This is a YouTube video. I am unable to determine what this dimensions are as these are not touching with any border line of the part.
The R5 is likely the corner radius between the 10 dia and the larger radius. I have no idea what the 24mm refers to. Another odd style is that there are no extension lines running from the "20" dimen on the right. I assume they should run to the outer dimen near the 10.50 DIM.
The (R5) is indicating a 5mm internal radius where the arrow is pointing. Not all dimension lines will actually touch a drawing, sometimes they are offset, like in this situation. As for the 24mm dimension I'm not so sure unless the dimension lines are mis-aligned but should be indicating that the outer diameter of the turn-buckle ring should indeed be 24mm.
Dimensions are not necessary to touch but at least it must go closer enough to border line of the part to determine.
I believe that the R5 is referring to the radius pointed to below. Like Jeff, I have no idea what the other one indicates. And just as a friendly suggestion, you might want to find a Youtube video that was produced by someone that knew what they were doing. Judging by that drawing, who knows what else is wrong, or what bad techniques it might be teaching.
Not always Maha. This can be at the control of the person doing the drawing. Ones personal preferences. Sometimes on smaller parts with lots of detail you may not be able to have all of your dimension lines touching without creating confusion, so you offset them away to clear things up.
There are options to change the R5 dimension arrow direction - agreed with your other comments, somtingwong
I know in the YouTube videos there is no quality control. There are some videos going to features without fully defining the sketch. But anything is better than nothing.
As Dave Bear states, some things are in "control" of the originator. That does not make it correct and shows the need for following approved standards. I fully agree with Glenn Schroeder that this is not a good example to be using.
Anything that maintains confusion when viewed by several people has an inherent problem.
In the video it has different meaning. Please see this video.
As far as I can tell, the 24mm dimension still has no reference to the solid body.
** EDIT **
Just as a matter of interest, have you watched the whole video from beginning to end to see if that dimension made reference to something at any other stage?
(I doubt that it did)
I develop this model in a different way therefore I need diameter of the circle. I found it in a different way. It was 20 mm.
I agree with Dave, far as I can tell it was only used to do the extrude in the video and didn't need to be included in the drawing since it could have been 24 or any number up or a little lower to clear that diameter he didn't want to intersect during the cut. I don't have time to watch a 45 minute video so they may have used that sketch for reference later but I don't see a need in the screenshot you provided to need that dimension viewed.
If I stuck with initial stage, how can I proceed?
If you are using this for tutorial purposes to learn this software I would not proceed with this video. While there is definitely more than one way to do things in this software this seems to be going down a wrong road. If you have experienced people calling out it's flaws already you may not want to learn them. I would go through the tutorials included in Solidworks software. As I stated before I have not watched this video and it may not be that bad but if you are already lost I would start with something else.
Every error in the video I am trying to fix. Now I am at middle of the work and it is proceeding smoothly. In my view errors also can give a good learning experience.
Often times the best thing to happen is figure out what makes the error, how did it happen and why, that is the best experience.
It is only the errors that stump you that you may seek answers to Maha, if there are those sorts of errors within the video then perhaps there are bad techniques and practices that you may be learning that may not be the best path for you in the long run. Try to find tutorials that are done by sources that are at least professional or accredited in some way.
Agreed with all you guys about R5
For 24mm, I think there is a ref. sketch in the model and it's used for dim in 2D dwg but it's hidden
How to find tutorials that are done by sources that are at least professional or accredited in some way?
I prefer audiovisual aid. That is why I go to YouTube. I usually go through the comment section under the tutorials, if many comments are saying it is a good tutorial, I do the tutorial.
Have you done all of the tutorials that are built into your software already?
I went through some of the SW software tutorial. It gave tips only, it is good for the people those who already know the subject well. Some tutorials are very heavy for the beginners.
Did you find any tutorials that demonstrate how to develop models from scratch as like above tutorial?
See the screenshot below. Both of these sections will start you off with part models from scratch listing step by step how to complete them.
My guess is raw material diameter?
Although sqrt(22^2 + 20^2) = 29.73, so that still doesn't make sense to have 24.
Sketch a circle on your bottom right view and see--maybe the break edge radii are large enough?
Without this dimension I have modeled this in a different way. File is attached.
I do not know what is meant by "raw material diameter".
Retrieving data ...