Jump to content

Dimensioning in 3d

Recommended Posts

From what I can tell, nobody has ever shown dimensions on a isometric view. Ever... Somebody please prove me wrong! I like a lot of things about the useability of VW so far, but am perplexed as to how I can justify converting our orthangonal designs into 3d if I can't get over this dimensioning blip. I am in machine design...if i can't show dimensions in 3d, that's a dealbreaker!

When dimensioning a view other than orthanganol, I get a usless "2d" dimension.

While I'm at it, I'll mention that the combination of grouping and classes is a blunder as I see it. Consider two objects, one in class A, another in class B, both grouped - the grouping is in class C. Now try and turn your classes on and off, and watch the usefulness of classes be nullified... This can be gotten over with proper implemabtation - as in don't group things, or keep everything in a group as the same class - but in real life i have many designs or imports of components that are grouped.

I'm hoping that someone can show me how to get over theses things, especially 3d dimensioning, but am fearing this post will be nothing more than a rant...

Link to comment

There are conceptual difficulties in this. As long as there is no associative, "view-conscious" 3D dimensioning, each view has to be dimensioned separately. I seem to recall that Julian Carr of OzCAD has or had something for this.

Measuring 3D distances is not difficult with a simple (very simple!) script. The dimensioning lines are the problem.

Link to comment

I know its not ideal but one way round it is to maybe use SketchUp to dimension the 3D view of your object.

Export the model to SketchUp, do your required 3D view with dimensions then bring it back into VW, say as a pdf, which I understand you can do in VW latest versions.

Maybe use the 8 hour trial version of SketchUp Pro or the free version just to evaluate if this is possible or suits your needs.

Its not going to cost you anything other than some time experimenting.

As I said in my first line, not ideal but another possible workaround.

I'd love to see dimensioning in 3D capability in VW.


Link to comment

Thanks all for your help. I have tried the layer linking method, and found it to be too cumbersome so far. For example a dimesnsion in the X-Y plane comes through nicely, but when I want a vertical dimension, it needs to be rotated and fiddled with. Also, adding in more dimensions seems to require a new layer each time even if I want it on a plane I already have set in place. In any case, far from as easy as it could be (Vectorworks programmers, do you read these boards??). I also couldn't get the dimensions to show up in a viewport, though I'm sure that is some oversight of mine.

Perhaps I'll give some of these 3rd party solutions a try.

As far as grouping in concerned, does anyone know why a group itself has a class attribute? I would find groups much easier and intuitive if they didn't mask my classes as I turn them on and off as I like to do while drafting.

Thanks for your help, and really, are any of the programmers on this board??

Link to comment

With a little more experience, perhaps you'll find the class designations even more useful. When I create a group (or Symbol) that needs to have a truly transparanet Class assignment, I make sure it's set to None. Since this class (by office standard) is always on (every layer view and every viewport), the "enclosed" classes are easily controlled.

Good luck,

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...