What's new

Measure tool - too complicated?

OrjanB

Senior Member
Hi all,
I use the measure tool all the time and find it unessery confusing and complicated, especially when used in assemblies.
When doing mesurements with planes or surface involved I always want perpendicular distances.
Not the distance from i.e. edge of hole to another edge, or edge to edge.
Cannot imagine anyone needing such distances.
Therefore I use the x-y-z values so most of the time there is no problem.
But if the measuring elements are in an angle in the assembly I cannot use the x-y-z values.
Sometimes the chain and projection can be used, but not always and not obvious.

In my opinion the measure tool should be simplified.
Examples:
Always show perpendicular distance when:
With 2 paralell planes/surfaces involved, regardless placement in space
With 1 plane/surface to a point or edge

Enclose picture showing mesure tool displaying a meaningless measurement when I want the perpendicular distance from the blue surface to blue edge.
Projecting do not help as far as I find.

Orjan

1659356567762.png
 

Ken226

Alibre Super User
Isn't the Delta Y in the measurement tool the measurements your asking for, in the pic?

I can't see the origin in your pic, so kinda guessing on the axes.

In your pic, a hypothetical plane above and parallel to the light blue face that is also at a height that it meets the other selected edge, would be your delta Z measurement. I think. Or no?

Or perhaps it's just measuring edge to edge distances. The values shown appear to be a simple Pythagora calculation.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20220801-081224.png
    Screenshot_20220801-081224.png
    93.4 KB · Views: 5
Last edited:

idslk

Alibre Super User
Hello Orjan,

your method:

1659367211770.png

Better (and "correct" measures...):

1659367239958.png

only with using of the features of the measurement tool...

Regards
Stefan
 

OrjanB

Senior Member
Hello Stefan and Harold,

I appreciate your willingness to look into users questons here in the forum.
You are valuable for Alibre.

Concerning the theme for this thread:
I now see that I earlier have used the measuring tool as you describe.

Neverthless I still mean that the measuring tool could be looked into and made less confusing.
As I say in my first post: Who need the measurement Alibre is showing as default? Nobody I think.

The only measurement of interest when planes/surfaces are involved is the perpendicular and that should be shown as default, without using project on plane.
Am I wrong?

I posted this under General Discussion for focusing on possible improvements and hope the Alibre team reads it.

Regards
Orjan
 

idslk

Alibre Super User
You are valuable for Alibre.
Thanks for the flowers ;)
Who need the measurement Alibre is showing as default? Nobody I think.
Sorry, but sometimes i do:(. (shortest distance between edge and face to see if an assembly could be possible for example)
The only measurement of interest when planes/surfaces are involved is the perpendicular and that should be shown as default, without using project on plane.
Am I wrong?
What about this:
1659388354237.png

If you need to know the "freeplay" between the "max height" of the slanted dome and the edge.

May be a check box for "perpendicular to face/plane with auto regognition (first chosen?) if a face or plane is under selected geometries would be ok...

Regards
Stefan
 

Max

Administrator
Staff member
Hello Stefan and Harold,

I appreciate your willingness to look into users questons here in the forum.
You are valuable for Alibre.

Concerning the theme for this thread:
I now see that I earlier have used the measuring tool as you describe.

Neverthless I still mean that the measuring tool could be looked into and made less confusing.
As I say in my first post: Who need the measurement Alibre is showing as default? Nobody I think.

The only measurement of interest when planes/surfaces are involved is the perpendicular and that should be shown as default, without using project on plane.
Am I wrong?

I posted this under General Discussion for focusing on possible improvements and hope the Alibre team reads it.

Regards
Orjan

I do not disagree with you. It can be a bit confusing. I'll see if there are any quick wins.
 

jfleming

Alibre Super User
Often times I must create a 2D drawing just to get a dimension that I need, because the measure tool simply can't.
 

DavidJ

Administrator
Staff member
Often times I must create a 2D drawing just to get a dimension that I need, because the measure tool simply can't.
Could you provide examples? Ideally including the file. I've never had such difficulty, which suggests I won't understand why you have problems without an example. I'd like to think I'll be able to use the measurement tool to get the value you need, but you might have a point that suggests a development need.
 

OTE_TheMissile

Alibre Super User
Could you provide examples? Ideally including the file. I've never had such difficulty, which suggests I won't understand why you have problems without an example. I'd like to think I'll be able to use the measurement tool to get the value you need, but you might have a point that suggests a development need.
I don't have a good file handy but I've done what jfleming's said to get a measurement to the outside of a curve, for finding things like overall length.

As it is (in my older version of Alibre), selecting the side of a curved surface steers the measurement tool to measure to the center of the curve, and selecting an edge makes it measure to the closest point to my other reference. I'd almost need an option somewhere to tell the measurement tool to use, like, the furthest point on the curve from my other reference.

EX1.pngEX2.png
 

jfleming

Alibre Super User
@DavidJ my example was going to be similar to @OTE_TheMissile

If you make a slot, for example, there is no way to get many of the dimensions listed here (from the 2D dialogue) Certainly no way, that I've found, to get an [0] Outside Slot measurement.


Note, it does not have to be a slot. The example above is a fine example of that.

You can, of course, go back into the sketches to get the measurement, providing only one sketch was used to make the geometry in question. Or, talking through it now, I suppose you could create a new sketch, project the geometry, and dimension it in there (instead of making a drawing), but that still seems like a lot of hokey pokey as well.

dims.png
 

DavidJ

Administrator
Staff member
Surely just adding a reference plane would be a simple way to achieve that. Much faster than creating a 2D drawing.

The original complaint is that the tool is 'too complicated' - adding extra options hardly simplifies it.

I'm not just being negative - getting real improvement without compromising usability of the measurement tool isn't easy. It's only by seeing examples that we can really think about possible options.
 

Attachments

  • addedPlane.jpg
    addedPlane.jpg
    111.5 KB · Views: 8
  • measure.jpg
    measure.jpg
    111.8 KB · Views: 7
Last edited:

H-L-Smith

Senior Member
Hi all,
I use the measure tool all the time and find it unessery confusing and complicated, especially when used in assemblies.
When doing mesurements with planes or surface involved I always want perpendicular distances.
Not the distance from i.e. edge of hole to another edge, or edge to edge.
Cannot imagine anyone needing such distances.
Therefore I use the x-y-z values so most of the time there is no problem.
But if the measuring elements are in an angle in the assembly I cannot use the x-y-z values.
Sometimes the chain and projection can be used, but not always and not obvious.

In my opinion the measure tool should be simplified.
Examples:
Always show perpendicular distance when:
With 2 paralell planes/surfaces involved, regardless placement in space
With 1 plane/surface to a point or edge

Enclose picture showing mesure tool displaying a meaningless measurement when I want the perpendicular distance from the blue surface to blue edge.
Projecting do not help as far as I find.

Orjan

View attachment 36699
 

jfleming

Alibre Super User
Surely just adding a reference plane would be a simple way to achieve that. Much faster than creating a 2D drawing.

The original complaint is that the tool is 'too complicated' - adding extra options hardly simplifies it.

I'm not just being negative - getting real improvement without compromising usability of the measurement tool isn't easy. It's only by seeing examples that we can really think about possible options.

I am fine with it how it works, just pointing out a 'for instance' that I've had with it not being able to "measure" what I was hoping to. Is there room for improvement, always. Does it need fixed? For me, no. I'd be fine if at some point down the road, it was perhaps a more intelligent tool and popped up a similar dialogue (as in 2D Dim Tool) depending on what type of edges/faces you selected.

While I agree with the idea of making a plane to measure from, I am not a fan of creating extra "stuff" in the model, for the sole purpose of collecting a measurement. just my own personal thing.
 

H-L-Smith

Senior Member
Actually, I use measurements like that all the time. Perpendicular distances are of course very useful, but not the only thing. For example, when making assemblies, I have to make sure if there is a bolt nearby another bolt, screw or part that there's enough distance to get a socket wrench on the bolts for tightening or loosening same.

I learned on the distance tool of Solidworks. I'd like to see Alibre improve its version substantially. The Solidworks version that I last used is much better visually than the Alibre version. One of my primary frustrations is getting the Alibre measuring tool to measure angles between things as I want it done. It has its own mind about measuring angles, often giving you the complimentary angle to the one desired. Yes, you can do a little arithmetic to get the one you need, but you shouldn't have to that. Besides, it introduces the chance for mistakes.

There have been some good tips in this thread. I'll come back and reread it when I have Alibre running.

I would add that I also use the distance tool to debug some kinds of restraints. One of the posters talked about making a drawing to get certain measurements. I've used the distance tool in that way to understand why constraints (mostly in assemblies) don't work. Many times its been that two subassemblies, or parts in them, are not truly parallel or at right angles as I intended them to be due to some small error I've introduced along the way.

I consider the measurement tool a real fundamental part of how I get practical things accomplished in Alibre, but feel it could be improved substantially.

Cheers,
 

DavidJ

Administrator
Staff member
With angles, there are some tricks that might help if you initially get the complimentary angle to the one you want.

If selecting edges, switch the selection order.

If using faces, see if you can swap one of the selections to an edge (obviously whilst maintaining the angle).
 

OTE_TheMissile

Alibre Super User
I've done the "add a temporary reference plane" trick too, but sometimes for whatever reason that's not a viable option either and I end up scribbling up a Drawing. Personally I'm fine with the measurement tool for quickly grabbing a number I either forgot and can't be arsed to reopen the Sketch, or for checking fit between two features/parts. But there are certain situations where it can't give me what I'm looking for & I end up making a Drawing to make use of the more finite Dimension tools in that workspace.

I make temporary Drawings all the time when I need to dial in the bend lengths on my Sheetmetal models, but I feel like that's more to do with my God-awful Sheetmetal abilities and less to do with Alibre :D

Like I said I'm happy with the Measurement tool as it is, I'm just adding my $0.02 to the discussion.
 
Top