ASSOCIATIVE DIMENSION ON 3D OBJECTS

[johnysadot]

Hi all,
Does the dimensions update with 3d geometry as 2d?

I tried with a square extruded and made dimensions on x, y and z axis, changing ucs to top and front. When I modified the solid with Extrude Faces the dimensions doesn't update. Is here something wrong? I need to change a variable?

Thanks in advance!

Johny D.

[Anonymous]

Quoting Shaan Hurley:

Here is a list of objects that do not currently support trans-spatial
associative dimensioning (what a mouthful). You will also get an alert
on
the command line when you attempt to dimension these objects from
paperspace.

* All dimension objects
* Leaders
* Tolerances
* Multi-lines
* Any min-inserted block
* Solids
* Traces
* 3D Faces
* Polygon mesh vertices
* Polyline mesh vertices
* Polyline meshes
* Polygon meshes3D Face records
* Viewports
* Hatches
* Mirrored or non-uniformly scaled block references
* Images

*******************************************************
DO NOT send technical requests to me via private e-mail
*******************************************************

Tracy Lincoln
Assistant Moderator, Autodesk Discussion Groups

Discussion Group Links:
Index: http://discussion.autodesk.com
Rules: http://discussion.autodesk.com/webx?groundrules

Product Support: http://support.autodesk.com/
Knowledge Base: http://support.autodesk.com/ViewAnswerworks.asp
Downloads: http://support.autodesk.com/Downloads.asp



johnysadot wrote:

> Hi all,
> Does the dimensions update with 3d geometry as 2d?
>
> I tried with a square extruded and made dimensions on x, y and z axis,
> changing ucs to top and front. When I modified the solid with Extrude
> Faces the dimensions doesn't update. Is here something wrong? I need
> to change a variable?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Johny D.

[galinav]

I didn't know that associative dimensioning doesn't working with solids and tried it, of course, without success.
But something strange happened after this: When I changed the UCS, and made a new dimension in the new UCS, all old dimensions were updated to the new UCS and became zero. How can I prevent this? It's awful, I had to make all my dimension again, starting from the beginning .
Regards: Galina

[Anonymous]

I don't think you are aware of situation where there is no alert when the
dimension is not associative. I just repeated the test to make certain I was
correct... if you dimension from a "legal" entity to part of a dimension
line, (i.e. snapping to what you think is the end of a line, but there is a
dimension in modelspace laying on the same line, so it is not visible) the
dimension will be created without warning. That dimension will show an
incorrect value, since it is not scaled for the viewport.

Still, even the situations where there is an alert... it occurs at the
command line where it will be VERY unusual for a user to notice.

DON"T USE PAPERSPACE DIMENSIONS, YOU ARE RISKING RELEASING INCORRECT
DRAWINGS!

Joe Dunfee

"Tracy W. Lincoln" wrote in message
news:3CBF07A8.167A3274@iroquois.com...
> Quoting Shaan Hurley:
>
> Here is a list of objects that do not currently support trans-spatial
> associative dimensioning (what a mouthful). You will also get an alert
> on
> the command line when you attempt to dimension these objects from
> paperspace.
>
> * All dimension objects
> * Leaders
> * Tolerances
> * Multi-lines
> * Any min-inserted block
> * Solids
> * Traces
> * 3D Faces
> * Polygon mesh vertices
> * Polyline mesh vertices
> * Polyline meshes
> * Polygon meshes3D Face records
> * Viewports
> * Hatches
> * Mirrored or non-uniformly scaled block references
> * Images
>
> *******************************************************
> DO NOT send technical requests to me via private e-mail
> *******************************************************
>
> Tracy Lincoln
> Assistant Moderator, Autodesk Discussion Groups
>
> Discussion Group Links:
> Index: http://discussion.autodesk.com
> Rules: http://discussion.autodesk.com/webx?groundrules
>
> Product Support: http://support.autodesk.com/
> Knowledge Base: http://support.autodesk.com/ViewAnswerworks.asp
> Downloads: http://support.autodesk.com/Downloads.asp
>
>
>
> johnysadot wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> > Does the dimensions update with 3d geometry as 2d?
> >
> > I tried with a square extruded and made dimensions on x, y and z axis,
> > changing ucs to top and front. When I modified the solid with Extrude
> > Faces the dimensions doesn't update. Is here something wrong? I need
> > to change a variable?
> >
> > Thanks in advance!
> >
> > Johny D.
>

[Anonymous]

Joe,

Could you please provide steps where the transpatial dimension is not
associated and there is no alert at the command line? I tried the case you
mention and the dimension was still associated. What would you suggest an
alert or other notification?

Sincerely,

Shaan Hurley
Autodesk, Inc.

"Joe D." wrote in message
news:3C916B5473386A1B89B290DB35399A36@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I don't think you are aware of situation where there is no alert when
the
> dimension is not associative.

[Anonymous]

I think there are several ways to recreate the problem since there are
many kinds of entities which aren't compatible with the transpacial
dimensions, but here is the method I most recently recreated...

- Draw a pbox in modelspace.
- While still in modelspace place a dimension internally to the box, so
that the dimension extension line overlaps the pbox.
- Switch to paperspace, create a paperspace dimension and deliberately snap
to the end of one of the dimension extension lines for one of the points.
The dimension placed gives the paperspace length, and there is no warning
message of any kind.

For creating a warning, whatever it is, it must absolutely grab the users
attention. Probably a warning box popping up is the best choice. No one
ever wants to create a dimension that shows the wrong value, so it should be
difficult to do so.

Even if you have memorized the list of problem entities, the only way to
discern if the object is an acceptable entity to dimension, is to examine
the objects properties first to compare it to your list of problem
entities.... not exactly a fluid workflow. More likely, the user will know
nothing about your problem entity list and will dimension them, thinking the
transpacial dimensions will work... they are going to be fooled and
potentially release a drawing with bad dimensions. In the case of
dimensioning things like 3-D faces there will be a warning, but the warning
message is on the command line, where it will probably not be noticed.

In our case, a warning box won't make transpacial dimensions usable. The
majority of the entities in our drawings are on the list of entities that
the transpacial dimensions don't like. So, I can't think of an easy fix for
that.

But, just knowing that warning is there will make the program more trust
worthy. Printing out bad data is VERY TROUBLESOME! One thing which
Autodesk should be vigilant to guard against.


Joe Dunfee


"Shaan Hurley" wrote in message
news:CF105FA5045B7871784E4A57AA06D338@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Joe,
>
> Could you please provide steps where the transpatial dimension is not
> associated and there is no alert at the command line? I tried the case you
> mention and the dimension was still associated. What would you suggest an
> alert or other notification?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Shaan Hurley
> Autodesk, Inc.
>
> "Joe D." wrote in message
> news:3C916B5473386A1B89B290DB35399A36@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > I don't think you are aware of situation where there is no alert when
> the
> > dimension is not associative.
>
>

[Anonymous]

Joe,

I will agree we need to be clear if a clear error is made but in some cases
it is hard to guard against. The problem you are seeing in the steps you
listed with no warning was most likely due to not dimensioning to the solid
or the dimension but an origin point as that is what I seen when I performed
your instructions then looked at the dimension. Also why would you dimension
that way in both model and layout and also overlapping the solid as that
seemed odd to me. If I select to dimension to the dimension specifically I
get "Non-associative dimension created" at command line. There are many
other areas in AutoCAD and other CAD applications as well where due to the
complexity and varied usage the user needs to have some knowledge of what
occurs otherwise you could have GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out). The in your
face alerts can cause frustration of users as well.

Sincerely,

Shaan Hurley
Autodesk, Inc.

"Joe D." wrote in message
news:95FA89F190C7800340CA88706D8B7EA7@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I think there are several ways to recreate the problem since there are
> many kinds of entities which aren't compatible with the transpacial
> dimensions, but here is the method I most recently recreated...
>
> - Draw a pbox in modelspace.
> - While still in modelspace place a dimension internally to the box, so
> that the dimension extension line overlaps the pbox.
> - Switch to paperspace, create a paperspace dimension and deliberately
snap
> to the end of one of the dimension extension lines for one of the points.
> The dimension placed gives the paperspace length, and there is no warning
> message of any kind.
>
> For creating a warning, whatever it is, it must absolutely grab the users
> attention. Probably a warning box popping up is the best choice. No one
> ever wants to create a dimension that shows the wrong value, so it should
be
> difficult to do so.
>
> Even if you have memorized the list of problem entities, the only way to
> discern if the object is an acceptable entity to dimension, is to examine
> the objects properties first to compare it to your list of problem
> entities.... not exactly a fluid workflow. More likely, the user will
know
> nothing about your problem entity list and will dimension them, thinking
the
> transpacial dimensions will work... they are going to be fooled and
> potentially release a drawing with bad dimensions. In the case of
> dimensioning things like 3-D faces there will be a warning, but the
warning
> message is on the command line, where it will probably not be noticed.
>
> In our case, a warning box won't make transpacial dimensions usable.
The
> majority of the entities in our drawings are on the list of entities that
> the transpacial dimensions don't like. So, I can't think of an easy fix
for
> that.
>
> But, just knowing that warning is there will make the program more trust
> worthy. Printing out bad data is VERY TROUBLESOME! One thing which
> Autodesk should be vigilant to guard against.
>
>
> Joe Dunfee
>
>
> "Shaan Hurley" wrote in message
> news:CF105FA5045B7871784E4A57AA06D338@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Joe,
> >
> > Could you please provide steps where the transpatial dimension is not
> > associated and there is no alert at the command line? I tried the case
you
> > mention and the dimension was still associated. What would you suggest
an
> > alert or other notification?
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Shaan Hurley
> > Autodesk, Inc.
> >
> > "Joe D." wrote in message
> > news:3C916B5473386A1B89B290DB35399A36@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > I don't think you are aware of situation where there is no alert
when
> > the
> > > dimension is not associative.
> >
> >
>
>

[Anonymous]

OK, I realize that dimensioning objects that already have modelspace
dimensions (although another user has run into this problem... it is not
just our office) The real-life situation where the error occurs is when the
dimension scale is so that the offset of the modelspace extension line is
very tiny.

Anyway, I just spent a few more minutes and was able to find another
method of creating the incorrect dimensions without a warning. I am sure
this situation will be much more common with other users.

- I opened an existing object. The object has a 3d-polyface mesh as well
as other entities like a 2-D polyline with a thickness.

- I go to a new layout tab, and accept the default view.

- I dimension the height of the object, by snapping to the endpoints of a
polyline with thickness, and one point on the polyface mesh.

The dimension created shows the paperspace distance, not the height of the
object. Here is a copy of the command lines immediately after creating this
dimension...
======
Command: ps PSPACE
Command: dim
Dim: vert
Specify first extension line origin or :
Specify second extension line origin:
Specify dimension line location or [Mtext/Text/Angle]:
Enter dimension text <6.2969>:
======
Note that there is no warning. I think that dimensioning common entities
created by AutoCAD should not be considered an unusual event.

As for a big, ugly pop-up warning. Why would a user want to create a
dimension with a bad number? Well... actually I have sometimes done it. It
was a paperspace dimension (which I knew had a bad measurement) and I just
typed in what I wanted the dimension to read, so I wouldn't have to go
through the hassle of creating a special layer just for that dimension and
then freezing/thawing it in the right viewports.

The reason I have been harping on this transpacial dimension issue is
because dimensioning is a core function of any drafting program, and bad
dimensions can be VERY costly if they are not caught in time.

For me, dimensions in models space have proven to be reliable. I have run
across one small error because a draftsman has accidentally dimensioned to
an extension line. But, fortunately, that error is rare, small, and usually
gets rounded out. There is a strong desire to use paperspace dimensions,
because of the layering hassle of the modelspace dimensions. But, they have
to work reliably without the user knowing a zillion rules and then querying
every entity they dimension to make sure it is one they can dimension
reliably.

Joe Dunfee

p.s. Aside from a few quick comments by about two other guys, I seem to be
the only one here complaining about this issue. Why is that? Am I alone
in having these problems (i.e. something unique to my computing enviroment
is causing the problems). or perhaps few people use entities like 3-D faces?



"Shaan Hurley" wrote in message
news:5743D1E30F85E039CA2A75D5D3C46A2A@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Joe,
>
> I will agree we need to be clear if a clear error is made but in some
cases
> it is hard to guard against. The problem you are seeing in the steps you
> listed with no warning was most likely due to not dimensioning to the
solid
> or the dimension but an origin point as that is what I seen when I
performed
> your instructions then looked at the dimension. Also why would you
dimension
> that way in both model and layout and also overlapping the solid as that
> seemed odd to me. If I select to dimension to the dimension specifically I
> get "Non-associative dimension created" at command line. There are many
> other areas in AutoCAD and other CAD applications as well where due to the
> complexity and varied usage the user needs to have some knowledge of what
> occurs otherwise you could have GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out). The in your
> face alerts can cause frustration of users as well.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Shaan Hurley
> Autodesk, Inc.

[Anonymous]

Joe,

It appears the dimension is not associated with the 3D Face just like
dimensions in prior releases except that now you are seeing this same
limitation transpatially more as you are trying it more often. Is this
correct?

Sincerely,

Shaan Hurley
Autodesk, Inc.



"Joe D." wrote in message
news:3BA4A060EC395316719BE18FF99D7D11@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> OK, I realize that dimensioning objects that already have modelspace
> dimensions (although another user has run into this problem... it is not
> just our office) The real-life situation where the error occurs is when
the
> dimension scale is so that the offset of the modelspace extension line is
> very tiny.
>
> Anyway, I just spent a few more minutes and was able to find another
> method of creating the incorrect dimensions without a warning. I am sure
> this situation will be much more common with other users.
>
> - I opened an existing object. The object has a 3d-polyface mesh as well
> as other entities like a 2-D polyline with a thickness.
>
> - I go to a new layout tab, and accept the default view.
>
> - I dimension the height of the object, by snapping to the endpoints of a
> polyline with thickness, and one point on the polyface mesh.
>
> The dimension created shows the paperspace distance, not the height of the
> object. Here is a copy of the command lines immediately after creating
this
> dimension...
> ======
> Command: ps PSPACE
> Command: dim
> Dim: vert
> Specify first extension line origin or :
> Specify second extension line origin:
> Specify dimension line location or [Mtext/Text/Angle]:
> Enter dimension text <6.2969>:
> ======

[Anonymous]

I am not certain what you are asking. My AutoCAD use has spanned
10,11,12, LTv2, and then jumped to LT'97, till I recently upgraded to the
Inventor Series with 2002.

I think the past problems I had with paperspace dimensions on LT'97 were
because of drawing file corruption, well... at least that is the Autodesk
theory. I also had some paperspace problems with earlier versions of
AutoCAD, so I wanted to be very careful with the transpacial dimensions.

I really considered using the old-style paperspace dimensions, using the
DIMLFAC variable. But, I am just so gun-shy about relying on them. My past
experience has taught me that I might come in one morning to print out a
drawing that was fine when I worked on it yesterday. I print out the
drawing and give it to the shop for production... but unknown to me, a few
of the dimensions (out of hundreds) have forgotten their DIMLFAC scale
factor and show a wrong value. Hopefully, the value shown will be obviously
wrong to the guy building it and they will ask me about it. But, I can
certainly see times it might not... i.e. what was 2'-1 3/4" now reads 2
5/8". The guy in the shop interprets it as 2 feet and 7/8" inches. After
all, he already know that AutoCAD will mess up the dimension display... "it
must have dropped that dash."

Unfortunately, I just don't see an easy fix for the program. To maintain
compatibility with the old "associative" dimensions, and the newer
"associative" transpacial dimensions, they come up with the new and improved
"SUPER DUPER ASSOCIATIVE" dimensions. Pretty soon, it will take an advanced
doctorate degree in AutoCAD dimensioning to figure it all out!

Joe Dunfee (not Joe Dunne)




"Shaan Hurley" wrote in message
news:6FC4CCC8824EE812F2FB51B7374BE0A1@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Joe,
>
> It appears the dimension is not associated with the 3D Face just like
> dimensions in prior releases except that now you are seeing this same
> limitation transpatially more as you are trying it more often. Is this
> correct?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Shaan Hurley
> Autodesk, Inc.

[Anonymous]

Joe,

I was referring to 3D Face objects not even associating with DIMASO based
dimension node points in past releases which is the same cause that you
cannot acquire the object transpatially. The new associative dimensioning
only works for entities that have been able in past releases to have a
dimension node associated. You should always check your drawings as
unfortunately the there are many ways to get bad dimensions of objects in
any CAD system until such time as computers have artificial intelligence. In
your specific case of 3D faces and the concern I would suggest just not
dimension from paperspace if you are concerned about missing errors.

Sincerely,

Shaan Hurley
Autodesk, Inc.


"Joe D." wrote in message
news:849F3AC95F826FA2C6D8C12D5CBF452B@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I am not certain what you are asking. My AutoCAD use has spanned
> 10,11,12, LTv2, and then jumped to LT'97, till I recently upgraded to the
> Inventor Series with 2002.
>
> I think the past problems I had with paperspace dimensions on LT'97 were
> because of drawing file corruption, well... at least that is the Autodesk
> theory. I also had some paperspace problems with earlier versions of
> AutoCAD, so I wanted to be very careful with the transpacial dimensions.
>
> I really considered using the old-style paperspace dimensions, using
the
> DIMLFAC variable. But, I am just so gun-shy about relying on them. My
past
> experience has taught me that I might come in one morning to print out a
> drawing that was fine when I worked on it yesterday. I print out the
> drawing and give it to the shop for production... but unknown to me, a few
> of the dimensions (out of hundreds) have forgotten their DIMLFAC scale
> factor and show a wrong value. Hopefully, the value shown will be
obviously
> wrong to the guy building it and they will ask me about it. But, I can
> certainly see times it might not... i.e. what was 2'-1 3/4" now reads 2
> 5/8". The guy in the shop interprets it as 2 feet and 7/8" inches. After
> all, he already know that AutoCAD will mess up the dimension display...
"it
> must have dropped that dash."
>
> Unfortunately, I just don't see an easy fix for the program. To
maintain
> compatibility with the old "associative" dimensions, and the newer
> "associative" transpacial dimensions, they come up with the new and
improved
> "SUPER DUPER ASSOCIATIVE" dimensions. Pretty soon, it will take an
advanced
> doctorate degree in AutoCAD dimensioning to figure it all out!
>
> Joe Dunfee (not Joe Dunne)
>
>
>
>
> "Shaan Hurley" wrote in message
> news:6FC4CCC8824EE812F2FB51B7374BE0A1@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Joe,
> >
> > It appears the dimension is not associated with the 3D Face just like
> > dimensions in prior releases except that now you are seeing this same
> > limitation transpatially more as you are trying it more often. Is this
> > correct?
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Shaan Hurley
> > Autodesk, Inc.
>
>

[Anonymous]

I forgot to mention I will also discuss your specific concern with the
dimensioning team.

Sincerely,

Shaan Hurley
Autodesk, Inc.

"Shaan Hurley" wrote in message
news:FD16D44A107D2473DB9E9D88CF3BDCF2@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Joe,
>
> I was referring to 3D Face objects not even associating with DIMASO based
> dimension node points in past releases which is the same cause that you
> cannot acquire the object transpatially. The new associative dimensioning
> only works for entities that have been able in past releases to have a
> dimension node associated. You should always check your drawings as
> unfortunately the there are many ways to get bad dimensions of objects in
> any CAD system until such time as computers have artificial intelligence.
In
> your specific case of 3D faces and the concern I would suggest just not
> dimension from paperspace if you are concerned about missing errors.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Shaan Hurley
> Autodesk, Inc.
>
>
> "Joe D." wrote in message
> news:849F3AC95F826FA2C6D8C12D5CBF452B@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > I am not certain what you are asking. My AutoCAD use has spanned
> > 10,11,12, LTv2, and then jumped to LT'97, till I recently upgraded to
the
> > Inventor Series with 2002.
> >
> > I think the past problems I had with paperspace dimensions on LT'97
were
> > because of drawing file corruption, well... at least that is the
Autodesk
> > theory. I also had some paperspace problems with earlier versions of
> > AutoCAD, so I wanted to be very careful with the transpacial dimensions.
> >
> > I really considered using the old-style paperspace dimensions, using
> the
> > DIMLFAC variable. But, I am just so gun-shy about relying on them. My
> past
> > experience has taught me that I might come in one morning to print out a
> > drawing that was fine when I worked on it yesterday. I print out the
> > drawing and give it to the shop for production... but unknown to me, a
few
> > of the dimensions (out of hundreds) have forgotten their DIMLFAC scale
> > factor and show a wrong value. Hopefully, the value shown will be
> obviously
> > wrong to the guy building it and they will ask me about it. But, I can
> > certainly see times it might not... i.e. what was 2'-1 3/4" now reads 2
> > 5/8". The guy in the shop interprets it as 2 feet and 7/8" inches.
After
> > all, he already know that AutoCAD will mess up the dimension display...
> "it
> > must have dropped that dash."
> >
> > Unfortunately, I just don't see an easy fix for the program. To
> maintain
> > compatibility with the old "associative" dimensions, and the newer
> > "associative" transpacial dimensions, they come up with the new and
> improved
> > "SUPER DUPER ASSOCIATIVE" dimensions. Pretty soon, it will take an
> advanced
> > doctorate degree in AutoCAD dimensioning to figure it all out!
> >
> > Joe Dunfee (not Joe Dunne)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Shaan Hurley" wrote in message
> > news:6FC4CCC8824EE812F2FB51B7374BE0A1@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > Joe,
> > >
> > > It appears the dimension is not associated with the 3D Face just like
> > > dimensions in prior releases except that now you are seeing this same
> > > limitation transpatially more as you are trying it more often. Is this
> > > correct?
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > > Shaan Hurley
> > > Autodesk, Inc.
> >
> >
>
>