Reply

Relationship conflict


I am trying to add a related part to the right of the side view of my original assembly.
To start, I have drawn a horizontal line ("line A") nearby in empty space. Now
I want it to line up with an existing horizontal line in the assembly ("line B").
I have tried both "collinear" and "horizontal/vertical" (duly using endpoints of
each line, not point-to-line). I cannot make Line A line up with Line B, always
getting the message that the requested change conflicts with existing relationships.
Line A bears no dimension lines, either driving or driven, and no relationships
or constraints except the horizontal tick at its midpoint. I am able to align Line
A with several other existing lines, just not with Line B. Can anyone suggest what
I am missing?
John Hilgenberg
John Hilgenberg
16 REPLIES

Re: Relationship conflict


John,
When you try it using collinear are you clicking on line A first then line B? That
should line up line A with line B. If you click on line B first then line A Solid
Edge would be trying to line up line B to A and depending on how line B is constrained
you may get the message you are seeing. Just a thought.
Ed
"John Hilgenberg" wrote:
>
>I am trying to add a related part to the right of the side view of my original
>assembly.
> To start, I have drawn a horizontal line ("line A") nearby in empty space.
> Now
>I want it to line up with an existing horizontal line in the assembly ("line
>B").
> I have tried both "collinear" and "horizontal/vertical" (duly using endpoints
>of
>each line, not point-to-line). I cannot make Line A line up with Line B,
>always
>getting the message that the requested change conflicts with existing relationships.
> Line A bears no dimension lines, either driving or driven, and no relationships
>or constraints except the horizontal tick at its midpoint. I am able to align
>Line
>A with several other existing lines, just not with Line B. Can anyone suggest
>what
>I am missing?
>
>John Hilgenberg
>John Hilgenberg
>


Re: Relationship conflict


That's a good thought, Ed, but I am definitely clicking on line A, the line to be
moved, first. Line A is the newly drawn line with no constraints except the horizontal/vertical
tick mark at the midpoint. Likewise, when attempting the horizontal/vertical constraint,
I am clicking on a midpoint or endpoint of line A first, then clicking on a midpoint
or endpoint of line B. I have tried deleting and redrawing line A, as well as closing
and reopening SolidEdge 2D, but that doesn't help. I keep thinking there must be
some hidden constraint on line A, but I have created none and can find none.
"Ed Kadlec" wrote:
>
>John,
>
>When you try it using collinear are you clicking on line A first then line
>B? That
>should line up line A with line B. If you click on line B first then line
>A Solid
>Edge would be trying to line up line B to A and depending on how line B is
>constrained
>you may get the message you are seeing. Just a thought.
>
>Ed
>

John Hilgenberg

Re: Relationship conflict


John,
Can you attach your Solid Edge "dft" file to a post so we can take a look at it?
Ed
"John Hilgenberg" wrote:
>
>That's a good thought, Ed, but I am definitely clicking on line A, the line
>to be
>moved, first. Line A is the newly drawn line with no constraints except the
>horizontal/vertical
>tick mark at the midpoint. Likewise, when attempting the horizontal/vertical
>constraint,
>I am clicking on a midpoint or endpoint of line A first, then clicking on
>a midpoint
>or endpoint of line B. I have tried deleting and redrawing line A, as well
>as closing
>and reopening SolidEdge 2D, but that doesn't help. I keep thinking there
>must be
>some hidden constraint on line A, but I have created none and can find none.


Re: Relationship conflict

[ Edited ]

Sure . . . Here it is. Lines A and B are indicated by callouts at the bottom of
the plan. Thanks.
John
"Ed Kadlec" wrote:
>
>John,
>
>Can you attach your Solid Edge "dft" file to a post so we can take a look
>at it?
>

John Hilgenberg

Re: Relationship conflict


John,
I got some very strange behavior. I was able to resolve it all by deleting the 11"
long rectangle that line B is part of and the 13" long rectangle that is to the
left of the 11" one. I then redrew the rectangles and placed them in place of the
deleted rectangles and all seems to be fine now.
I would be tempted to send that file to Rick and/or Andy and have them take a look
at it to see if they can explain the strange behavior.
Good luck.
Ed
"John Hilgenberg" wrote:
>
>
>
>Sure . . . Here it is. Lines A and B are indicated by callouts at the bottom
>of
>the plan. Thanks.
>
>John
>
>"Ed Kadlec" wrote:
>>
>>John,
>>
>>Can you attach your Solid Edge "dft" file to a post so we can take a look
>>at it?
>>


Re: Relationship conflict


Thanks, Ed . . . That is a useful workaround, and I am glad to know that I have not
simply made some foolish error. I hesitate to bother Rick or Andy with this, as
my Version 20 is probably no longer supported. I couldn't stand the new interface
and have not followed the "upgrade" path on that account.
"Ed Kadlec" wrote:
>
>John,
>
>I got some very strange behavior. I was able to resolve it all by deleting
>the 11"
>long rectangle that line B is part of and the 13" long rectangle that is to
>the
>left of the 11" one. I then redrew the rectangles and placed them in place
>of the
>deleted rectangles and all seems to be fine now.
>I would be tempted to send that file to Rick and/or Andy and have them take
>a look
>at it to see if they can explain the strange behavior.
>
>Good luck.
>
>Ed
>

John Hilgenberg

Re: Relationship conflict


John,
(I tried to send this last evening but had a message saying it was not
posted - if this duplicates the earlier message please forgive)
Like Ed I played around with your drawing and managed to get the
two lines to line up in the way you want. I attempted to attach your amended file
but think it is too large. If there is another way and you would like the amended
file please let me know.
A long while back Rick B said if you hover the mouse pointer over lines in the
drawing a small icon appears - a mouse with three small zeros - then right
click and the Quick Pick menu appears. This shows the relationships which
applied to your 'box'. I deleted each of the relationships one at a time (select
and delete) and eventually was able (using hofizontal/vertical
relationships) to line up line A with line B (I clicked on line A first).
Hope this helps.
Sincerely,

Roger

"John Hilgenberg" wrote:
>
>Thanks, Ed . . . That is a useful workaround, and I am glad to know that I
>have not
>simply made some foolish error. I hesitate to bother Rick or Andy with this,
>as
>my Version 20 is probably no longer supported. I couldn't stand the new interface
>and have not followed the "upgrade" path on that account.
>
>"Ed Kadlec" wrote:
>>
>>John,
>>
>>I got some very strange behavior. I was able to resolve it all by deleting
>>the 11"
>>long rectangle that line B is part of and the 13" long rectangle that is

>to
>>the
>>left of the 11" one. I then redrew the rectangles and placed them in place
>>of the
>>deleted rectangles and all seems to be fine now.
>>I would be tempted to send that file to Rick and/or Andy and have them take
>>a look
>>at it to see if they can explain the strange behavior.
>>
>>Good luck.
>>
>>Ed
>>

>John Hilgenberg
>

Re: Relationship conflict

John,
I took a look at your drawing.
The problem is an overconstrain issue.
Additional constraints conflict with existing constraints.
The more constraints you add, the more likely there will be a conflict.
Constraint solve is not linear. It is collective.
I deleted the connect relations from line B and can then place the colinear
constraint.
I suggest a simplified drawing technique.
I notice that you have many duplicate shapes.
Each instance of a shape is a copy of the geometry of the shape.
This also duplicates the constraints on the geometry of the shape.
If you Fit the drawing woy will see a blob of constraints.
Whenever you will have duplicated geometry like this, use blocks.
Create a block for each shape you will duplicate many times.
The geometry within a block is constrained locally within the block.
The block can be modified and all instances off the block will update with
the single change.
When the block is placed, geometry outside the block may be constrained to
the geometry contained within the block.
Where the benefit comes in is that each instance of the block is rigid when
placed.
The constraint system sees the block as a single entity, like a line.
This will greatly reduce the constraints that need to solve on the drawing
and will give you better success.
You will also notice that the software will be much faster.
Regards,
Rick B.

Re: Relationship conflict


Thanks, Roger . . . I did use Quick Pick to delete relationships that I suspected
were problematic, but not all, and it seems from your report that I didn't delete
enough (e.g. corner right angles). I don't know why they should have caused the
issue, but thanks to your persistence, I'll know what to do if this ever happens
again.
John
-----------------
"Roger Hurrell" wrote:
>
>John,
>(I tried to send this last evening but had a message saying it was not
>posted - if this duplicates the earlier message please forgive)
>
>Like Ed I played around with your drawing and managed to get the
>two lines to line up in the way you want. I attempted to attach your amended
>file
>but think it is too large. If there is another way and you would like the
>amended
>file please let me know.
>
>A long while back Rick B said if you hover the mouse pointer over lines in
>the
>drawing a small icon appears - a mouse with three small zeros - then right
>
>click and the Quick Pick menu appears. This shows the relationships which
>
>applied to your 'box'. I deleted each of the relationships one at a time
>(select
>and delete) and eventually was able (using hofizontal/vertical
>relationships) to line up line A with line B (I clicked on line A first).
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>
>Roger
>
>
>"John Hilgenberg" wrote:
>>
>>Thanks, Ed . . . That is a useful workaround, and I am glad to know that

>I
>>have not
>>simply made some foolish error. I hesitate to bother Rick or Andy with this,
>>as
>>my Version 20 is probably no longer supported. I couldn't stand the new

>interface
>>and have not followed the "upgrade" path on that account.
>>
>>"Ed Kadlec" wrote:
>>>
>>>John,
>>>
>>>I got some very strange behavior. I was able to resolve it all by deleting
>>>the 11"
>>>long rectangle that line B is part of and the 13" long rectangle that is

>>to
>>>the
>>>left of the 11" one. I then redrew the rectangles and placed them in place
>>>of the
>>>deleted rectangles and all seems to be fine now.
>>>I would be tempted to send that file to Rick and/or Andy and have them take
>>>a look
>>>at it to see if they can explain the strange behavior.
>>>
>>>Good luck.
>>>
>>>Ed
>>>

>>John Hilgenberg
>>
>
John Hilgenberg