So, back in early Oct. I did a bunch of adjustments to the layout of the Connect Ribbon to make the work flow more user friendly. Most of this involved moving the groups from the individual ribbons into pull down menus so they wouldn't take up nearly as much space. Some how I tossed the "Planar Distance" Constraint into my Ribbon and I've been using it effectively to make the protrusion tool work for a few weeks. Today I decided to segregate the dimensional constraints from the other 2D constraints in my customization because one type persists through 3D feature creation and the other does not.
Problem is... I cannot find this Constraint 2D Planar Distance tool anywhere in the original Bentley ribbons and I know I didn't just invent it. What's even more weird is that the keyin half works it doesn't appear in the keyin browser as an option but it does activate the tool and does work!
My most immediate concern is should even be using this tool or is it going to cause some major issues down the road.
Thanks in advance.
You are correct that it is not located within the delivered ribbon. You can find it if you open the "2D Constraints Tools" toolbox.
Based on the description you gave on how you are using the tool I would suggest using the "3D Dimension" tool rather than the "Dimension Plane" tool.
The 3D Dimension tool is bit more robust in that it can handle dimensioning between points(vertexes), edges, and faces.
In your case if you use the 3D dimension tool if you dimension 2 faces, they will also be assumed to be parallel and constrained as such.
I would only recommend the use of the Dimension Plane tool when creating constraints between planes(profiles), not a plane and another object, ie a solid.
Grant Wood said:Something else I find very confusing is how to set up the cell origin and make it work 100% of the time. So far the only way I've been consistently able to make this happen is to make a construction element and lock it to the world then use the 3D constraints to hold one of the first parts of my solid to it. I always figured that if I used the 3D lock I could hold it still but that doesn't seem to be the case at all. Specifically I'm looking at this because I'm building parametric cells which all place from the origin.
I totally agree with this. I've brought this up in the EAP. It would be better to have the ability to position geometry relative to 0 based on variables rather than build construction element just to establish 0,0,0 and then start adding constrained dimensions. Another possibility is an ACS at the origin that we can construct off of with constraint commands.