AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006 DWG Format

[#1]

I have used 'cal in the offset command to offset distances such as 4.25/2 in the past with no problems but now in autocad mech. 2006 the answer 2.125 calculates but does not go into <2.125> for the offset value. Any idea why not?

[#2]

robert_chrismer wrote:
> I have used 'cal in the offset command to offset distances such as 4.25/2 in the past with no problems but now in autocad mech. 2006 the answer 2.125 calculates but does not go into <2.125> for the offset value. Any idea why not?
>
You said "calculates but does not go into <2.125>! Not sure how it does
but doesn't - try putting your computation inside parens, i.e., (4.25/2)

[#3]

>now in autocad mech
Wrong forum
http://discussion.autodesk.com/adskcsp/index2.jspa?categoryID=14&discommunity=mfg

What happens if you use _offset instead?

[#4]

I often do the same thing you're doing for offset distances but I don't use
CAL. 4.25/2 for me would be 425/200. Since AutoCAD won't tolerate decimals
in fractions I simply add zeros where appropriate to make up for the decimal
places that I remove. I find this quicker than using CAL. Give it a try.

Josh

wrote in message news:5512771@discussion.autodesk.com...
I have used 'cal in the offset command to offset distances such as 4.25/2 in
the past with no problems but now in autocad mech. 2006 the answer 2.125
calculates but does not go into <2.125> for the offset value. Any idea why
not?

[#5]

Josh wrote:
> I often do the same thing you're doing for offset distances but I don't use
> CAL. 4.25/2 for me would be 425/200. Since AutoCAD won't tolerate decimals
> in fractions I simply add zeros where appropriate to make up for the decimal
> places that I remove. I find this quicker than using CAL. Give it a try.
>
> Josh
>
> wrote in message news:5512771@discussion.autodesk.com...
> I have used 'cal in the offset command to offset distances such as 4.25/2 in
> the past with no problems but now in autocad mech. 2006 the answer 2.125
> calculates but does not go into <2.125> for the offset value. Any idea why
> not?
>
He was using the transparent command 'cal in the middle of offset
command and he needed only 2.125 - not 212.5. Works quite well - most of
the time.

[#6]

The problem is the command offset in AutoCAD Mechanical actually does a command amoffset.

[#7]

Good point. However, 'Cal should work. It works on my computer. Even
without parenthesis. If 'CAL doesn't work, he can use lisp.

Command: o OFFSET
Current settings: Erase source=No Layer=Source OFFSETGAPTYPE=0
Specify offset distance or [Through/Erase/Layer] <0.3333>: (* 4 2)
8

By the way, I sure like the Erase and Layer options here.

--
Bill DeShawn
bdeshawn@nospamsterling.net
http://my.sterling.net/~bdeshawn
(website link works now)

"Josh" wrote in message
news:5512966@discussion.autodesk.com...
I often do the same thing you're doing for offset distances but I don't use
CAL. 4.25/2 for me would be 425/200. Since AutoCAD won't tolerate decimals
in fractions I simply add zeros where appropriate to make up for the decimal
places that I remove. I find this quicker than using CAL. Give it a try.

Josh

wrote in message news:5512771@discussion.autodesk.com...
I have used 'cal in the offset command to offset distances such as 4.25/2 in
the past with no problems but now in autocad mech. 2006 the answer 2.125
calculates but does not go into <2.125> for the offset value. Any idea why
not?

[#8]

That being the case, he needs to use .OFFSET with a dot in front of the
command. The underscore is for International versions to use the English
version of the command.

--
Bill DeShawn
bdeshawn@nospamsterling.net
http://my.sterling.net/~bdeshawn
(website link works now)

wrote in message news:5513463@discussion.autodesk.com...
The problem is the command offset in AutoCAD Mechanical actually does a
command amoffset.

[#9]

thanks to the on-line help, I had enough clues to figure out the problem. I was using amoffset instead of the regular offset command. Regular offset will work with the 'cal to enter in a value into the . I changed the alias in the pgp file so that I access the regular old offset rather than the new and "improved" mechanical version. Life is good again.

[#10]

Riiiight...

First, I know he's using 'CAL. I know it's transparent. I can read.

Second, I offered him an option that isn't based in lisp and therefore will
work on amoffset...not that I even needed to know that from the OP.

Third, I'm not sure where you learned math but 425/200 does NOT equal 212.5.
Go ahead...get your calculator out and try it.

Thanks for playing!

> wrote in message news:5512771@discussion.autodesk.com...

He was using the transparent command 'cal in the middle of offset
command and he needed only 2.125 - not 212.5. Works quite well - most of
the time.