Hi,
I am trying to use the offset command multiple option. I am getting strange results, does anyone know why?
I use the offset command, use multiple option, I type 1 then 4. The first line is offset .3335 and the second is 2.83. I have no idea where these numbers are coming from. I attached a jpg of the command line and the result. What am i doing wrong?
Any help would be awesome!
Robert
Solved! Go to Solution.
Solved by RobDraw. Go to Solution.
Hi Pen,
Thanks for response 🙂 I checked the distance and the dims are correct. Another odd thing is everytime i try this i get different results, the error is not consistent. I can't seem to get a good offset using the multiple option.
Thanks!!
@pendean wrote:
... dimensioning .... There is a chance your DIMSTYLE settings are off for the space you are dimensioning in.
....
I doubt that's the issue, because presumably such a result should be from either:
1) a DIMLFAC setting other than 1, or;
2) Dimensioning in a different UCS from that of the dimensioned objects.
In either case I would at least expect the ratio of their intent to their result to be the same for both Offsets, but they're very far from the same. But maybe you're aware of another kind of setting that could result in what they're seeing.
[By the way, I haven't been able to reproduce that kind of result. I wondered about ORTHO being off as a cause, but that doesn't do it for me. So I agree -- a sample drawing that demonstrates this behavior would be helpful, if only to narrow down whether it's a problem with the drawing file or with their AutoCAD.]
Hi,
I attached the drawing. The offset command works fine as long as I don't try using the multiple option. Maybe the procedure I'm using is wrong I attached it in the dwg.
Thanks,
Robert
I can reproduce this following your example. But instead of hitting return to accept the Through option, type in 1, then when you can use the multiple option and it will work as expected.
GrantsPirate
Piping and Mech. Designer
Always save a copy of the drawing before trying anything suggested here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If something I wrote can be interpreted two ways, and one of the ways makes you sad or angry, I meant the other one.
@GrantsPirate wrote:
.... instead of hitting return to accept the Through option, type in 1, then when you can use the multiple option and it will work as expected.
When you type in a distance, you don't get the Multiple option displayed in the prompt. Yes, it lets you Offset multiple objects, but separately selected [whether the same one repeatedly or separate objects], and all at the same distance. EDIT: no Multiple option immediately after entering the distance, but one more step in [after selecting the object] you do get the Multiple option, but it does all at the same distance from the previous result [in that direction -- you can go both ways].
I think they're using the Through option with Multiple sub-option in order to get the same object [selected only once] Offset at various different distances. @Anonymous , is that the case?
@Anonymous wrote:
.... I attached the drawing. ....
It works as expected for me [Acad2019] in your drawing. Might your Offset command possibly have been UNDEFINEd, and you have a differently-defined replacement Offset command?
The only way I can get this to work with the through option and varying distances is to use OSnap tracking.
Hi,
thanks so much for looking into this. But if i set offset to 1 then I get multiple offsets at 1 inch (like array). I need to offset a line at 1" and another at 4" using the multiple option in the offset command. This is a autocad exam question I stated the exact procedure that gives me a correct answer on the test, it just does not work for me in my acad.
guess its a glitch or i am still missing something.
Take care,
Robert
@Anonymous wrote:i am still missing something.
Please see the post before your last one.
In case it gets you around the problem, you might be interested in OffsetRunningOptions.lsp, available >here<. It lets you change the Offset distance in the middle of an Offset command, rather than having to end the command and start it again to set a new distance. [It does what I wondered about before -- Undefines the native Offset command and makes its own new definition, which is why the result doesn't have all the current possibilities -- it was written under an older version that didn't have as many options in native Offset.] But it's not a perfect solution for what you're trying to do -- you would still need to select your original object again for each new distance.
Ok here is the correct answer to the test question. Can anyone make it work and if so what am I missing.
That "correct" answer does not work for me unless I use Object Snap Tracking as stated before.
That correct answer does work just right for me, without Object Snap Tracking on, with the one meaningless difference that the last-mentioned Enter gets the <next object> default and puts me back to the select-object prompt, and it takes one more Enter to end the command.
With through I keep getting the same error. It is because the through option is using the location of the cursor to define the distance. I think a better way is to use MULTIPLE first, then OFFSET. See video attached
GrantsPirate
Piping and Mech. Designer
Always save a copy of the drawing before trying anything suggested here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If something I wrote can be interpreted two ways, and one of the ways makes you sad or angry, I meant the other one.
Yes, that does work for me, too.
It still makes the "correct" answer incomplete though.
Now, I am confused. I thought it was working as @Kent1Cooper described but it is not working anymore. Maybe I was too precise with my cursor.
Object Snap Tracking does work, though, but I am so used to using it, it is second nature to me.
@GrantsPirate wrote:
... the through option is using the location of the cursor to define the distance. ....
Only when you pick with the mouse. In the procedure laid out, the cursor location determines only the direction from the source object [to which side] where the result will go, but the typed number is the distance [at least, for me].
Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.