parameter rounded value

Hi all,

I'm looking for rounding some parameter values in order to display them on a
drawing.

For example, I have a mass parameter that take the part mass value.
(mass=pro_mp_mass)
I would like to round this parameter not to have 7.925466541 on the sheet
but just 7.92.
Is there any round possibility or must I use Ceil and Floor functions ?

Thanks,
GB

 

When the parameter appears in a note, you can truncate it by entering
the parameter text as &mass[.X] where X is the number if digits after
the decimal point you want.

 

When the parameter appears in a note, you can truncate it by entering
the parameter text as &mass[.X] where X is the number if digits after
the decimal point you want.

Every function I know of in Pro/e for changing the number of decimal places shown rounds up or down; none strictly truncate, although rounding down will look like truncation.

David Janes

 

And, this adds.....
Yeah, squat.

 

Well, the irony of your post wasn't lost on me Forky old man. What
gets me is when occaisional posters get themselves free consulting and
can't be bothered to say thanks. Did Mr. Bon's parents teach him no
manners at all?

 

Well, the irony of your post wasn't lost on me Forky old man. What
gets me is when occaisional posters get themselves free consulting and
can't be bothered to say thanks. Did Mr. Bon's parents teach him no
manners at all?

Actually, John, a lot of people don't reply to advice given here, with the results or, with thanks. And, some people do, regularly, reply with both. And sometimes a thread, a conversation ensues. It's not often but worth the trek through the desert. But, in all of that, I have no idea what it represents. I suppose though, that the thanks is up to us: if we demand it, we'll get it, if only by keeping a list of those who do not reply (with results/thanks) and simply no longer helping those we consider rude and ungrateful, possibly even announcing that fact here. I'm really more interested in hearing the results because, far too often, I'm sure I'm guessing, interpreting (or misinterpreting) the question. My BIGGEST gripe, here, is the paucity of information we have to go on to answer any question, indicated by how many times someone will say something like "well, I guess I didn't express myself very clearly" or "I guess I didn't give you guys enough detail", then they go on to do what they should have done in the first place, which is to give a complete description of the problem and what they did already to address it. Instead, we play dentist, yanking answers out of them like they were teeth, reluctant to be pulled. And, yeah, if you make me BEAT the details of YOUR problem out of you, you'd damn well better have a BIG 'thank you' waiting when I answer it correctly! On the other hand, if you make it easy for me to look smart (like you tell me enough so I can just look in the Help files), no 'thank you' required, 'cuz I'll just tell you how you coulda done it yourself. (Who'd expect a 'thank you' for making someone look foolish and ignorant and inept and lazy and.... !?!) And, then, how do we politely, diplomatically tell people, who pose some "problem" to us, that what they're trying to do is nuts and violates every ISO/ASME rule known. Sheesh, the help biz!

David Janes

 

Yes, they can say thanks but when the get information (right now for me).

So : Thanks, it works fine.

 

Perhaps you meant to write 7.93 in the first place? IOW you wanted to
round the value to the nearest 2 decimal places, not truncate it.

 

Yes,Yes, You're right.
My question was very stupidly exposed (I've just seen that).

As you said, I wanted to round the value (and get 7.93).
The solution that uses [.2] is what I was looking for.

Formtunately, My question was wrong but the response I get was right...

Thanks.

"graminator" <> a écrit dans le message de ...

Perhaps you meant to write 7.93 in the first place? IOW you wanted to
round the value to the nearest 2 decimal places, not truncate it.