Unitless?

[Anonymous]

Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

I always have to re read, well I printed it out for quick reference if I can only find it, its in help under whatever equations are called in IV lingo. I am not sure whether Sean touches on this or has a dedicated How to do? -- Laurence, Power is Nothing without Control --- "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

Larry, I too find it strange way mixing units would matter. I don't try it very often but when I have it's made accomplishing a task harder then it should have been. I think the last time I had problems was when I tried to use custom parameters to drive an array. This should definitely be fixed. Lets start a new organization: Society for the Acceptance of Mixed Units, (S.A.M.U.) 8>) Matt P.E.A.D. & S.A.M.U. "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

Ah ... you mean "Edit box..." that's where units are listed in help, but I haven't see any reasoning there as to why they can't be mixed or if that will always be true. ... If I'm missing it, maybe you could say where it is? ~Larry "Laurence Yeandle" wrote in message news:40914a84$1_3@newsprd01... > I always have to re read, well I printed it out for quick reference if I can > only find it, its in help under whatever equations are called in IV lingo. > I am not sure whether Sean touches on this or has a dedicated How to do? > > -- > Laurence, > > Power is Nothing without Control > --- > > > "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message > news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... > Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise > when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should > be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or > some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified > dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care > if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a > unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is > for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will > this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said > she was going to stay with me forever)? > ~Larry > >

[Anonymous]

Hey ... good idea ... you can be founder and I'll be co-founder ... recon we can collect dues! ~Larry "Matt Hendey" wrote in message news:40914bfe$1_1@newsprd01... Larry, I too find it strange way mixing units would matter. I don't try it very often but when I have it's made accomplishing a task harder then it should have been. I think the last time I had problems was when I tried to use custom parameters to drive an array. This should definitely be fixed. Lets start a new organization: Society for the Acceptance of Mixed Units, (S.A.M.U.) 8>) Matt P.E.A.D. & S.A.M.U. "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

"parsing example in edit boxes" ;) -- Laurence, Power is Nothing without Control --- "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914cdf_3@newsprd01... > Ah ... you mean "Edit box..." that's where units are listed in help, but I > haven't see any reasoning there as to why they can't be mixed or if that > will always be true. ... If I'm missing it, maybe you could say where it > is? > ~Larry > > "Laurence Yeandle" wrote > in message news:40914a84$1_3@newsprd01... > > I always have to re read, well I printed it out for quick reference if I > can > > only find it, its in help under whatever equations are called in IV lingo. > > I am not sure whether Sean touches on this or has a dedicated How to do? > > > > -- > > Laurence, > > > > Power is Nothing without Control > > --- > > > > > > "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message > > news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... > > Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They > arise > > when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should > > be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or > > some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified > > dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it > care > > if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a > > unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that > is > > for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and > will > > this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said > > she was going to stay with me forever)? > > ~Larry > > > > > >

[Anonymous]

This one? ~Larry "Laurence Yeandle" wrote in message news:40914eda$1_3@newsprd01... > "parsing example in edit boxes" ;) > > -- > Laurence, > > Power is Nothing without Control [snip]

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure I follow. As long as the resulting units are the same as the chosen units for the parameter you are okay. i.e. tmp1=2 in, tmp2=3ul, then tmp1*tmp2=6 in. OR tmp2/tmp1=1.5/in. if you want the results to be unitless then it would be tmp2/tmp1*1 in=1.5ul. Does this make sense or have I missed your point? keith "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

Yeh try procedure tab. -- Laurence, Power is Nothing without Control --- "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40915425_2@newsprd01... > This one? > ~Larry > > "Laurence Yeandle" wrote > in message news:40914eda$1_3@newsprd01... > > "parsing example in edit boxes" ;) > > > > -- > > Laurence, > > > > Power is Nothing without Control > [snip] > > >

[Anonymous]

If you start your own standards orginization, you will require a unique file format that no one can read. "Matt Hendey" wrote in message news:40914bfe$1_1@newsprd01... Larry, I too find it strange way mixing units would matter. I don't try it very often but when I have it's made accomplishing a task harder then it should have been. I think the last time I had problems was when I tried to use custom parameters to drive an array. This should definitely be fixed. Lets start a new organization: Society for the Acceptance of Mixed Units, (S.A.M.U.) 8>) Matt P.E.A.D. & S.A.M.U. "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

Nah, I'll just steal everyone else's. That would be easier. Matt "Mark" wrote in message news:4091588e$1_1@newsprd01... If you start your own standards orginization, you will require a unique file format that no one can read. "Matt Hendey" wrote in message news:40914bfe$1_1@newsprd01... Larry, I too find it strange way mixing units would matter. I don't try it very often but when I have it's made accomplishing a task harder then it should have been. I think the last time I had problems was when I tried to use custom parameters to drive an array. This should definitely be fixed. Lets start a new organization: Society for the Acceptance of Mixed Units, (S.A.M.U.) 8>) Matt P.E.A.D. & S.A.M.U. "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

Oh Ya! We'll promise everyone A,B,C. Give them A & C then charge more for B. Just like Autodesk except we'll do it the non-profit way. Matt "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914e11$1_2@newsprd01... Hey ... good idea ... you can be founder and I'll be co-founder ... recon we can collect dues! ~Larry "Matt Hendey" wrote in message news:40914bfe$1_1@newsprd01... Larry, I too find it strange way mixing units would matter. I don't try it very often but when I have it's made accomplishing a task harder then it should have been. I think the last time I had problems was when I tried to use custom parameters to drive an array. This should definitely be fixed. Lets start a new organization: Society for the Acceptance of Mixed Units, (S.A.M.U.) 8>) Matt P.E.A.D. & S.A.M.U. "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

Well ... for example: how would I have a pitch (in) drive a length (in.) (p*l) in. then drive the number of coils (ul) "c" with (c=p*l) (ul) in the coil dialog? How would I get that equation for revolutions to be (ul). and distance (p*l) to remain inches? ~Larry "Keith Panik" wrote in message news:409155c7_3@newsprd01... I'm not sure I follow. As long as the resulting units are the same as the chosen units for the parameter you are okay. i.e. tmp1=2 in, tmp2=3ul, then tmp1*tmp2=6 in. OR tmp2/tmp1=1.5/in. if you want the results to be unitless then it would be tmp2/tmp1*1 in=1.5ul. Does this make sense or have I missed your point? keith "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

We could just copy their disclaimer! ~Larry "Matt Hendey" wrote in message news:40915d2f$1_1@newsprd01... Oh Ya! We'll promise everyone A,B,C. Give them A & C then charge more for B. Just like Autodesk except we'll do it the non-profit way. Matt "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914e11$1_2@newsprd01... Hey ... good idea ... you can be founder and I'll be co-founder ... recon we can collect dues! ~Larry "Matt Hendey" wrote in message news:40914bfe$1_1@newsprd01... Larry, I too find it strange way mixing units would matter. I don't try it very often but when I have it's made accomplishing a task harder then it should have been. I think the last time I had problems was when I tried to use custom parameters to drive an array. This should definitely be fixed. Lets start a new organization: Society for the Acceptance of Mixed Units, (S.A.M.U.) 8>) Matt P.E.A.D. & S.A.M.U. "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

That's the Spirit! Matt "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40915fee$1_3@newsprd01... We could just copy their disclaimer! ~Larry "Matt Hendey" wrote in message news:40915d2f$1_1@newsprd01... Oh Ya! We'll promise everyone A,B,C. Give them A & C then charge more for B. Just like Autodesk except we'll do it the non-profit way. Matt "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914e11$1_2@newsprd01... Hey ... good idea ... you can be founder and I'll be co-founder ... recon we can collect dues! ~Larry "Matt Hendey" wrote in message news:40914bfe$1_1@newsprd01... Larry, I too find it strange way mixing units would matter. I don't try it very often but when I have it's made accomplishing a task harder then it should have been. I think the last time I had problems was when I tried to use custom parameters to drive an array. This should definitely be fixed. Lets start a new organization: Society for the Acceptance of Mixed Units, (S.A.M.U.) 8>) Matt P.E.A.D. & S.A.M.U. "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

If I am following you correctly: define a user parameter p=pitch=in=.125, l=length=in=1 then coils=c=ul=l/p=8ul (8 coils at .125in pitch is equal to 1 in total length). If for some reason you wanted another parameter d=distance=in=p*l then you would actually write it as p*l/1 in=.125 in. Sorry if I am missing something. kp "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40915eb5$1_2@newsprd01... Well ... for example: how would I have a pitch (in) drive a length (in.) (p*l) in. then drive the number of coils (ul) "c" with (c=p*l) (ul) in the coil dialog? How would I get that equation for revolutions to be (ul). and distance (p*l) to remain inches? ~Larry "Keith Panik" wrote in message news:409155c7_3@newsprd01... I'm not sure I follow. As long as the resulting units are the same as the chosen units for the parameter you are okay. i.e. tmp1=2 in, tmp2=3ul, then tmp1*tmp2=6 in. OR tmp2/tmp1=1.5/in. if you want the results to be unitless then it would be tmp2/tmp1*1 in=1.5ul. Does this make sense or have I missed your point? keith "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

Thanks ... I saved your post and I'll try it. Guess this means I can't expect a Nobel Prize in Mathematics, eh? ~Larry "Keith Panik" wrote in message news:409165fc_2@newsprd01... If I am following you correctly: define a user parameter p=pitch=in=.125, l=length=in=1 then coils=c=ul=l/p=8ul (8 coils at .125in pitch is equal to 1 in total length). If for some reason you wanted another parameter d=distance=in=p*l then you would actually write it as p*l/1 in=.125 in. Sorry if I am missing something. kp "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40915eb5$1_2@newsprd01... Well ... for example: how would I have a pitch (in) drive a length (in.) (p*l) in. then drive the number of coils (ul) "c" with (c=p*l) (ul) in the coil dialog? How would I get that equation for revolutions to be (ul). and distance (p*l) to remain inches? ~Larry "Keith Panik" wrote in message news:409155c7_3@newsprd01... I'm not sure I follow. As long as the resulting units are the same as the chosen units for the parameter you are okay. i.e. tmp1=2 in, tmp2=3ul, then tmp1*tmp2=6 in. OR tmp2/tmp1=1.5/in. if you want the results to be unitless then it would be tmp2/tmp1*1 in=1.5ul. Does this make sense or have I missed your point? keith "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

The key here is that Inventor is an engineering tool, we have an equation editor not a calculator. The Units in an equation must balance. "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40916793$1_3@newsprd01... Thanks ... I saved your post and I'll try it. Guess this means I can't expect a Nobel Prize in Mathematics, eh? ~Larry "Keith Panik" wrote in message news:409165fc_2@newsprd01... If I am following you correctly: define a user parameter p=pitch=in=.125, l=length=in=1 then coils=c=ul=l/p=8ul (8 coils at .125in pitch is equal to 1 in total length). If for some reason you wanted another parameter d=distance=in=p*l then you would actually write it as p*l/1 in=.125 in. Sorry if I am missing something. kp "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40915eb5$1_2@newsprd01... Well ... for example: how would I have a pitch (in) drive a length (in.) (p*l) in. then drive the number of coils (ul) "c" with (c=p*l) (ul) in the coil dialog? How would I get that equation for revolutions to be (ul). and distance (p*l) to remain inches? ~Larry "Keith Panik" wrote in message news:409155c7_3@newsprd01... I'm not sure I follow. As long as the resulting units are the same as the chosen units for the parameter you are okay. i.e. tmp1=2 in, tmp2=3ul, then tmp1*tmp2=6 in. OR tmp2/tmp1=1.5/in. if you want the results to be unitless then it would be tmp2/tmp1*1 in=1.5ul. Does this make sense or have I missed your point? keith "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

Hmm ... okay if that's the way it is then that's the way it is. Now I'm trying to understand what the difference is between a calculator and an equation editor. Maybe this is above my head, but don't they both calculate equations? The calculators I have sitting on my desk both calculate equations and don't care what units I may be thinking of, it just does the math (guess that defines a calculator, right?). Wonder if you could say what the different is when putting the same equation in Inventor? Maybe it's not engineering or maybe I don't know what you mean, but I thought that making parts that will change as needed is what parametric modeling was most useful for. ~Larry "James (autodesk)" wrote in message news:40916e29_3@newsprd01... The key here is that Inventor is an engineering tool, we have an equation editor not a calculator. The Units in an equation must balance. "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40916793$1_3@newsprd01... Thanks ... I saved your post and I'll try it. Guess this means I can't expect a Nobel Prize in Mathematics, eh? ~Larry "Keith Panik" wrote in message news:409165fc_2@newsprd01... If I am following you correctly: define a user parameter p=pitch=in=.125, l=length=in=1 then coils=c=ul=l/p=8ul (8 coils at .125in pitch is equal to 1 in total length). If for some reason you wanted another parameter d=distance=in=p*l then you would actually write it as p*l/1 in=.125 in. Sorry if I am missing something. kp "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40915eb5$1_2@newsprd01... Well ... for example: how would I have a pitch (in) drive a length (in.) (p*l) in. then drive the number of coils (ul) "c" with (c=p*l) (ul) in the coil dialog? How would I get that equation for revolutions to be (ul). and distance (p*l) to remain inches? ~Larry "Keith Panik" wrote in message news:409155c7_3@newsprd01... I'm not sure I follow. As long as the resulting units are the same as the chosen units for the parameter you are okay. i.e. tmp1=2 in, tmp2=3ul, then tmp1*tmp2=6 in. OR tmp2/tmp1=1.5/in. if you want the results to be unitless then it would be tmp2/tmp1*1 in=1.5ul. Does this make sense or have I missed your point? keith "Larry Caldwell" wrote in message news:40914937$1_1@newsprd01... Unit definitions cause (me at least) a lot of modeling problems. They arise when I really need to illegally mix units but I don't know why that should be so. For instance, if I want to make a coil's number of revolutions or some angle dependant on a dimension, it seems to be written in petrified dung somewhere that it's a no no. If a value is unitless, why would it care if it was multiplied by a dimension? A dimension value is a number and a unitless value is a number, no? So what gives? Been trying to figure that is for a long time without a clue. Anyone able to explain that, maybe and will this be true forever (Forever's 3 years. ... Evidence: my first wife said she was going to stay with me forever)? ~Larry

[Anonymous]

I think the key here is that IV is designed around metric units. When using non-metric units they are automatically converted to metric internally. Just like in algebra, the units need to be treated like scalar values and must cancel out correctly to balance the equations. Patrick