Constraints

[Anonymous]

This program is still awful compared with Solidworks in terms of being user friendly.

For example I am working in a base sketch (Right side of view cube) and I have to use the horizontal constraint for vertical constraint and vertical constraint for horizontal constraint.

I have no idea why it decides up is across and across is up?

It should be relative to the user, but actually the top for the view cube is still vertical so it makes no sense whatsoever.

This is one of many complaints I have with this software and I would of thought by now you would of sorted silly niggles like this...

[jtylerbc]

The Horizontal and Vertical constraints are based on the sketch's coordinate system.  That coordinate system is actually the point where the definition gets weird.  It would be nice to have this match the overall coordinate system for the model as much as possible.

In the current state, there are a couple of things you can do to deal with this situation.  You may or may not already know about these, but I'm throwing them out there anyway. These aren't arguments against a change, but rather tips on how to deal with it in the meantime.

1. You can visually identify which direction is "horizontal" by the fact that the axis line in the sketch is thicker.  This doesn't change the odd definitions, but does make it easier to identify what the definition is so you can pick the corresponding constraints.  This is how I tend to operate.
2. You can manually redefine the sketch's coordinate system to match your preferred orientation.  I used to use this method, before finally deciding it wasn't worth the trouble.
   1. Create the sketch (don't actually draw anything yet).
   2. Exit the sketch.
   3. In the browser, right-click the sketch and pick Edit Coordinate System.
   4. Redefine elements as necessary to orient the axes as desired.
   5. Go back into the sketch and start drawing.

Additionally, one thing I do that tends to help with this is minimize the number of horizontal or vertical constraints in the first place.  In general, I try to have at most one defined horizontal or vertical line, and everything else defined by parallel or perpendicular constraints.  That way I only have to deal with the odd definition a very small number of times.

[Anonymous]

Thank you for your suggestions, I will have to try.
I never had these difficulties in SW and find this software infuriating and really un-intuitive.
I think Autodesk are stuck in a time warp and do thing a certain way because "That's how it's always been done"
Thanks again

[jtylerbc]

Understandable.  Every CAD system has its own quirks.  A long-term Inventor user moving to Solidworks would probably find things that they didn't like or found difficult or confusing as well.  When you switch CAD systems, you're basically learning a new language.  It takes some time to get used to the new rules. 

Some will eventually make sense to you - others will forever seem absurd.  You are not the only one that has complained or asked for changes to the way this works, and it isn't even just former Solidworks users that have issues with it.  I got used to it long ago, but I struggled with this in the beginning of my time using Inventor as well, and I've never spent any significant time in Solidworks.

[kadscad]

It seems this constraint would be related to the view you are working not coordinates. Vertical is vertical and horizontal is you guess it horizontal. 

Screen X is horizontal Screen Y is Vertical

[jtylerbc]

@kadscad,

I'm not sure that a view-based orientation system makes sense.  In a system where the constraints are defined by the view, if you draw a line that is horizontal, then rotate your view, what happens? 

Does the line rotate to remain horizontal on the screen?  The geometry is now camera-dependent, which sounds like a highly unstable way to design parts.

Alternatively, if it remains locked to the original orientation, what happens with the next horizontal constraint you apply in the new view orientation? 

• If it maintains the original line's definition of "horizontal", then all you've changed is that you're describing the sketch coordinate system based on view orientation.  This might work, but doesn't seem to meet the definition you stated of not being dependent on a coordinate system.
• If it uses the new screen orientation to define a new "horizontal", then instead of inconsistent definitions between different sketches, you now have the potential to have an infinite number of definitions of a horizontal orientation within the same sketch. 

[kadscad]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

This program is still awful compared with Solidworks in terms of being user friendly.

For example I am working in a base sketch (Right side of view cube) and I have to use the horizontal constraint for vertical constraint and vertical constraint for horizontal constraint.

I have no idea why it decides up is across and across is up?

It should be relative to the user, but actually the top for the view cube is still vertical so it makes no sense whatsoever.

This is one of many complaints I have with this software and I would of thought by now you would of sorted silly niggles like this...

---

@Anonymous Sorry I am an inventor virgin, I don't even have my license yet. Hoping that comes in today. 

Okay back to vertical and horizontal. When you choose a plane to sketch on that plane is rotated to be aligned with the camera, so then at that point Inventor should know what is vertical and what is horizontal in relation to the view. Right? Perhaps vertical and horizontal constraint should be automatically chosen. If you line is closer to the 90 degrees it locks it to vertical if closer to zero degrees it locks horizontally. 

I don't understand how you have an infinite number of definitions of horizontal and vertical ... YET

[jtylerbc]

@kadscad,

The sketch plane does not rotate.  The plane is still in the same location and orientation relative to the part coordinate system that it always was. The camera view is what rotates, to align with the sketch's coordinate system.

There is nothing (nor should there be) that locks you into staying in that initial view orientation.  How can you define a single fixed reference based on something infinitely variable (the camera view angle)? 

Again, think about the following simplified scenario, in a system where the constraints are view-dependent:

1. Draw a line constrained horizontally.
2. Rotate the view 90° using the View Cube.
3. Draw a second line, also constrained horizontally.

When you rotated the view, what happened to the first line?  Does it appear vertical on the screen, or does it move to remain horizontal?

• If it appears vertical now, continue on.
• If the geometry reorients to the camera, then the software is no longer capable of designing stable models for manufacturing purposes.  Changing the way you look at the part would change its shape, rendering the software useless.

Would the second line be parallel or perpendicular to the first?

• If it's parallel, you didn't really get rid of the sketch coordinate system.  You just initially defined it based on the view orientation, and it is subsequently camera-independent.  This would probably be viable, but if it's what you meant, that wasn't clear from your previous posts.
• If it's perpendicular, you now have a camera-dependent definition of horizontal, instead of coordinate system-dependent.  Since the camera can be rotated to any angle (not just the 90° of my simple example), there are now infinite angles that can be defined as "horizontal", even within a single sketch. 

[kadscad]

Is this not rotating the design plane?

https://knowledge.autodesk.com/community/screencast/555a79b0-ded9-4fe7-b22c-f57fc52fd2fe

[jtylerbc]

You seem to have the Screencast set to Private, so I can't see it from your link.

[Anonymous]

What would be nice is if when you hover over either the vertical or horizontal constraint a temporary screen graphic shows either a horizontal or vertical line right across the screen. It doesn't really matter which is horizontal or vertical to me in regards to the coordinate system as long as it easy and quick to tell which one you need. The number of times I click on the horizontal constraint because the geometry is lying in the horizontal only to find out it wanted the vertical one.