Codes

[Anonymous]

Where in the world do you control colors for
assemblies v. sub-assemblies. Do the codes control both? Where are these codes
controlled? Why is the dialogue box for sub-assembly properties is a non
functioning modifier, meaning inability to change whatever the he(l)(l) these
codes define? Why oh why do I deal with this bull...

[Anonymous]

Change the colors by changing the properties (either the layer or the color)
of the Links, Markers, & Shapes in the Settings->General->Multipurpose
Styles.

If you place a Subassembly in the drawing without attaching it to an
Assembly, then you can assign a Code Set Style for that Sub.

When you attach the Subassembly to an Assembly, then the Code Set Style
assigned to the Assembly will control ALL subassemblies attached. This is
why it says, in the Subassembly properties, "Code Set Style (from assembly)"

When you create your corridor(s) you can assign a different Code Set Style
for the Corridor, this will override the one specified for the Assembly.

When you create Cross Sections that include the Corridor, you can again
assign a different Code Set Style for a different look.

In addition, each of the Link, Marker, Shape styles have different settings
for how they display in Plan, Model & Section.

Yes, there are a lot of different things that can be set. But this is all so
the we, as users, can create our drawings with just about whatever look we
want.

HTH,
Jeff



"Metcalf" wrote in message
news:6334368@discussion.autodesk.com...
> Where in the world do you control colors for assemblies v. sub-assemblies.
> Do the codes control both? Where are these codes controlled? Why is the
> dialogue box for sub-assembly properties is a non functioning modifier,
> meaning inability to change whatever the he(l)(l) these codes define? Why
> oh why do I deal with this bull...

[Anonymous]

thanks for the reply but with all due respect we certainly will have to
agree to disagree on "whatever look we want".

"Jeff Mishler" wrote in message
news:6334430@discussion.autodesk.com...
Change the colors by changing the properties (either the layer or the color)
of the Links, Markers, & Shapes in the Settings->General->Multipurpose
Styles.

If you place a Subassembly in the drawing without attaching it to an
Assembly, then you can assign a Code Set Style for that Sub.

When you attach the Subassembly to an Assembly, then the Code Set Style
assigned to the Assembly will control ALL subassemblies attached. This is
why it says, in the Subassembly properties, "Code Set Style (from assembly)"

When you create your corridor(s) you can assign a different Code Set Style
for the Corridor, this will override the one specified for the Assembly.

When you create Cross Sections that include the Corridor, you can again
assign a different Code Set Style for a different look.

In addition, each of the Link, Marker, Shape styles have different settings
for how they display in Plan, Model & Section.

Yes, there are a lot of different things that can be set. But this is all so
the we, as users, can create our drawings with just about whatever look we
want.

HTH,
Jeff



"Metcalf" wrote in message
news:6334368@discussion.autodesk.com...
> Where in the world do you control colors for assemblies v. sub-assemblies.
> Do the codes control both? Where are these codes controlled? Why is the
> dialogue box for sub-assembly properties is a non functioning modifier,
> meaning inability to change whatever the he(l)(l) these codes define? Why
> oh why do I deal with this bull...

[Anonymous]

[...thanks for the reply but with all due respect we certainly will have to
> agree to disagree on "whatever look we want"...]

So you can't get your sections to look the way you want? Why not attach an
image of what you want and a DWG with some data. Let's see if we can get
them to look right. It sounds like you don't have a ton of experience with
code set styles. I'm betting we can get you very close if not perfect.

--
Matt Kolberg
Global CADD Systems - A division of Cansel

[Anonymous]

Helloooo Matt 🙂

This will probably open up a can of worms?

You probably could get very close to perfect but what most engineers or
technicians don't seem to understand is that by spending another $5k on
making something look good may in fact cost the client $50k by simply
waiting for perfection that is not necessary. Yes I have very little
experience with the new wave of C3D but tons of experience as the dinosaur
LDD user and now as a PowerCivil user. I can still design, draw, estimate
and construct in less time than it will take me to become a "button monkey"
user that seems to be the case with C3D (imho). Don't get me wrong, I am an
engineer who started as a draftsmen, became a technician and later as a
licensed engineer. Why did I become educated and licensed? I got tired of
waiting on engineers/technicians to give me "close/perfect" lines on paper
when they had no clue how to put together those lines in the field or simply
could not tell the difference between a track hoe v. backhoe.

The time that it took me to ask, read and reply to this post I was able to
draft up simple sections using old fashioned software drafting tools
(offset, lines, circles), prepare a plan and profile using old fashioned
takeoffs with a scale from prints, write up a letter and delivered to the
county on time so that my client can begin digging tomorrow for under $800
and now have beer time to reply to this post. Why? If it did not happen then
it would have cost the client $54,000 per month in down time. So here I am
opening up a can of worms to simply state that what we do is not ROCKET
SCIENCE yet somehow we believe that very close to perfect on paper using
rocket science software is the key to a better product in the field.

I don't think so...

So, attached you will find a very simple section/assembly that all I wanted
to do was generate simple cross sections from alignment, profile, generate a
plan and use the assembly as an exhibit for a typical section. To simply
change colors or what was showing and not showing, what layers had color,
what layers controlled color was a pain in the elephants butt! I have never
seen so many section/assembly codes for points, shapes and links of
unimaginable magnitude there must be over 50 codes? If we believe that this
makes it more efficient and productive then we are baffling our clients with
BS and threw out how we can impress our clients with brilliance.

Respectfully
Zdenko Novkovic

"Matt Kolberg" wrote in message
news:6334851@discussion.autodesk.com...
[...thanks for the reply but with all due respect we certainly will have to
> agree to disagree on "whatever look we want"...]

So you can't get your sections to look the way you want? Why not attach an
image of what you want and a DWG with some data. Let's see if we can get
them to look right. It sounds like you don't have a ton of experience with
code set styles. I'm betting we can get you very close if not perfect.

--
Matt Kolberg
Global CADD Systems - A division of Cansel

[Anonymous]

Fine.

Sounds like you made up your mind before you posted your questions anyway.
Jeff answered your questions.

I see this was a post to vent and not get actual solutions. That's ok.

--
Matt Kolberg
Global CADD Systems - A division of Cansel