Anuncios

The Autodesk Community Forums has a new look. Read more about what's changed on the Community Announcements board.

Kent1Cooper
en respuesta a: Kent1Cooper


@Kent1Cooper wrote:

@Anonymous wrote:

.... THIS PATTERN.....AT A SIZE OF 200X1200X2MM


What's the 1200mm dimension? ....


Try this, using the lower  part of my image [overall  extent in length = 1200, long edge = 1000], and with the "size" being nominal, i.e. to the center of the 2-unit-wide joints  [not the tiles themselves], and with accurate 45-degree-multiple angles for all linesets:

*CHEVRON, Chevron pattern, 200x1200 nominal with 2-wide joints
90, -1,2.41421356, 1414.21356237,1414.21356237, 280.01428535,-2.82842712
90, 1,2.41421356, 1414.21356237,-1414.21356237, 280.01428535,-2.82842712
90, 706.10678119,707.52099475, 1414.21356237,1414.21356237, 280.01428535,-2.82842712
90, 708.10678119,707.52099475, 1414.21356237,-1414.21356237, 280.01428535,-2.82842712
45, 1,2.41421356, 200,200, 997.17157288, -1002.82842712
45, 1,-0.41421356, 200,200, 997.17157288, -1002.82842712
135, -1,2.41421356, 200,-200, 997.17157288, -1002.82842712
135, -1,-0.41421356, 200,-200, 997.17157288, -1002.82842712

But I agree with @hugha -- the joints are so tiny compared to the tile size that there must be only a very limited set of circumstances in which it's worth showing both edges of the joints.  If you're showing it at a size such that the joint width is apparent, you probably won't be showing enough of it to really see the pattern.

Kent Cooper, AIA