two part concrete question..

[muleman1]

1> Is it possible to adjust the weight of concrete assigned to volume of concrete in AS? 

2> Is it possible to show cubic yards of concrete in BOM's? AS has to calculating volume to assign weight...right?

maybe @acbsdesign  @Emanuel.Nestor  or @anyonewhocanhelp

[cadman777]

Hi Sebastian,

I presently use Inventor and am considering adding AS to my work, but not sure yet, b/c I keep reading in this forum MANY complaints for software problems that are nonexistent in the Inventor drawing environment. Inventor BOM is SIMPLE, once you setup all the templates.

If customizing AS is this difficult, what motivation do I have to use it? I tried Tekla already, and it's VERY DIFFICULT to customize. AS doesn't appear to be any better, just a different kind of IMPOSSIBLE. The posts in this forum look like inventor iLogic and VBA Customization forum, where a few experts answer all the questions that people post in the forum. 99.9% of users are unable to be experts. The software should not require you to be an expert programmer or a magician with telepathic abilities in order to have the data and procedures that should be readily available IN THE SOFTWARE to make customizations for simple functions that SHOULD ALREADY BE inside the software.

So, please post the web page that shows the syntax and functions for writing these formulas. That will show me what is involved in writing these macros compared to simple out-of-the-box Inventor drawing environment. Also, if there's other areas of AS that need to be programmed and have syntax and functions (like Parts List on a drawing), then please provide we pages for them. I'm not talking about the AS VBA API. I'm talking about BASIC USER CUSTOMIZATION like is asked for in this thread.

Thanx !

[cadman777]

mm,

I have used Pocket Ref for many years for looking up conversion factors:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocket_Ref

I found Wiki to have some good resources on conversion factors.

Also there are free conversion programs on the internet that show the math involved.

That's how I get help on formulas I can't remember when I need them.

Cheers

[Sebastian_Eiche]

I don't know if I found it, but I will have a look for it.

Normally it is not important because the most things could be done in Advance without any scripting.

And by the why: in my opinion it's not harder to customize AS than other CAD Software. Maybe for you it's easier but for another one which is coming from AS, the customizing for Inventor seems to be much harder.

But it's not easy to learn AS only by using the forum I advise everyone to be part of a training by a reseller (which do this often).

And the last point: in the end everyone had to decide what is more effective...to spend many hours to learn how to customize AS or to let this set by another person

[cadman777]

Hi Sebastian,

Thanx for your comments.

I look forward to reviewing your findings.

I disagree with you about the need for training to learn software.

I've been running software since the late 80's and can tell you I've seen a lot.

I learned many CAD software programs, even as far back as CadKey and FastSurf on DOS 3.1.

One thing I learned along the way from working with programmers on industrial jobs is this:

A good programmer will make their software easy to use so they hardly need help files.

Lousy programming relies on help files.

The fact that CAD software needs so much 'VAR support' (most of which sucks), is evidence of shoddy workmanship and defective product. SolidWorks is atrocious! AutoCAD has a very steep learning curve. I remember when I learned it way back in the 80's.

Let me give you an example of good programming relating to 'automatic drawings' (which I want to try to learn how to do for Inventor). I know about Tekla, so I can only comment on how BAD that software is to use to make drawings AND to customize! Maybe this applies to AS too?

I want a simple and 'intuitive' UI for custom Dimension Styles. I want the UI to provide a VISUAL INTERFACE to create a Style for each structural shape. Let's take a base plate for example:

1. You have a Dialogue Box that has some simple controls related to part features, dimensions and text annotations.

2. You show a rectangular box on the screen representing the base plate.

3. You permit the user to drag-and-drop various features, dimensions and text wherever they want onto the rectangle.

4. The user must name the style for that UI instance before clicking "OK" to exit.

5. THEN (this is the 'easy' part) the SOFTWARE makes all the Dimension Style settings in the background in the blink of an eye. The details of this Style can be reviewed in a Dimension Style Manager, and manually modified if necessary (that's where it becomes COMPLICATED).

6. Now the user has a Custom Base Plate Style available whenever he needs it, and it only required a few minutes of his time to VISUALLY ARRANGE on the screen, and he didn't need any VAR SUPPORT or ONLINE HELP SYSTEM to do it.

7. The simple instructions should be part of the software INSTALLED ON THE LOCAL HARD DISK.

8. Then the user can copy this custom style (and rename it) and modify it to be a new style, or delete it, or modify the existing style of it as needed.

I am convinced the PURPOSE for withholding critical information like HELP is for POLITICAL POWER. Most times, I've discovered the reason has to do with CONTROLLING PEOPLE. In other words, I will bet you 'dollars to donuts' that Autodesk WITHHOLDS this critical work path information so they can CONTROL THEIR CUSTOMERS. It all has to do with long term planning to accomplish total control over our TOOLS OF THE TRADE. In "communist countries" they have a motto: "Control of all the means of production and means of distribution". Read Marx and Engle to see what I mean. This is 100% Anti-American. You may like it this way over in Germany, but we Americans do not, unless they are the new kind of STUPID Americans who have no concern for right and wrong, and good and bad, but only look at MONEY and COMFORT. This is how globalism works. It's totally wrong, and totally evil.

Back to the point: A simple UI like the above for creating Automatic Dimension Styles frees up the draftsman so he doesn't need to 'marry' his software. Then he can devote more energy and time on DESIGNING/DRAFTING instead of FIGHTING with his TOOLS OF THE TRADE at work. The DEVELOPER creates the UI, NOT the draftsman. This brings happiness to the user due to ease of use. This is how we 'bless' when we work with your tools, instead of 'curse' you when we work during our day. I remember when I was a vehicle mechanic back in the 70-90's. I can't tell you how many times I CURSED auto manufacturers for their lousy designs. I can tell you I became a Honda tech b/c they were so easy to fix, and b/c they hardly needed fixing. This is what I'm talking about. QUALITY instead of GREED.

Now you have an idea of a possible GUI for creating Automatic Dimensions for AS (or for Tekla, if any Tekla reps are reading this thread). From what I understand, SDS/2 doesn't have ANY of these problems. I wonder why?

Cheers

[Sebastian_Eiche]

Link for BOM formulas (AKN)

maybe some comments from me, but then I think this is not the thread for this.

"A good programmer will make their software easy to use "
Hmm this is easy to say, but in reality: for example AS is just based on AutoCAD and is developed about many years. If you decide to create a software it's easy to say, how you want to have it, but if a software is growing by years, commands and functions will be added. And so a structure could not be consistent and easy to learn for everyone. This is not everytime the problem of the programmer, the programmer could only use "what is there" so they could not change the core (in case of Advance Steel it's just AutoCAD).

"UI to provide a VISUAL INTERFACE"
Your example for changing is a little bit to easy. Because in the case of the base plate: do want this everytime? Same style for plates which are shown from the front or above? All cases had to be there and the user want to change it, but it should be "easy" to do. This is complety unrealistic, because every software is based on a specific system.
And maybe additional I'm not working for Autodesk, but in my opinion the user could learn Advance Steel or any other CAD software by his own, this is definitly possible, but the question is "how long do you need for the knowledge". And Autodesk provide a lot of work, in the Advance Steel Help, Autodesk Knowledge Network and for example on youtube.
I never used SDS/2 so I could not compare to it. But as you wrote for example Inventor...Inventor has his own core, the adjustment and settings of Inventor are not intuitve.

As I already said, this is not the topic of this thread, so I will stop here 😃

[cadman777]

Hi Sebastian,

Thanx for your reply.

Even though I understand what you are saying, I disagree with you.

Incidentally, I've been reading Ilko's comments about AS, and they sound like my comments for early versions of Inventor. Back then, when I was young, I was stupid enough to 'believe' that Autodesk would take seriously my hard work and many hours of time writing up suggestions to improve their program. Like Ilko says many times in his forum posts, these suggestions are BASIC DRAFTING REQUIREMENTS, not personal preferences. That is why I 'chimed in' on this subject in this thread.

Currently, I'm trying to learn VBA for Inventor so I can FORCE Inventor to do what *** I *** want, since Autodesk refuses to do it. I'm talking about BASIC FUNCTIONS that SHOULD BE in the software but are not. I was hoping that AS would do that for me. But seeing how BAD the drafting/drawing module is, I am disinclined to 'go there'. But, here's a FREE suggestion for you:

Tell your programmers to create a dwg (or other format) EXPORT STANDARD for AS 3d models that can be opened in Inventor, so Inventor can use the native Inventor drawing environment to create GA and detail drawings (with BOMs) of the AS model. Inventor environment is very easy to use to make drawings. It isn't AUTOMATIC, but it doesn't have all the problems I've seen in this form with AS. That would give me an incentive to buy AS and use it in my work-flow, since Inventor Frame Generator SUCKS(!). I can envision that possibility. This should be a simple task for the AS and IV programmers to corroborate on and accomplish. It should have been already done after all these years anyway!

I will honor your request to discontinue this subject in this thread.

Cheers