Jump to content

trashcan

Member
  • Posts

    546
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by trashcan

  1. I have viewports on two different sheets. I want to copy and paste the position of those viewports from one sheet to another. Could have sworn this could be done with the eyedropper tool! Normally, I would just copy and paste in place, but the viewports have a lot of notes that I don't want to lose. Any ideas? 

     

    Obviously I can set the anchor point and copy and paste X and Y values separately, but there must be a faster way! 

  2. Bunch of viewports, bunch of sheets. 

     

    If I update the record in an on object that only appears in one viewport, why is it that all viewports are then out of date? Is there a way to see what changed in a viewport that is forcing it to need to update it? That way I can audit things so I don't have to update all constantly. 

  3. (just wanted to say I've been out of the loop on this thread because of a variety of things, mainly that I've been drawing this stuff manually and it works for me for now though I really really want to take the time to learn both of the tools in great detail. I love that this thread is still going and there are so many contributors!)

     

    Also @Frank Brault did any of these features make it into VWX 2022??

  4. @Pat Stanfordwhat's weird about the solid section thing is that I used that same technique for the lens. So we know it works sometimes

    Open GL:

    image.thumb.png.c779e182efc6152a96ee69ef052bf535.png

    Wireframe:

    image.thumb.png.37ded2c7499ae280811296585f880738.png

     

    Went back to the foot where that little guy doesn't show in wireframe. Maybe it has something to do with scale? Scaling up it still doesn't show up in wireframe and it isn't clickable. Maybe it has to do with how I made the solid section?

    image.thumb.png.7e803d0d5a3867ba148d663c69598135.png

    Hmmm nothing weird there. So I redid it:

    image.thumb.png.2204248546163797a30fc1aa34878706.png

    It worked! Weird...

     

    I also tried your sweep method and of course that worked perfectly, too:

    image.thumb.png.50fba47ac4efce52308f2357deb57504.png

     

    Weird, thanks for the help

     

     

  5. I have a work-around for this. I think it's a z-fighting issue. The work around I use I don't love because it changes the math for projector calculations and that isn't ideal. I'd love to see if there's another way to do this. For those with similar issues here's a work-around that I employ. 

     

    Here's my projector study in an isometric view:

    image.thumb.png.7eaef3324281013b4fee28887696679f.png

    Here's what it looks like straight on:

    image.thumb.png.a87443fee7a5686a01e12506ff8a9a45.png

     

    Hey where'd my lines go at the top and bottom of the projection field!? Where's the blend?! It should look like this (with the target blue and grey still visible):

    image.thumb.png.d6439d3c87b5defe58fca8ef743b6c7c.png

     

    The only way I know to fix this is to nudge the projectors back by 1/64" or the wall forward by the same. This will eliminate Z-fighting, but my math will now be off by 1/64. No sweat off my back, you say? I'm trying to keep things precise! 

     

    Here's the end result, with the nudge:

    image.thumb.png.4839f18dc4c43c2ab61bc4aee8b67da2.png

     

    Any cleaner solves out there? This is confusing to me because the lines draw properly in an iso view but not straight on. 

  6. Another question.

     

    I have created the feet for the projector:

    image.thumb.png.7f1e99eeb529c48e01928e8a775189c5.png

     

    To create that rounded edge at the bottom of the foot, I created a sphere and used the split tool to use only the portion of the sphere that I needed for the foot. What remained was a Solid Section. Later, I needed to snap something to the bottom of the foot and I wasn't able to get any smart points. Usually when this happens, I switch to wireframe, but oddly that rounded portion doesn't show up! I tried converting the solid section to a generic solid and a nurbs and still had the problem. Any ideas?

    image.thumb.png.20a7427878972d03dea8f1425fe5aabe.png

  7. @Pat Stanford coming in hot for the win to help me figure this out. 

     

    Changing the direction yielded this result:

    image.thumb.png.caefb01eadc5599e1fe162767d25341e.png

     

    The smaller polyline object has 13 vertices. The bigger poly line has 51. Hmmm. I recreated the object that had too many vertices and it only had 13. When I did it that way, here were my results:

    image.png.ebbe083eca7b4379efb95e7ddc4a3718.png

    Whatever method I used to create that bigger poly (don't remember) must be the culprit. 

     

    @Art V I have not used loft solid before (or don't remember using it). Do you have any recommendations on where / how to get started? 

  8. I'm slowly plugging away at this model "in all my free time"

     

    And I got stuck:

     

    I have two shapes that I need to do a multiple extrude with a depth of .291"

    image.thumb.png.7bb5deb03881bb3bf968f455963998b1.png

     

    It gets super nasty if I do a multiple extrude:

    image.thumb.png.078c241a9595fe9a3602522d0716476e.png

     

    If I just the bigger rectangle and do a flat extrude at .291", and then use Deform-->Taper Solid, I get close to what I want but not exactly right:

    image.thumb.png.70a3ff86900e3b35f3b1975ab0cbe877.png

    Close enough for jazz! But how do I do it right, I wonder? 

     

  9. @Boh tracing is a little tough for me to be honest. I come from Creative Cloud world where line tools and bezier and polygons are a bit more intuitive and I've found it very difficult to adapt to the VWX Polyline tool (especially dealing with curves). But that's a great suggestion! 

     

    @bcd that's also a good call!

  10. I've done this a few times now and I'm looking for best practices / a faster solve. 

     

    I got this DXF from the manufacturer:

    image.thumb.png.60d35d5c4d9f65b7b0dbaeacce583b79.png

     

    I then go through and delete all the junk I don't care about:

    image.thumb.png.49a4dee270b6251ccfd5cda7985b1c3e.png

     

    I then do that in a fine tuned way trying to delete all the artifact junk from the DXF:

    image.thumb.png.12c16dbeacd3a944d3e8dc37b3fd6135.png

     

    Then I pick a surface as my base extrude and use the command "Combine Into Surface" and extrude it to the depth that I want:

    image.thumb.png.daed1df856ca693f4cdf7c48d9d24436.png

     

    Then I rinse and repeat for all the other blocks and then combine at the end. Is there a faster / smarter way to do this? 

     

    • Like 2
  11. Deep thread but more questions. I have a ton of poly-lines that I want to connect. It's dozens of lines and I want to think about best practices. I'm trying to create a shape from a DXF so I can extrude it. Not all the end points are connected end-to-end (there are some gaps). 

    image.png.6b005b53ac645b6945a3aaf6c61e5a69.png

     

    Compose results with:

    image.thumb.png.579e06af19561b65ce78ffbe80a0e834.png

     

    There are now fewer line segments so I could use connect / combine from here, but it's still slow going. And I have all this noise to contend with:

    image.thumb.png.838ddcc4cb252bb63cb03a16898476ad.png

     

    What's the best way to do this? 

     

     

     

  12. So I have some additional non-viewport images on my Sheet Layer. I've put a Drawing Label with each of them and assigned a number. I've then grouped them. However, when I create a standard Viewport with a Drawing Label, it doesn't see the numbers I've used for my "manual" images. Is there a better practice than this? I could, of course, put the images in my design layer, class them appropriately and then use standard viewports but that seems like a whole lot of unnecessary work. Ideas?

  13. I have a custom text block that I use for notes and I'd love to make it a symbol. 

    image.png.08c65148beaf5705f3d7e1d780b688bc.png

    When I make it a symbol, all the text fields disappear:

    image.png.2794bd9d72eae0371c8e398f49313f5f.png

    image.png.44e546b89badfc082398a3eb7927a870.png

    What am I doing wrong here? 

     

    (I may link these text areas to individual records so that I can customize text later, but for now I just want this whole thing as a symbol in my RM so I can reuse it as necessary). Maybe a symbol isn't exactly what I want? I just want to be able to reuse this element freely and want to make it more streamlined than copy and pasting from my template document. 

     

     

  14. @Dave DonleyI do not have any crop on any of these viewports. The work around here is to ADD a crop that is bigger than your viewport. Then the lines appear. It would seem to me that the auto viewport (no crop) should take this into account and draw all the lines within a viewport (including edge pixels). 

     

    Dave can you separate this post between Tobias' request (which I agree with!) and the actual bug I've reported here? I don't know why they are both in this post! 

×
×
  • Create New...