Hello! Am I the only one that believes the UCS command needs to be modernized? I mean, Autodesk has not revisited it, for what, almost 10 years? What it lacks: Part mode: Allow the user to select a plane, planar face, axis, straight edge, or a given axis of another UCS to define the directions of X & Y, on the top of the current point geometry. Assembly mode: Allow all the options of part mode, described above, especially anchoring the UCS in a vertex or point. The absolute reference point and then parametric translations/rotations in IAM mode is a serious half-baked job in the history of modern CAD. In part mode, after anchoring the UCS to a point, Inventor does NOT: Allow the user to select a linear edge as the direction of the UCS axis Allow the user to select an axis as the direction of the UCS axis Allow the user to select an axis of an existing UCS as the direction of an axis of the new UCS Allow the user to select a plane as the direction of the UCS axis Allow the user to select a planar face as the direction of the UCS axis It ONLY allows the user to pick a point as the direction of X and Y. In assembly mode, Inventor does NOT allow even the anchoring to an assembly point as it does in part mode, nor does it allow the user to pick the direction of XY using a point, as it does in part mode as well. In assembly mode, the UCS is positioned using the UCS parameters in FX manager, relative to the assembly absolute origin. Frankly, entering UCS coordinates manually in the parameter manager of a professional-grade 3D CAD tool is soooo backwards... what about things like design intent, and associativity? None of them exist when you type UCS values in the FX manager... This is the way to go to allow UCSs to be constrained to the model geometry, and thus be associative to them in more ways, and to have UCSs in assemblies that are not defined exclusively as parameters in the FX manager. What a mess it is to non-associatively adjust offsets&rotations of dozens of UCS that have automatically generated parameter names? And who really renames all six parameters for each UCS they create in either part or assembly mode? It's not only a matter of lack of associativity and ties to the design intent: It's a usability issue as well, almost like ergonomics. This modernization would have a big impact in the utilization of integrated CAM systems running within Inventor that have thus to abide by Inventor UCS rules because that's what the API demands... For CAD users, it also enables UCSs that are constrained to the design intent, not to a waterfall of named parameters in the FX manager that are not associative to the solids... I hope the GIF below clarifies just one of the many limitations we have today... Edit: Previous ideas around UCS modernization submitted before - @dan_szymanski - Hope you guys can count all the votes from the ideas submitted here for US-106211. https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/improvements-to-ucs-command/idi-p/8530964 https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/assembly-ucs-workfeatures-can-t-be-positioned/idi-p/9998955 https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/update-the-custom-user-defined-ucs-tool/idi-p/5318331 https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/full-control-over-ucs-placement/idi-p/3690650 Thanks, everyone for your inputs and upvotes!
Show More