I've noticed on many SE models done by a certain individual that sketches are made with no dimensions. This is using "ordered". Not sure if it makes a difference either way.
I am not used to this in other CAD tools. Yeah it stands without dimensions - but you can not dynamically change values?! I end up going into a sketch and modifying.
Where do you all stand on this? Should sketches be dimensioned?
By the way...these are sketches made while creating features, not stand alone sketches. Not that they should be treated any different.
I think they should be fully constrained. In ordered anyway. Not important in sync.
Thanks TDB - I ain't crazy.
I am thinking....maybe this person does not want the dims so he has more control over movements of features???
Another think...he uses lots of sketches in the assembly to drive things.
Sketch elements size or position can be driven by geometry outside the sketch, in which case the sketch can be parametrically fully constrained without dimensions. So it doesn't necessarily violate "best practice" suggestions for a sketch to not have dimensions.
There are some cases where feature dimensions are not critical, and I would argue that in those cases, dimensions or fully constrained state are not really necessary. Situations like this might happen when final dimensions are established by later features, or the entire part is only for reference, not for manufacturing.
This sort of "best practice" should be established in a company's CAD standard so no one wastes a lot of time a) arguing about stuff when it's pointless or b) adding unnecessary detail when it's pointless.
I agree but I assumed that "driven by" as a form of constraint was understood. And of course there are exceptions to the always uptight rule.
In Ordered, unconstrained sketches can be pushed in unexpected ways as other features higher up in the tree are modified. It is a best practice in Ordered to fully define your sketches however that may be.