Delmer

The room name tag ordinarily maintains output text size for me, meaning it alters in relative size with reference to the drawing. Quite often with these text PIOs you have to make some modification to them so they re-read their referenced scale and adjust accordingly. As far as I know, their text size is controlled solely in their OIP. Plain old text on the other hand can either scale (change font size) or not, depending on what you have checked in the layer scale dialogue box.

When you want to turn a fill on in, say, a drawing label, unless your font is excessively small, parts of its bounding box will cover the circle or whatever else it finds itself in. I wouldn't mind the fill behind the text of the drawing label coming on, but would rather just have the fill on in the circle and not the item # or sheet #. As it is, if I need a fill for these items I once agin have to explode them or group them with a solid box.

Techno, make up something that has a possibility of being valid but isn't and ask your vendor about just for fun.

bonus, it is very likely someone does know the real solution, but I have to admit it has eluded me as well. Since VW likes to center the drawing in the workspace, here is what I have done; draw a bounding box in the AutoCAD file making sure there are no errant items outside it. Insert this box into any AutoCAD files that need to be aligned. VW will center imports on these bounding parameters. You can use the same going in the reverse direction, though I have found much greater success with exported VW files maintaining alignment in AutoCAD without rigging it.

re. part B, shift arrow up/down selects multiple layers on my PC.

Larry, -side note- Look in the fill portion of the attribute pallet under image.

For me it wasn't too big a deal, at least this time. The file still opened, there were maybe 4 objects I had created and saved since the last automatic backup. I copied these, put them in the autoarchived file and went from there. I had to rearrange the pallets but it didn't seem to do damage to the workspace itself. This was after, what, about two weeks of clean use. Of course it would be great to see it eliminated, but with so many factors; drivers, OS, add-ons, customizations, disc size/space, solar bodies, and on and on, I'll live with this.

Also, and this would add to my original post, I would like to be able to turn many fills off in 2D but still have them render in 3D. Even with textures, the fill still has to be turned on in both before it will render. [ 04-24-2005, 11:30 PM: Message edited by: Delmer ]

Textures provide many advantages, and you are right Travis, using them does allow much more flexibility than fills or hatches. This seems to be a very common practice at vw/mcd; to provide new tools with greater functionality rather than improve the old ones, and I guess I can live with that. Now I want a compilation of texture files in simple colors and shades of grey so I don't have to make and import my own.

Also, and this too is just personal preference or habit, I actually almost never annotate in 3D. For me, the things I want to show in 3D are self-evident. When I get to needing dims and notes I like to use the convert copy to lines and go from there.

One license operating at any given time. You can make backups and load it on other computers.

Grant, here's a little quirk I discovered: If you set an iso view via the viewport info on the OIP your design layer text and dimensions disappear. Viewport annotations remain. NONE however export. If you edit the viewport, use the flyover tool to set your view, the design layer dims will stay and rotate but design layer text disappears. Viewport annotations remain. ALL export, including the design layer text that is no longer visible in the viewport. If you want an Iso, instead of going from top plan to the iso in the OIP, first rotate with the flyover tool. After that you can use the OIP to set it to iso and the dims will remain and export. Wacked!

Just had my first meltdown today since running the fix. Crashed while undoing a layer change. I notice the file grew by about 1.4 meg and my pallets were strewn around like what you would expect when you come home to the trailer after leaving your rottweiler inside over the weekend.

You do need to have a fill in the object -just in case.

I don't get that anymore, but I think in version 9 I found that if I held the shift key to constrain while stretching, and then drug the cursor just slightly to the insulation side of the node, it would keep it from flipping.

I've found and asked about this in a few related threads, but I guess I'm not satisfied yet. I am a great fan of viewports, they're the best thing since perspectives, but from what I've experienced and from what I've read here so far I can't see the benefits of annotating in them and would like to ask for further input. There seem to be a number of people who do it, and many seem very satisfied with it. I've gone through Katies wonderful extollation of the various capabilities they have, but even there she never states any reason why it would be better to annotate, she even mentions that dmensions will not update with the drawing. This along with the fact that every time any adjustment is made in a drawing layer you have to go to a sheet and edit a viewport leaves me wondering why, so: How does annotating in viewports provide advantage over placing text, dimensions and other annotations in separate classes or layers? - I am honestly not looking for a poll, or an arguement, just info.

If you started out with a polyline, you can switch your 2D conversion res to low before changing it to a polygon, that will help a great deal. In the industry series there is a "Filter 3D Polys" command which does exactly what you want, but I don't know of a 2D equivalent. In many cases it would be faster to convert to 3D, filter, and convert back to 2D than to delete vertices.

As with many other items, it would be nice if you could set particular script pallets with a preference rather than reinserting and locating them in any new or old drawings. Just like a resource browser or working plane pallet. Perhaps a check box to have them open in all files or just specific ones.

Guess we only partially answered it huh?. As far as setting up the drawing elements, I lean toward the modelview approach because of my preference of notating in a drawing layer. You can set and maintain views in viewports, but that almost dictates that you note them up there, and, well, I've given my $0.02 about that.

Jonathan, Though it appears that plan dimensions of objects are the only ones that maintain rotation with the object, wouldn't it be as pertinent or more so to have the dims in the drawing layer for 3D views as it would be with any 2d view? If you're dimensioning a nonhorizontal in iso wouldn't you have to fudge it in either case? Please elaborate as to why it is a better place to have them in the viewport?

"When offsetting you want to reselect the original or something different to offset depress the spacebar and keep it down set the select tool then select the original object or a different one let go of the spacebar and you are back in offset mode." -B.Balemi

The Viewports seem to be very irregular in this respect, their capacity not fully resolved I would think. Dims, 2D items and parts of PIOs such as drawing labels will rotate with the model when viewed in 3D (though not perspective), but plain old text with nothing to anchor it, disappears. Though I've come to take advantage of the fact that 2D items don't rotate in 3D, I've always wondered why.

If one was unaware or unaffected by the various viewport annotation issues brought up in this forum, I still don't really see the advantage of using them. I think because I was happy with my old method of putting notes in their own classes I just stuck with it. Since I haven't played with it much let me know if I'm just unaware, but every time you want to shift, adjust, flip anything in your design your annotations have to be adjusted separately? I'm willing to be enlightened but right now still don't see the benefit of annotating within viewports.

You could also have things like a very nicely detailed window section and link it like a hybrid to a particular window in plan, to be called upon not when switching to a 3D view, but when switching to a section view. OK, time to stop dreaming and get back to work. Its not going to get done by itself.

OK, maybe not for version 12, but it shouldn't be too long till we can have say, a framework for a section still live with the 3D model and all the 2D details such as cut wood/steel, insulation etc, associated to the 3D framework like dimensions are associated to the objects you snap them to. Adjusting a relatively simple model will give the option of adjusting all the complex 2D items associated with it. Can't be all that far off can it?