Your Products have been synced, click here to refresh
Is this for all versions with Xactmeasure (4+ and up) or just for 2010?
Did they say anything about True Position not always displaying nominals or not displaying correct nominals?
Actually, my compaint is when I have a True position I want it to report like this:
But if I change any other report feature, I frequently get this:
That is from the same feature on the same report. I made a change to a totally unrelated reporting feature (Different datums and all) and reran the program.
And once I lose the nominals, it becomes a fight to get them back on the report properly. I don't want to put a location dimension on the report and then a true position dimension when the location is supposed to be part of true position. I know things are set correctly in the Advanced tab in the images I have above.
Do you know if that is fixed in 2009 or 2010?
(I am not inclined towards violence, but if someone ever walked up to me and told me they were responsible for coding the TP reporting in 4.x, my coworkers will testify at the trial that my actions were premeditated..... )
Rick, I have not experience that myself. but I have only tried to use Xactmeasure in 2009 & 2010 (no MR).
Have you by any chance altered an alignment?
Also, are you using current alignment or datum reference frame in the advanced tab?
I try not to alter alignments when reporting. The problem seems to happen if I report TP of several features in the same report. If I go back and adjust the nominals or change from Datum Reference to Current Alignment, frequently anything reported after that will suddenly not report nominals. If I recreate all the reporting features that are giving me a problem, I sometimes can get my nominals to show on the report again. It seems trial and error mostly to get a report displaying properly again. Getting the report (and proof reading the final product) can take up 1/2 the time I spend writing a program.
I have been using Datum Reference Frames mostly. I had no idea about Xactmeasure making the first datum in the Z direction. Most of our parts are laid out so that the first datum does align with the Z adn frequently the second is aligned with the X. I'll have to go back and look at instances where this is not the case.
Other than the reporting item I posted above, we're pretty happy with 4.2. It was a big jump from 3.2. Most of the problems we had turned out to be programmer error. But this one has been elusive to fix by training and practice. That's why I'm curious if the items you noted in class hold true for 4.2. Our SMA is expired a while ago, but we haven't need more advanced features. If going to 2009 or 2010 solves this issue and adheres to standards, I have a much better shot of getting the SMA renewed.
FWIW Hexagon says as of version 2009 Xactmeasure is "locked" into ASME Y14.5M-1994. To me that implies that older versions are not.
In the advance tab, have you checked to see if the tick boxes for the nominals you want in the report are selected? I don't know why they would "unselect" and if that doesn't fix it. . . I dunno. . .
Yeah, I was getting the same impression. I wondered if at class there was a comment along the lines of "Up until 2009, Xactmeasure is wrong and/or displays incorrectly."
I have tried everyhting in the advanced tab. Sometimes unchecking and rechecking works. BUt in the example above, when I would look at the advanced tab, everything would be checked as it should, the edit window would show the correct axis, and nothing would show on the report.
Although I am going to try to get the class approved. It certainly sounds like it would be helpful. If nothing else, I could ask my questions directly.
I feel like this exchange should be in the general directory, not the tips and tricks. Oh well....
Thanks for the insight into the class.
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. | Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement |