Redefine sketch reference - what's the point?

[stevec781]

I often project edges from one part into the sketch of another to use as construction geometry.  Sometimes the references fail when the first part is edited.  So in the part with the reference I edit the sketch, right click on  the reference, select redefine and pick the new edge.  The new line appears but loses its construction status and all constraints and dimensions do not update.  It behaves no differently to when I just delete the reference and re create it.  So I am wondering what's the point of this redefine command if nothing updates properly?

And to add to the problem, if faces from the part with the updated reference were copied into another part using copy object, they dont update and they dont register an error either, they just stay in the wrong place.

So does anyone know what  is redefine meant to do?

[stevec781]

Thought I would attach an example that doesnt involve a sick part.  Lets assume that in part 2 we want to redefine the projected edges from the outside edges to the inside edges.  Not only do the end point coincident constraints disappear but so does the 40mm dimension.  AND when you try and drag the other lines to the new redefined lines to fix the sketch some wont move.  So why even bother with redefine?

Files in 2011 format

[ToddHarris7556]

I'll often use redefine to move a sketch to a different work plane, or reference surface. My understanding was always that it was more intended to be used to move sketches around your part, as opposed to healing problematic / broken/sick sketches.

If you're running into problems with sketches breaking, you might try to make more use of reference planes and/or parameters, and be very selective about what sketch geometry you project. This can certainly be done, but do so sparingly and carefully. It should be recognized that it's not the most robust method.

Hope this helps.

[Justin_DeSilva]

My features suffer from the same dilemma. I don't understand why the projected sketch position is repositioned to some arbitrary location? When redefining, It would be much better for the sketch to project itself relative to it's own coordinate system opposed to moving 20mm left, or 36mm high, or rotating 180 degrees. Very frustrating.

[chad38]

I must say again that I don't understand why there's a need to "project" geometry in the first place, especially when it's geometry that is in the part you are drawing in. In solid edge, though it's not the most reliable method to do in context modeling, you can include edges from other parts inside of a sketch, however a much more reliable method is using the interpart copies. It's crazy to me how many "sick" sketches I end up with because of something as trivial as a change to a bend radius or just moving a flange. It also aggravates me that when I draw a sketch, and it projects edges, that it claims that technically the sketch is sick because of open loops. Stupid. Must I really go and change every bit of projected geometry to a "construction" line so I can feel that the part was done correctly, even though everything about the feature is just fine and those projected edges weren't selected as the boundary in the first place?

I really really hope that in the near future I'm able to convince my workplace to get a program that is better suited for a sheetmetal fabrication shop. Solid Edge = Metallica+Pantera and Inventor is more like Limp Bizkit. Autodesk needs to get it's crap straight before it Fred Durst's.

[inventorsucks]

Patrick, i couldn't agree more...right on, right on