michaelk

What is your design layer scale and what is your default font size? If the layer scale is 1:1 and the default font size is 6, they may be there, but just very very very small. hth michaelk

Islandmon Much more elegant way of creating threads! I still wish there was a way to get the sweep to do X revolutions and then progressively decrease the radius for Y revolutions. Thanks for digging into the archives. I always enjoy looking at your stuff. michaelk

This might work for you... Set up a new sheet layer. Paper size = letter. Set the horizontal and vertical number of sheets to something that gives you enough pages. Get the viewport looking good in your large format drawings. Select the VPs. Duplicate them. Move them to the new sheet layer. Change the scale so they'll fit. Position them on pages. Both the large and small scale VPs will update from the design layers, of course. But if you change the annotations in one you'll have to duplicate and move the VP to keep both of them the same. hth michaelk

I gave up on that super position label thingy. You've found out why. The graphics are not editable. Often "Number of Req'd Circuits" hangs out the left side of the box, the cut size often encroaches into the color field, and the headers (Instrument Summary, Color Summary, and Circuit Info) sink below the bottom of their cells. I've found the best way to get predictable results is this: Set layer scale to 1/2" (you can use different scales, but you will need to adjust the font size accordingly) Set font size to somewhere between 9 & 12. (Depends on the default font) Usually smaller is better. Ariel 9pt works for me. In 1/4" scale Archie 9pt works. Go figure. Create the position. That usually gets all the data inside the container. Once the position is created changing the font will change the font for all the fields, but changing the size only seems to affect the position name, not any of the other fields. The instrument summary and the color summary work the way you would expect. But the circuit info is a little trickier: The "Number of Req'd Circuits" function is looking for data in the Circuit Number field. It seems to take the total number of instruments and subtract the number of duplicates in the circuit number field of the instruments. It appears to ignore the Circuit Name field. (I don't know that for sure, just guessing from its behavior). So if you don't have any circuit number data, the number of req'd circuits will be equal to the total number of instruments. If my understanding is correct, it ignores the dimmer field. So if you have a dimmer per circuit house then you would have to duplicate the dimmer data into the circuit number field. And if you have a road rack, then you can't use the circuit name field for the multi and the circuit number for the circuit and still have the position summary be correct. Because every position will have circuit 1-6 occur several times. To get the summary to be correct, all the circuit data will have to go in the circuit number field. And for the quantity of TwoFers, it counts the number of TwoFer objects created with the Ganging Tool. Just having the same circuit number appear twice doesn't work. To get the position summary to update you have to either select it and Modify>Refresh Instruments or select it and "bump it" (Shift Right Arrow then Shift Left Arrow) to force a redraw Auto Update doesn't seem to be an option. hth michaelk

I've never seen that before w/ instrument symbols. It does happen on regular hybrid symbols w/ snap to object turned on. But not on instrument symbols, even when inserted as symbols. I was hoping that putting the symbol inside a group and applying a drawing rotation (like in your example) would make it appear, but it didn't. Which makes me suspect the symbol... Is it a "stock" VW 2009 symbol? Does it happen w/ symbols not in a group? Was that symbol inserted as a symbol or as an instrument (ie. which insertion tool)? Do you have an LLM applied to the symbol? Could you post a screen shot of the problem w/ the OIP open?

The end of the thread cut bugs me... This is the same idea: 1 extrude along path + a sweep (10 revolutions @ .125 pitch) + a sweep w/ the same profile & pitch, but only 1/2 revolution. After a solid subtraction like the last one, position the 1/2 sweep at the hard end of the thread cut. Then decrease the radius of the 1/2 sweep and reposition until the thread doesn't have a "hard end". Subtract solid. There must be a more elegant solution that I'm not seeing...

Not an unreasonable place to look! Might be a good wish list item. michaelk

After the callout has been placed the marker is controlled by the attributes palette. Before the callout is placed, you can choose the marker in callout preferences. hth michaelk

Arrrggg... Another of my many, many, many daily mistakes if forgetting the attachments....

Keep an eye on these 3 buttons when you are using the 2D selection tool The first button lets you move objects, but not resize them. The second button lets you move or resize objects. The third button lets you resize multiple objects at once. By default the 'U' key cycles between them. That could be how you unknowingly set it to that mode. hth michaelk

You're quite welcome. It's one of the many, many, many mistakes I make often enough to recognize. michaelk

I should have started with, that's what fixed it on my machine.... MK

It's possible your 2D Selection tool is in "Disable Interactive Scaling Mode". Try hitting the Escape key, then the X key, then the U key. (unless you've changed the default keyboard shortcuts!) If that's the problem, you should now be able to edit 2D objects. hth michaelk

Instead of using a color, try using a texture w/ a white color and a constant reflectivity. hth michaelk

I'll attach an example. There were some changes in the solid modeling engine from 2008 to 2010, so I'm not sure what it will look like when you open it... Here's what I did to make the attached object. Extrude along path to create a pipe w/ the correct ID and OD. -Draw a triangle w/ part of one point where it looks like the threads should go... -Insert 2D locus along center line of pipe -Sweep (set sweep angle to 10*360? [however many rotations you need] and set pitch to whatever is really is - I used .125" which is probably really coarse - and I'm sure I made the triangle too big!) Subtract solids. hope this export works... michaelk

Works like a charm, Pat! If you had wanted it to rotate the other way, would you have used HRotate(H2, X1, Y1, -90); or HRotate(H2, X1, Y1, 270); or are they the same thing? Thanks again! MK

:grin: Honestly - I wasn't trying to hint! Cookie, this is your lucky day! Thanks, Pat MK

Your wish is granted! In the OIP, switch to polar coordinates. It's the lower of the two buttons. Looks like a circle with a dot in the middle. (Below the little grid, which is for cartesian coordinates.) hth

There is probably a simple vectorscript way to go through all the instruments and add +90? to each instrument. But you wouldn't want to use my attempt at it!

Ahhh, that makes sense. I guess the quickest solution is to select all the instruments with the same rotation, ie all the units facing south on the page, click into the rotation field on the OIP and add "+90" behind the value that is there. I don't remember if 2008 has a custom select tool that will let you do that... Then you will have to be careful to not select any of the same units twice, thereby rotating them 180 degrees.... Perhaps this will work: -Select all the units facing "south" It's important the they have the same rotation in the OIP -Click into the rotation field, add +90 behind the value that is there -While they are still selected, move them into a temporary layer so they won't get selected again. -When you run out of lights to rotate, move all the units back from the temporary layer. hth

Yeah.. I probably could have made it work in fewer steps. Once you have it created, you can duplicate it and change the layer options in the duplicate. For example, if you create the reference for the first floor, you can duplicate the viewport and in the duplicate set the first floor layer to invisible and the second floor layer to visible. No need to go through the 11 steps again! michaelk PS. Has anyone been able to do an old style Resource reference in 2010? I can't get it to work.

No need to start in the Resource Browser. Just got the View menu and select Create Viewport...

Do you mean interior pipe thread? I'm not sure how real world pipe threads work, but it is possible to model something close using a solid subtraction... michaelk

Tricky to answer w/o knowing your vintage and version of VW... But, assuming you have 2010 Architect.... Try this in a new drawing so you can see how it works. 1. View>Create Viewport... 2. In the Create on Layer pulldown choose New Design Layer 3. Name the new layer if you want, and click OK 4. If you had box checked for it and the Edit Design Layers dialog box opens, click OK 5. Click on Select Source... 6. In the Select Viewport Source dialog box, select External Document. 7. Select New Reference 8. Click Choose>Navigate to the source document> click Open 9. Back at the Select Viewport Source dialog box click OK 10. In the Create Viewport Dialog box you can choose the layer and class visibility now or just click OK and deal with it later. 11. The drawing will appear on the new design layer in a viewport. Select it and you will notice that you have control over the layer and class visibility from the OIP of the viewport. The scale, render mode, and view of the referenced drawing is controlled by the scale, render and view setting for the design layer it lives in. The old style resource referencing looks like it is still an option, but I haven't been able to make it work. But it sounds like for your case you want to reference the geometry and not the resources. hth michaelk

Two ways: Right click the symbol in the Resource Browser. Choose 2D. Select All. Modify>Rotate>Rotate 90?......>Exit Symbol. If the symbol is also in 3D do the same for the 3D part. OR Select all of the instrument symbols in the drawing and enter 90 (or -90) in the rotation field of the OIP. hth michaelk