Section cuts actual are not inheriting the current alignment

[[Ti...]]

I am using the last version that was released of 2021.

For some reason, I thought section cuts using either 'reference' or 'actual' as a fitting strategy inherited the current alignment.

I wrote a lengthy program today, and noticed that is not the case. Shouldn't the default for section cuts be set at the current alignment so you don't have to manually click the 'required alignment' button?

This has me questioning what I thought was the software using pure parametric principles that a section cut pushes the alignment to the features created from it parametrically.

Through some lengthy testing I constrained a section cut to a certain alignment and then all 10 lines created from the section cut did not require an alignment, except for one line for some reason.  Is is best practice to constrain all section cuts to an alignment and then make sure all lines created from said section cut be constrained as well?

 

 

Edited July 17, 2023

[[Be...]]

Hi Tim,

I must confess that I don't exactly understood what the intent of your question is, but I try to give you some general explanations regarding 'Required alignment'

The default of 'Required alignment' is chosen by the command, e.g. for fitting elements or for grayvalue features we try to establish this flag if the preconditions are met (which is usually the case). For sections we usually don't enable the 'Required alignment' flag because most applications are using the section for an evaluation linked to the current alignment and to visualize the deviation in a planar evaluation. Therefore the section usually doesn't get by default the 'Required alignment' flag.
For some measuring principles like 'Projected offset section' we are enabling the 'Required alignment' for sections by default because the derived fitting element shouldn't be invalidated in each alignment and more important the plane for intersecting the actual data is derived as a fitting plane from the actual data itself -> the plane itself would also be transformed via the alignment and therefore the sections would be calculated at the same position on the mesh . Fur purposes like this it makes sense to set the 'Required alignment' flag manually at the constructed sections or if you can specify one unique alignment where these preconditions are also semantically fulfilled.

Hope this helps?! Otherwise you have to contact our professional support with your concrete application data.

Regards,

Bernd

[[Ti...]]

Please sign in to view this username.

When you have a torus on the top of a cylinder you need to Construct > Single Section in order to create a circle so you can measure the radius. This feature doesn't need an alignment because it is perfectly symmetrical. But anyone that encounters this fillet/rounded edge needs the capability to create a section cut.

In my second picture, you can see to get the top torus radius things become more complicated. Also, what if you are required to get the small radius of the thread profile?

Both these radii need to have an alignment. While you can simply manually apply it, it seems intuitive to me that any section cut should automatically apply the active alignment just like creating a cylinder does.  

Just an observation and suggestion.  I could have swore section cuts automatically applied the active alignment upon creation a version ago or something. Maybe I'm wrong.

Edited July 18, 2023

[[Be...]]

Hi,

for these applications you are right: 'Required alignment' at these sections makes sense and is even required to ensure a semantically correct calculation.

As I already mentioned: 'Required alignment' is set by a defined set of commands if possible. The commands for normal section creation in general never set this flag (as far as I know) besides the already mentioned 'Projected offset section' or other comparable measuring principles.

Nevertheless, you can define your own "section measuring principle": 

•  Apply the standard measuring principle to nominal elements
• Set the 'Required alignment' flag manually at the actual elements
  • Ensure that all elements which you construct have a 'Required alignment' flag set
• Create your 'User defined measuring principle' (under Menu -> Inspection)
• Apply for situations like the mentioned on this measuring principle instead e.g. 'Actual section'

Hope this helps?!

Regards,

Bernd

 

Edited July 18, 2023

[[Ti...]]

Please sign in to view this username.

 

I can create a 'user defined measuring principle' for many features, but when I create them for a single section cut, that option is always greyed out when I go to apply it to a nominal single section cut.  Can you test this to see if it works on your end?

[[Ti...]]

Please sign in to view this username.

I figured it out, you must have only the CAD blue feature highlighted.

It seems you must add these user defined measuring principles each time you start a new project, correct?

[[Be...]]

Simple answer: No!

For more explanations how you work with 'User defined inspection principles' visit the 'Tech Guide' and search for 'How to Work with User-Defined Inspection Principles'

The section 'Export/Import' with 'Packages' is important for you!

Regards,

Bernd

[[Ti...]]

Please sign in to view this username.

,

 

I am creating some 'User defined inspection principles'...

For section cuts, I have the actual section cut color set as green. The nominal is set at Black. How can I change all the nominal section cuts to Blue?

 

Thanks.

[[Ti...]]

BTW......In my opinion section cuts should inherit the active alignment....currently they do not. Planes and Cylinder do, so why would section cuts not inherit the active alignment?

[[Ti...]]

BTW......In my opinion section cuts should inherit the active alignment....currently they do not. Planes and Cylinder do, so why would section cuts not inherit the active alignment?

 

What I am trying to accomplish is to create the same experience and color application for a section cut that happens with a cylinder....by default our cylinders go blue for nominal and green for actual....AND they inherit the active alignment...this is desired.

Why would I create a section cut other than in the current alignment? Why would you engineer the software to leave this open for interpretation? I'd don't see a use case that a section cut would benefit from 'not' being tied to the alignment that it was intended to be created in.

Edited October 3, 2023

[[Be...]]

Simple example from the Automotive or Airfoil industry: We inspect the deviation between nominal and actual with a section deviation plot (e.g. via Inspection section) always at Z=100mm but we have at least two different alignments where this evaluation is necessary -> actual section and the corresponding deviation has to be calculated for each alignment 

Usually these are section cuts where the shape geometry of the surface gives no hint to follow a special shape, e.g. a circle.

Therefore the user must decide for his application what he needs.

Regards,

Bernd