms it by either selecting OK or Apply. In either case, the task is OVER. This is the normal and consistent behavior found in virtually all of the rest of NX. What you are seeing in the old legacy 'Edit Transform' was ONLY implemented in that way in an attempt to make what was otherwise a very difficult and clumsy workflow work at least a bit more efficiently, but it was NEVER intended to be a role-model for the general behavior of a modern CAD system.

So if you're wish to wait until we change our minds, that's your choice. But we are spending our development resources on other much more important projects intended to provide benefits to as wide a set of customers and users as possible, not focusing on how to preserve obsolete and out-dated behaviors while trying to keep our products both competitive and easy to learn and use. To expect us to do otherwise would be naive at best.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[abboberg]

J.B. said "not focusing on how to preserve obsolete and out-dated behaviors while trying to keep our products both competitive and easy to learn and use. To expect us to do otherwise would be naive at best. "

I guess the TASK IS OVER when the CAD system decides, not the designer decides...

I'm sorry, I thought I was done here and made my point.
Maybe we all have to step back a little bit and review what the purpose of CAD is. I remember using the rotary eraser in drafting to make changes. CAD made this a lot easier. Now I see UG making even the most basic moves very complex and time-consuming. You have Bigger things to work on? What could be more important the "move object"? continued...

 

[abboberg]

I understand your need to appeal to a wide customer base, and from my experience, that is the edict of big corporations, like Siemens. Market share must be maximized based on the opinion of marketing people. "Make the interface generic and look good" (menu accelerators have no looks at all).
Yes, you need new customers, but what about existing customers? Skip my company - what about all the existing users in Detroit - can they really afford such a productivity hit at this time?

 

[PHayden]

I didn't mean to start a grump-fest when I griped about the changes in the way Move & Transform worked.
I still forget to check whether Copy or Move is checked. Undo.

There are a lot of changes in each major release. Each time I have to think about how do something, it detracts from what I'm doing. My co-workers have heard it with each release, since V5. They also hear the Oooh's & Ahaa's once I 'get it'.

I gripe and complain about having to stop & think about the process, but now that I have re-learned that process in NX6, it is seamless and a heck-a-lot faster than it was the old way.

& I'm too old to learn ProE.

-ph-

"Anything's possible. Just change the equation"

 

[cowski]

abboberg, as a work-around I suggest grouping the objects before you start the move operation. Selecting groups in NX6 is now super easy. I know it doesn't make up for the lost workflow of earlier versions, but it doesn't look like it is coming back any time soon.

 

[abboberg]

Grouping could re-coup some time (even though it's a band-aid); unfortunately, grouping was one of the first dialogs to lose the 10-kepad capability (I believe in NX2). I must assume it has not been fixed. You see, I never get used to all the slow downs - I vividly remember them as big hurdles thrown in my way each time there was an "upgrade".

 

[JohnRBaker]

There are NO plans to even attempt to re-implement any sort of PFK-like, 10-key adder-pad kludge (and I DO mean KLUDGE since the original PFK had 32 buttons) that was put into place some 15 years ago or so when we dropped support for external PFK's.

And for the record, this had been our policy for several years, ever since we started to move away from dialogs which consisted of only option buttons arranged in roughly 'rows & columns' (sound familiar?). One of the reason that the Edit Transform was still supporting this is because, as I've alluded to on several occasions, those dialogs were using some of the oldest code left in NX. Perhaps we would have been better off to have just disabled the entire 10-key adder support in one single step when it became obvious that our long term direction ideas about dialogs was no longer going to be able to support anything like this. At least it would have all come out at once and we could gotten over it long ago rather than letting it die a slow lingering death.

This is a PFK and below is a little tutorial which explains how Unigraphics worked when I first learned to use it some 32 years ago!!!

http://plmworld.org/museum/hall/UGI_exercise_1.htm

Perhaps now you'll better understand now from where some of this legacy stuff came from and why it's called LEGACY and why we would just as soon be done with it once and for all.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[abboberg]

Your attempt to embarrass us "nuckle draggers" with an image of a PFK will not work. Just the other night I saw a partially-disabled man confined to a wheelchair who was forced to use a mouse to type. He would move the mouse and click on each letter of the alphabet on a screen-keyboard.

Perhaps the next image you should post is the keyboard itself, because, at the rate you are going, that will also be eliminated as an input device for NX.

 

[JohnRBaker]

Since you asked...

...but if it ever comes to past, the role we played will be minuscule compared to some of the other 'players' working on this ;-)

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[cowski]

I'm waiting for this:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazin...logy_tech+maven+page+-+new_this+week's+column

to interface with NX.

 

[ewh]

Me too! That and the gloves, and I'll be a happy camper.

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]