Layer

[MichaelLawson]

Does anyone know a way to send a layer to the back and make it stay there?

I cannot understand why that is not someting native to AC out of the box.

I have tried grouping, locking, setting Z to someting

other than 0.0.  This is something we need to do on a regular basis.

Anybody have a solution...Am I missing something?

Mike Lawson

[cedwards8511]

Try using DRAWORDER.

[pendean]

Missing a lot perhaps: QSELECT or FILTER commands to isolate the layer then DRAWORDER it any way you want.

Or Make that layer active, lock all other layers, then DRAWORDER as you desire.

Or Freeze instead of lock, same tip as above.

Or set SELECTSIMILAR command to only pick up layer settings then DRAWORDER as you desire.

Or if you are über-organized, start Express Tools' CDORDER command as a left-field option.

Then there is the wonderful free world of custom lisp creation in AutoCAD: what you paid for 🙂

Let us know if you get stuck somewhere.

[jggerth]

Acad is not corel or photoshop,  layers are not (at least for some of us)  at all pertinent to the desired Draworder.  So for us, having Draworder managed by Layer is not at all helpful.

And, as has been noted, there are tons of freebie add-ons to accomplish that.  IIRC theres' a plugin of the month on Adesk Labs to accomplish that for those who want it.

[rkmcswain]

As others have said, 3rd party add-on.
It's been in Toolpac for years.
More info in this thread:
http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/AutoCAD-Civil-3D-Wishes/Layer-Hierachy-Locking-Draworder/td-p/2049734

[3wood]

If the information on this layer is only for reference, you can save it as a separate file and xref it into the master drawing.

You can even make the xref file read-only so nobody can change it accidentally.

1. Use LAYISO to isolate that layer.

2. Use WBLOCK to save all objects on this layer to a separate file.

3. Delete previous selected objects if they are still in the drawing.

4. Create a speciall layer to put xrefs and lock it.

5. Use XREF to insert the xref file in Step 2 into current drawing

6. Send the xref to the Layer created in Step 4.

[vandenoosterkamp]

you wrote: So for us, having Draworder managed by Layer is not at all helpful. A bit weird that for hatch it's there isn't it? Not helpful is your opinion. Some would very much like to see it implemented and users are asking for it for ages. Check http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/AutoCAD-2000-2000i-2002-Archive/Draworder/m-p/86004/highlight/true#M69... Toolpac provides the solution but still it is a workaround because each time you want your drawing 'ordered' the way you want you have to execute DOL The only logic I can think of is that Dotsoft Toolpac is an autodesk company as well.

[jggerth]

I narrowed that down to the phrase "some of us". skipping those two words drastically changes the meaning.  different industries have different needs, and in my world relating draworder to layer is not at all useful.  Maybe it is in yours.

If that's the case, there are multiple ways to get there, both using Acad built-in capabilities, or 3rd party tools.  IIRC there are free tools on Exchange or Adesk LAbs as well.   As a global DOBL change that took permanent effect, I would be very displeased as that would break a great deal of existing work.

I also fail to see the relevance of comparing hatches to layers?  hatches are objects - layers are properties.  It makes sense (in my business) to control draworder by objects - it doesn't to do that by layer names.

[nrz13]

I've found that DRAWORDER is sometimes lost, but a REGEN will restore it back to how you set it.

Blocks will also retain their layer order (as long as they're not copied to another drawing), so creating a block may be a workaround for you as well.


Regarding the topic of in-built layer management, I think it would be useful if AutoCAD had a Layer Order property on the Layer Properties Manager.  By default, all layers would be "0", so the way it currently works would be unchanged.  Then, if you wanted to force certain layers above or below, you'd use a positive or negative integer to distinguish that element from the "0" baseline.

[steve216586]

You're crazy jgerth! If you don't use it, it must be seldom used by the masses? I know exactly what the OP is hinting at. I have used it to "map" territories, work zones, changes, etc. and it is terrible to manage to bolden or hide these areas. It is really something AutoDesk should look into re-designing/coding.

[jggerth]

Well, I do spend my days doing CAD and staring at colored lines on a monitor, so 'crazy' is a possibility.

But -- I'll reiterate the "some of us" part of my initial post.  Ignoring that portion of the post seems a bit disengenous....

However, let's look at the possibilities -- either sticking with a by-object Draworder control, or swapping to a Draworder system based on Layer, ala CorelDraw or Photoshop.  Or.... combining the two concurrently.

Considering the existing base of drawings that currently rely on Draworder by object, converting to a system that actively managed draworder by layer would lead to a certain amount of breakage.  that's a given.  Not changing over results in a more stable and manageable situation where existing dwg files are used.  To me, that's a plus unless there are overwhelming benefits to draworder by layer.

And given that there are multiple ways right now to change draworder on a bylayer basis, it does not appear to be a critical item to implement at a low level.  Those who need to do this, already have the ability to do it whenever it's needed.

running Civil3d -- I have hundreds of layers predefined and AEC object styles that use them.  Layers are used in this environment to control printing and lineweights.  Attempting to assign a drawing order to AEC objects that are composites of layers would make no sense -- e.g. C-TOPO holds the AECObject, but the makers and labels are on C-TOPO-SPOT and C-TOPO-LABL respectively - If I put layer C-TOPO-LABL on top of layer C-TOPO -- it seems that a circular reference would lead to a meltdown.  Similar scenarios could happen with complex block assemblies - the block is on one layer, but the subcomponents of the block are on other layers.  Who ends up on top?

Then there's the worst case scenario of trying to have both Draworder by object, and a dynamic draworder by layer, techniques running .  which would take precedence? If the Draworder by layer is set to always have WRIGLEY on the bottom, but I want to move a hatch on SPEARMINT below WRIGLEY linework _here, _ but need to show SPEARMINT  lines running over WRIGLEY  on the other side of the site...  what takes over?  and when will the order be recalculated by the dynamic draworder process?

And finally, having a dynamic draworder by layer will slow down all drawing and regeneration calculations because the extra bit of sorting through the layer precedence would have to happen constantly.   (If you don't need it to be a constant process, then it's not needed at all since there are, as has been noted, multiple ways to set draworder by layer on a snapshot basis)

[steve216586]

Nice diatribe.

I guess you never worked with the AMShide or HLsettings commands??? Duh!!

[nrz13]

JGerth:

You bring up some good points but, nevertheless, I think a combined system could still work.  Things like layers in a block would be easy to sort out:  all layers in the block would sort by layer within the block and the block itself would sort by whatever layer it was on.  There'll definitely be some hard problems to solve, no doubt, with the processing power being chief among them.  If AutoCAD would actually utilize even 4 of my 8 processing threads instead of 1, maybe that wouldn't be an issue.

I guess the real issue is that if DRAWORDER actually worked the way it was supposed to, I probably never would have thought to want the layer order sort option to begin with.

[rkmcswain]

vandenoosterkamp wrote:
The only logic I can think of is that Dotsoft Toolpac is an autodesk company as well.

1. Why is that logical to you?
2. I can assure you they are not affiliated in any way.

[vandenoosterkamp]

Sarcasm... In case autodesk would provide us with more functions I wouldn't buy toolpac. Right now I can't do without it.