Anyone have an idea on how I could set up a contingant rounding value for a property?
Our standard is as follows for rounding of weights.
>1 lbs round up to nearest 0.1 lbs
>5 lbs round up to nearest 1 lbs
>50 lbs round up to nearest 5 lbs
>100 lbs round up to nearest 10 lbs
>1000 lbs round up to nearest 100 lbs
Most of the stuff we make has final assembly weights of 50k-300k lb but on the smaller individual parts like a nut, bolt, flange etc. the values can be sub 1lb.
Where this comes up is the parts list, often we get odd numbers like 0.0 lbs for really small things and 37567.8 lbs for large things and I manually go back and edit which is time prohibitive.
Each model file has accuracy digits for each unit type. While not an exact match to your brackets, you could at least set up model files to different levels of digit precision.
I think the problem is the precision at the assembly and BOM, not the individual part files? In other words the model file settings won't affect the assembly level reports.
The setting in the draft file will effect the display of everything. I'm not sure how the settings of the part and assembly file would interact.
Taking a step back. Why not allow everything to use the finest precision? If you really want those specific settings. One could program variables to get it done, but that's a long path for something this simple. Another rout is to control the displayed digits, but allow full resolution in the background math.
The precision in my part and assembly files is set at 3 decimal place. I have tried to set them at different levels but got some odd stuff like items sub 1 lb showing up as 0.
I guess I was hoping there was an ability to apply a formula to the fields in the parts list to give me the desired output but it seems solid edge just isn't that good at displaying desired information.
I guess I wonder what is the purpose of rounding in such a way. Is it a legacy practice from manual drafting days? (I do though, often dislike people questioning whys rather than addressing the question, and here I am doing it.)
If a part's mass is, say, .003lb, the it's going to show as .00 if the units are at 2 place precision.
I think, but I'm not sure, it's full value mass counts toward the total assembly mass. You could always round down the assembly total or display as an integer with a variable formula. Why not increase the precision as 12Gage suggests.
Like rules, standards are meant to broken (or changed).
You touched on one of my pet peeves about SE. No way of placing a variable into a single cell of a table. Say you use variables to do some background math. To display the result, one has to use old school display text in row and columns (Annotation) where you can't really line things up except the nearest space of text....old school.
Not sure how a variable in a single cell solves the precision problem.
That problem is not specific to this, but it applies. One can do the math using variables, it's a display/output limitation. Without resorting to spreadsheets, there is no way to place a mathmatical result into a table.