Allow "Add Constraint" while in a position representation

[Anonymous]

It is insane that I have to add conflicting constraints in the master position because I cannot add them in the position representation. Basically, we have to add a ton of constraints that all conflict eachother (because they represent different positions), suppress each one-by-one, then re-enable each one-by-one. Just allow me to add a constraint within the position representation...

[Dan.Schlosser]

It would be nice to be able to constrain parts in an assembly while in a positional representation, rather than turning the visibility of parts on/off.

[PaulMunford]

Similar ideas:
https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/allow-quot-add-constraint-quot-while-in-a-position/idi...

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/representations-need-more-functionality/idi-p/6938221

[PaulMunford]

Similar ideas:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/allow-quot-add-constraint-quot-while-in-a-position/idi...

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/representations-need-more-functionality/idi-p/6938221

[Rory_M]

Why can't we add a constraint whilst in a positional rep?

Not all positional reps are simple value overrides, sometimes you need to mate multiple parts to completely different places to show alternative positions.

Currently with a relatively simple position change (move a pin from one hole to another for example) we have to create two constraints that first of all conflict with each other and do the "activate each pos rep and turn one constraint off & the other on" dance.

From an interface point of view, the constraint dialog box just needs a tick box that says "apply to the current rep only".

The constraint would then be automatically suppressed in all other reps.

[philthalmann]

Good idea and sounds like a nice simple solution as far as the interface goes anyways.

[jtylerbc]

I've been meaning to add this idea myself for a while, so I'm glad to see someone else got around to it.

I would personally like to see it work similarly to the Factory/Member editing modes from iParts.  If you are in Factory mode, any changes you make apply universally across all table members.  If you are in Member edit mode, they are overrides to that member, and are excluded from others automatically.

This logic would easily stretch to cover PosRep constraints.  Any constraint added in "Master" would be enabled in all PosReps.  Any constraint created while any other PosRep is active would automatically be suppressed in all others. 

I think this would make PosReps much more intuitive than they currently are.  The existing method of knowingly adding conflicting constraints so you can then go suppress them in the right places is rather silly, and confusing to newer users. 

[3D4Play]

+1 Ditto what's been said so far

[PaulMunford]

@jtylerbc 'Like'

[JoschaWondraschek]

It would be helpful, if it would be possible to create constraints in active positional representations (in the following called "PR").

For example, you are working on an activated PR in an assembly and you want to add an constraint to this PR. That's not possible. You have to switch back the the "main" PR, add the constraint, supress it, switch back to your PR you want to edit and override the supression.

This could be shortened by enabling constraint creation in PRs.

Hope this is kind of understandable 😉

[jtylerbc]

Would love to have this.  I have been meaning to post a similar idea myself for some time - glad to see someone actually got around to doing it.

My preference would be that the constraints created in a Positional Rep be initially active only in that representation.  This could be easily accomplished by automatically Suppressing the constraint in the Master PosRep, and overriding it to be active in the PosRep where it was created.

The way PosReps and constraint creation works currently is silly, and very confusing to new users. 

[JoschaWondraschek]

Hi jtylerbc,

yeah that was also exactly my idea, but it seems that I forgot to describe it myself. Thank you!

[engilic]

Great and very useful idea.

thx @JoschaWondraschek  and @jtylerbc .

suppressing all constrains that are in conflict with new pos rep, making new ones for new pos rep, then suppress those new ones, unsuppress the ones needed for the main pos rep, going to new pos rep, override (suppress) main pos rep constrains, override (unsuppress) new pos rep constrains

is there easier way?

if not this idea would help a lot, just within new pos rep override (suppress) not needed constrains, make new ones that will be overriden  (unsup) in new pos rep and suppressed in main pos rep

easier

imagine how much to do for 10 or more pos reps

thank you

[engilic]

Same idea

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/allow-quot-add-constraint-quot-while-in-a-position/idi...

[engilic]

Same idea

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/creating-constraints-in-positional-representations-in-...

[engilic]

Great and very useful idea.

thx @Anonymous 

suppressing all constrains that are in conflict with new pos rep, making new ones for new pos rep, then suppress those new ones, unsuppress the ones needed for the main pos rep, going to new pos rep, override (suppress) main pos rep constrains, override (unsuppress) new pos rep constrains

is there easier way?

if not this idea would help a lot, just within new pos rep override (suppress) not needed constrains, make new ones that will be overriden  (unsup) in new pos rep and suppressed in main pos rep

easier

imagine how much to do for 10 or more pos reps

thank you

[gregory_nickol]

This would be huge for the usability of positional representations. They are very useful, but my co-workers hate working with them due to this issue and often just place two copies of a part and change visibility to show the changes right now which I'm sure everyone here understands is very bad for BOM management as you have to override quantities and masses end up incorrect, etc.