Equation editor bug?

[cclark440]

Equation editor bug?

I am curious to know if anyone else has this problem.
Try these following steps and see if the same thing happens on your system.

1) create a rectangle
2) create horizontal line in the rectangle.
3) dimension the height of the rectangle using this equation 10*.03937. (D1)
4) dimension the horizontal line from the bottom of the rectangle using this equation D1*.75/2 (D2)
everything works fine to this point.
5) Modify D1’s equation to 11*.03937 ?--------- this is where the problem occurs. The result of this new equation is .00000.

I have tried this on two different systems, and can reproduce this every time.

 

[flyboydave]

Re: Equation editor bug?

I am curious to know if anyone else has this problem.
Try these following steps and see if the same thing happens on your system.

1) create a rectangle
2) create horizontal line in the rectangle.
3) dimension the height of the rectangle using this equation 10*.03937. (D1)
4) dimension the horizontal line from the bottom of the rectangle using this equation D1*.75/2 (D2)
everything works fine to this point.
5) Modify D1’s equation to 11*.03937 ?--------- this is where the problem occurs. The result of this new equation is .00000.

I have tried this on two different systems, and can reproduce this every time.

Well, mine doesn't go to .0000, but there's definitely a bug there. When it's 10*.03937, the value is .31496. Hmmm, maybe my calculator needs new batteries, but I'd expect 10*.03937 to be closer to .3937. Then when I change it to 11*.03937, the line length actually gets smaller. DOH! In that case, 11*.03937 = .11811. Check your 10*.03937 result and see if it's truly .3937, or if it's calculating it incorrectly like mine is.

 

[ss_21]

I find neither the problems, mine appears correct.But I have had a past issue when typing in the edit box as well as the equation editor 1 + 13/16
returning some wild number of something to effect of 2.???? I found
this to go away with SP2. Might want to check and make sure, if there is a
way, that all updates and patches are correctly installed.Here is my ver info PRODUCTVERSION 7,0,2,6220
This new forum is going to be great. So much easier to read, post, reply
and most of all important SEARCH atleast I hope so. :wink:

 

[flyboydave]

Did you add the extra horizontal line? It works fine on just a straight rectangle, but if you add an additional horizontal line, and then the two dimensions, that's when the problem shows up.

 

[ss_21]

Sorry bout that. See that is what happens when you spell out your question so clearly, with number sequence even :lol: I dont get zero but (D1) does change to .0397 So mine appears to reading only the first 1 and not the second or vise versa. When I change (D1) to 22*.03937 I return .82677 That scraps the first theory. However (D2) updates correctly to what ever the incorrect (D1).Hey that's 50% correct :wink:
It is strange though we all three get different results. Maybe we are sketching different in some way.Myself not using Albre to do many of
my sketches I created the rectangle placed a horizontal line inside added
a = constraint from the horizontal line to the bottom horizontal of the rectangle which of course resized the rectangle. Then dimensioned the
vertical side of the rectangle to create (D1) Then dimensioned the bottom
horizontal of the rectangle to create (D2).

I also get same results without using constraint

 

[flyboydave]

Maybe the different behaviors are due to the following code:

Program (Equation Editor)
call subprogram (random_number_generator)



At first, I didn't get the zeros either. But if I open the Equation editor, and change d2 from (d1*.75/2), they BOTH go to zero. Since D2 was at that point undefined, I almost expected it to, but it shouldn't have affected D1. It looks like D1 is in some way dependent on D2, but it should not be. That may be the crux of the problem.

 

[flyboydave]

Re:

Maybe the different behaviors are due to the following code:

Program (Equation Editor)
call subprogram (random_number_generator)



At first, I didn't get the zeros either. But if I open the Equation editor, and change d2 from (d1*.75/2), they BOTH go to zero. Since D2 was at that point undefined, I almost expected it to, but it shouldn't have affected D1. It looks like D1 is in some way dependent on D2, but it should not be. That may be the crux of the problem.

Crap, that should have read "...change D2 from (d1*.75/2) back to just D2,..."

 

[ss_21]

I found if you use 10mm as (D1) it works correctly I would about bet,
not being a computer programmer but messing around with it on the side,
that the code they use to handle the ability to use the "mm" is the culprit
Maybe they want the user to use mm in place of .03937.Surely not I wouldnt think. It requires to much thought to even think of that :lol:

call subprogram (random_number_generator)
They got that much to work :wink:

BTW where do you find the program calls?

 

[cclark440]

I have the updates, and my version is the same as yours. When I first started experiencing this problem, the result of the equations was not .0000. Actually I would get different results every time I tried it. I have reported this to Alibre, so hopefully it will be addressed in the next release.

 

[Willbur]

OK - I tried it (not using Equation editor, but just editing things on the screen)...
10*.03937=.394
11*.03937=.039
5*.03937=.197
6*.03937=.039
1*.03937=0
2*.03937=.039
3*.03937=.079
4*.03937=.079
7*.03937=.197
8*.03937=.276
9*.03937=.079
Now here's the fun part - I went back and tried some of them again:
2*.03937=0
3*.03937=.118
4*.03937=.039
5*.03937=.157
7*.03937=.118
10*.03937=0

I've listed these numbers in the order that I tried them. I created the rectangle using the associated sketch tool, then created a horizontal line inside it (not touching the edges of the rectangle). This line moved outside the rectangle after the first 0 result, but D2 seemed to always be 3/8 of D1. All I did to change numbers was right click on the dimension, highlight the leading number and type over it - I just showed the default 3 digits that appear on the screen, but they're far enough off that the result is obvious.

???????????????????