sw2003-dimension vs. measure-using both I get different numbers 1

[borsht]

I'm trying to verify that I have two faces at the correct distance apart. When I use the measure function, and select the two parallel faces it gives me .06250000, when I use the dimension function it gives me .03308052. I'm selecting the same two faces. I tried making a sketch perpendicular to these faces, convert entities to project the edges of the faces to the sketch, then place a dimension which reads .0625000, then I used the measure function on these converted lines and it gives me .06250000. Does anyone know what the problem is?

 

[CADShark]

When using the measure tool it gives you all the distances in the coordinate system (X,Y and Z). Just make sure you are looking at the right coordinate. I've made the same mistake. Don't always trust the distance or projection dimension.

 

[borsht]

I'm relying on the "normal distance" only, because the faces that I'm verifying are parallel. because the parts were imported from another software, the faces are not properly related to the xyz coordinates. I'm thinking that the issues must be in the dimensioning area. Any thoughts on that will be apreciated.

 

[TheTick]

Does SW recognize these faces as parallel? If so, you will get a message on the measure tool that explicitly states "entities are parallel". Zero degree angle is not necessarily parallel in SW.

 

[borsht]

entities are parallel, not zero degrees

 

[macPT]

Verify if the dimension is really the dimension between faces (rotate the part to a different perspective), that is if the dimension is measured orthogonally between faces.

Sometimes, when items are parallel but apart one from the other (parallel faces at different levels) SW does not show the orthogonal dimension. It shows a diagonal dimension (for example between the faces edges). If you are viewing the part perpendicular to the faces you are not able to see that the dimension is in a diagonal plane (unless the surfaces are too much apart - is this case you can see that the dimension arrows are smaller than they should be caused by the perspective) and it seems to be an error.

After some problems like this, in 3D, I allways trust only in the measuring tool. If I need a dimension I allways rotate the model to verify that SW as the right dimension.

Regards

 

[borsht]

Thanks, I find more information pointing to the case for the measure tool value being correct. I guess the dimension tool is just kindof messed up for this file for some unknown reason. It has been verified that it has selected the faces, and not a diagonal dimensnio in the fact that the dimension value is less than the measure value.

 

[JNR]

Are we talking about the Measure tool or Dimensioning in the model - I'm getting mixed signals. If you use dimensions in the model you have to be super careful. The text will be flat to the screen but the dimension will be true 3D. It really depends on exactly what POINTS (ie. locations on things) are being measured.

3/4 of all the Spam produced goes to Hawaii - shame that's not true of SPAM also.......

 

[borsht]

Its in the model, and 2 faces are being picked, not points, vertices, or edges. The faces are parallel, not zero degrees. I've come to the conclusion that this is just an anomolie on this particular model, ghost in the machine if you will.

 

[JNR]

No, (even though Halloween as at hand). I think I am correct in saying that it tends to give you the distance from the closest vertex of a face in at least some circumstances. Try sticking a couple of planes on those faces and measuring between them - see if the result changes. Also you could look at the temporary line it shows between the faces and rotate your model to inspect it from different angles to see where it is attached to the faces.

3/4 of all the Spam produced goes to Hawaii - shame that's not true of SPAM also.......