Dimension Driven Design, Generative Components, Parametric Cell Studio, Dependencies, none of the above?

J... got your messages, no problem there.

Wrt the last post, I would be 99.9% sure there are no changes made to DDD, there are however changes made to dimensioning tools all the time. You probably just need to dig out the dimensioning toolboxes - they would still be there... One thing you can always depend on Bentley for is not breaking anything.  

Colin- Indeed I have seen that and the many other posts your information was provided in. The effort you put forth in those is truly outstanding. I am just seriously baffled as to how/why Bentley made no attempt to promote the use of the tools?

Quick question for you- have you tried any of the DDD stuff (which is now found under Tools>Parametrics) in the latest versions, like SS2 or SS3 Beta? I think I am seeing yet some more nuances that may not behave specifically like you described in the videos. I am honestly just doing a little at a time, when I have free time, which is often far and few between.

You're right it's tedious and finicky but a well built solution can last 1000s of uses over many years. And yep, I agree - parametrics are very fragmented. However, it seems it is still the best solution for many situations - not because its good, but because it's there and is integrated very well into MicroStation.

You've probably seen this post, but if not here it is again.

Any specific problems you help with?

jharkless:

I can see why so many people have shied away from DDD

I don't think people have shied away from it so much as not finding it in the first place.  As you've just experienced, it's not too easy to (a) find what parametric tools are available, (b) what the difference between them may may be and (c) find documentation and tutorials.

Glad you found 'constraints.dgn'; I don't know where it ended up on my installation.

There is a tutorial on DDD from many years ago.  It used to be on the Bentley web site; I've attached the index PDF (the complete set is too big to post).

Thanks for the file Jon.

In case anyone else stumbles upon this posting, I have attached "constraints.dgn" which is indeed, the V8 version of "cnstrn.dgn" (plus a little more in it).

I'm digging into DDD now, but I can see why so many people have shied away from it- very tedious and finicky with what dimensions work, etc. 

Jon Summers:

illustrates a number of DDD examples, including some that vary in the way you describe.

I'm still skeptical that I can get the if/then logic structures to work, but we shall see...

jharkless:

I have searched my entire HDD - no such file exists.

Curiously, I was using MicroStation/J at the time I answered your query, and cnstrn.dgn just happened to be there.  I don't know why constraints.dgn isn't delivered with MicroStation V8.  I've attached a copy of cnstrn.dgn to this post.

jharkless:

According to THIS post, which you made 9 years ago

Well, if you're going to hold me to account for ancient history  8-)

Jon, you have me curious as to what version of MS you are using, based on...

• Jon Summers:

  If you look at the examples installed with MicroStation, there's one constraints design (cnstrn.dgn)

I have searched my entire HDD- no such file exists. According to THIS post, which you made 9 years ago, that file was v7 and replaced with "constraints.dgn". I have subsequently searched my HDD for that file, still to no avail. If it is truly a file that will provide me examples of what I described, would it be possible for you to post/attach it here?

• Jon Summers:

  Bentley Systems wisely avoid the term 'parametrics'

Uhhh, DDD is located in Tools > Parametrics

jharkless:

IF Line 1(Length) >= a and <b, THEN Circle 2(Radius) = 5

That's very close to the syntax used by DDD.

If you look at the examples installed with MicroStation, there's one constraints design (cnstrn.dgn)  that illustrates a number of DDD examples, including some that vary in the way you describe.

jharkless:

That THIS is true Parametric Design

Let them argue about the number of angels that can dance on a pinhead.  Bentley Systems wisely avoid the term 'parametrics'.

Thank you both for your response. No, I have not looked at Feature Solids, as I was making the correlation (possibly incorrectly so) that any solid pushes me into "complex elements" when I really want to crawl before I walk (or run for that matter).

Thomas- I was hoping to not have to give a specific example of what I want to do but to keep this more on a "high level overview", but if I get some more time, it looks like I may just have to do such and see what you wizards come up with.

In the mean time, I can however, ask a slightly more detailed question...

What if the relationship between 2 elements is not algebraic in form, but rather, would best be described as a series of IF statements? Ex:

• IF element Line 1(Length) >= a and <b, THEN element Circle 2(Radius)=5
• (else) IF element Line 1(Length) >= b and <c, THEN element Circle 2(Radius)=5.4
• (else) IF element Line 1(Length) >= c and <d, THEN element Circle 2(Radius)=6.7
• and so on...

In this example, there is absolutely no relationship between the value Circle 2(Radius) and Line 1(Length)- if you plotted all of the possibilities on a graph, no such linear or algebraic form would they take. Equally as important is that Circle 2(Radius) should not increase unless the threshold for Line 1(Length) is met- it stays the same for a given range of values for Line 1(Length).

I am told by SolidWorks (hearsay only- I've never touched it) users that THIS is true Parametric Design...

We don't know your needs, so it's hard to comment. Here's a brief summary.  Whether DDD is user-friendly or not, as with the other tools, depends largely on the viewpoint of the user  8-)

Dimension Drived Design (DDD) - 2D

jharkless:

What is the future of DDD?

DDD has been around since MicroStation V5.5, I believe.  It's 2D only.  It's the Cinderella of MicroStation's parametric toolset: valuable but largely ignored.  We can't foresee its future other than that Bentley tend not to remove existing functionality in MicroStation.  UCMs, for example, might have been removed with V8 but remain well past their sell-by date.

Generative Components (GC) - 3D

jharkless:

I'm thinking GC is probably overkill for my needs

GC has an enthusiastic following amongs architects & engineers, with its own Forum on Be Communities. 

GC is a 3D design tool.  It works either inside MicroStation or outside -- there's a stand-alone version.

Feature Solids - 3D

Don't overlook Feature Solids, as Thomas recommends.  Feature Solids are part of MicroStation.

Parametric Cell Studio - 3D

This tool is part of the Bentley Building family, so aimed clearly at a particular market.

Dependency Engine

jharkless:

Has [DDD] been updated to make use of the new dependency engine which V8i uses?

The dependency engine maintains logical connections between DGN objects.  It has nothing to do with the algebraic and geometric constraints which are the core of parametric tools.

Describing what you want to do will help us to understand.

Have you looked at Feature Solids?

Disclaimer: I hate nothing more than a really vague post/question. So, at the risk of doing so myself, here goes...

Are these all not very similar concepts? I haven't used any of them but understand that DDD has been around the longest but I hear maybe not very user friendly and not great in 3D (just heresay)? Since I'm looking for simple primitive geometry than complex (solids, etc), I'm thinking GC is probably overkill for my needs (which I may explain further later if I so feel the need) and DDD is what I plan on investing time into getting to know (starting with the 26 part video series I came across).

But before I do spend said time, I was hoping to know:

1. What is the future of DDD? 
2. Has it been updated to make use of the new dependency engine on which V8i uses?

A much less important question but one to ask nonetheless: why are there so many variations of complex solutions and more importantly, why can't a catch all solution just exist natively in the platform? Maybe there is a lot of programmatic overhead with the more complicated (GC) stuff, but make a user turn it on first- that should solve that issue.