Point parameters not moving after block table choice

Point parameters not moving after block table choice

WfZC9JJ
Contributor Contributor
1,031 Views
9 Replies
Message 1 of 10

Point parameters not moving after block table choice

WfZC9JJ
Contributor
Contributor

Hi all, and thanks for reading in advance.

I have a dynamic block that changes based on a blocktable.

However the 4 point parameters arn't updating their coördinates

see below, (left) first option  and (right) another option.

 

WfZC9JJ_0-1656597809542.png

 

 

I did gave them coördinates, so I don't know whats going on

WfZC9JJ_1-1656597990271.png



update: I wrote them away and reinserted the block, but no change

0 Likes
Accepted solutions (2)
1,032 Views
9 Replies
Replies (9)
Message 2 of 10

JBerns
Advisor
Advisor

@WfZC9JJ,

 

I think you may need a stretch action, but I'm not certain.

The Dynamic Block expert, @Libbya , will likely be able to assist.

 

By the way, there is a dedicated forum just for AutoCAD Dynamic Block assistance.

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/dynamic-blocks-forum/bd-p/154 

 

Regards,

Jerry

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAD Administrator
Using AutoCAD & Inventor 2025
Autodesk Certified Instructor
Autodesk Inventor 2020 Certified Professional
Autodesk AutoCAD 2017 Certified Professional
0 Likes
Message 3 of 10

h_s_walker
Mentor
Mentor

Why do you want those points in the first place?

Using them to move the "linework" around is a bit of bad practice in that you can move them anywhere even "a million miles" from the basepoint of the block which would totally mess up your drawing.

I'd just remove them and use an intersection snap on the two lines in the circles if I wanted to move the linework around.

Howard Walker
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.

EESignature


Left Handed and Proud

0 Likes
Message 4 of 10

WfZC9JJ
Contributor
Contributor

The basepoint is moving along with everything else, I don't really see a problem in messing anything up.

Using move with an intersection snap isn't really the workflow I'm going for here.
thanks for the feedback though

0 Likes
Message 5 of 10

WfZC9JJ
Contributor
Contributor

Thanks, I'm looking into it

0 Likes
Message 6 of 10

h_s_walker
Mentor
Mentor

But your basepoint isn't moving with the block, it's staying at 0,0 (see the first two images below). And then if you change the state using the block table it breaks the block even more (see the third image).

Capture.JPGCapture1.JPGCapture2.JPG

Howard Walker
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.

EESignature


Left Handed and Proud

0 Likes
Message 7 of 10

WfZC9JJ
Contributor
Contributor
I noticed that after I posted the block but I already updated it?
Or thought I did, it's moving along fine here, check the latest block
0 Likes
Message 8 of 10

Libbya
Mentor
Mentor
Accepted solution

When a block properties table changes the position of a point parameter, any actions associated with that point parameter are activated for the change in position.  You have 4 point parameters and each of them move EVERYTHING in the block, including the other point parameters!  The four move actions combine to cancel each other out. 

0 Likes
Message 9 of 10

Libbya
Mentor
Mentor
Accepted solution

Here's probably the easiest way to get it all working the way you want.  See screencast:

 

 

Message 10 of 10

WfZC9JJ
Contributor
Contributor

Wow did not know about the fact it also activates the associated actions as well, that's some deeper knowledge.
So you use the new points to balance it and knudge them in the right directions. I'll try and recreate it

 

Thanks alot, really appreciate the help, this keeps me moving forward in understanding dynamic blocks.

I probably also could have set new points per visibility, but that would've been 4x8=32 points.
But the less the better that's why I tried this approach. Thanks for dotting the i's 

0 Likes