TheSwamp
CAD Forums => CAD General => Dynamic Blocks => Topic started by: CottageCGirl on October 19, 2010, 09:46:22 AM
-
I am FINALLY getting back to learning dynamic blocks...and seem to have forgotten everything...blech...
I made a 2D block w/ 4 visibility states and in editor the VS toggle is there.......when block editor is closed, or i insert the block into a drawing, there is no toggle for visability states? what am I missing????
-
You would have to share the block for me to have any chance of being less than useless.
-
here it is.....
-
Why does autodesk do such a good job at explaining "concept" but not "procedure"....grrrrrrr I have been working with my right brain lately.....I am such a cripple right now..
-
you will find that adding the visibility states FIRST as visible is a great start...
then add the visibility control after it works in the visible mode correctly
-
you will find that adding the visibility states FIRST as visible is a great start...
then add the visibility control after it works in the visible mode correctly
I did that..I have the visibility states all set up and they toggle in the editor...but when I close the editor, it just shows the primary state w/ no toggle control to change the state....
my guess is that I am missing something really silly...
-
You have that "contains authoring element" message box poppng up. I can't remember exactly what that problem meant, but I think I remeber it is fixable
-
Visibility icon showed up for me...a little to the right, but there nonetheless.
When you just OPEN a dwg that is a block with dynamic properties, it will always ask to open the editor. I like to create my dynamic blocks in a blank drawing, block the objects together, edit the block to add dynamic properties, then WBLOCK the completed dynamic block out to it's own drawing file. Then I insert that into the dwg I need. It's easier to check if it works without bouncing out of the current drawing.
-
ok....WHY IS IT ALL THE WAY OVER THERE??? bangs head on keyboard..
thanks Dommy.....
-
Might have something to do with the BASE variable being 30,0,0....let me check
EDIT: YES, it is the BASE variable. Open that dwg, say NO to opening block editor, type BASE for the command, you should see it's 30,0,0. Change it to 0,0,0 and save, then re-insert into drawing. It now shows up at the corner.
-
Here it is
-
thanks...I usually do basepoints at the end...probably a bad habbit...
-
thanks...I usually do basepoints at the end...probably a bad habbit...
Not basePOINTS, just the BASE variable:
BASE
Sets the insertion base point for the current drawing
Menu: Draw Block BaseAt the Command prompt, enter base.
Command entry: base (or 'base for transparent use)
Enter base point <current>: Specify a point or press ENTER
The base point is expressed as coordinates in the current UCS. When you insert or externally reference the current drawing into other drawings, this base point is used as the insertion base point.
-
thanks...I usually do basepoints at the end...probably a bad habbit...
Not basePOINTS, just the BASE variable:
BASE
Sets the insertion base point for the current drawing
Menu: Draw Block BaseAt the Command prompt, enter base.
Command entry: base (or 'base for transparent use)
Enter base point <current>: Specify a point or press ENTER
The base point is expressed as coordinates in the current UCS. When you insert or externally reference the current drawing into other drawings, this base point is used as the insertion base point.
lol..sorry,...now you are banging your head into the keyboard...I am editing existing non-dynamic blocks so I am not starting from scratch..... I have sooo much to learn uggg....been watching some tutorials...but starting w/ the basics so I have a ways to go...thanks...I am leaving in a bit, but will be back ...thanks again.
-
It looks like your problem was solved, but fwiw; I get asked about this problem by other users sometimes. 9 times out of 10, they inserted it as a block, which makes it a block-inside-a-block, and thus not dynamic. They'd either have to reinsert it without making it into a new block, or just explode the one they inserted into a new block already.
-
the toggle is there for me...off to the RIGHT of the block...
I insert(ed) the block in a new drawing; then selected NO VISIBILITY grip was shown...
zoom out quite a bit..
Select the block...there is the Visibility toggle...right over there...
no problemo...
open in block edit...move the Visibility toggle grip over to the left...and close the editor.
nothing to do with the BASE command
-
No head-banging over here...they look at me funny in this office when I listen to metal, so no keyboard head-banging either...
Quick tips I've learned:
1) Make sure BASE is 0,0,0 in all your drawings UNLESS you use this to your advantage (I have never found a need to have BASE anything but 0,0,0). All I've found is that this messed me up in quite a few blocks.
2) I make sure my block has a corner, center or other significant position located at 0,0. That will be my insertion point. I've only used the basepoint parameter in 2 blocks so far...and there are a lot more than 2 blocks in my library.
Just my 2 cents...
-
thanks for the assist everyone
James..thanks, I am pretty good at ferretting out thoses issues, since I am always fixing those sort of block problems w/ other people here, but I have not been at it for a while, so anything I did know, seems to have left me regarding dynamic properties.....
-
No head-banging over here...they look at me funny in this office when I listen to metal, so no keyboard head-banging either...
Quick tips I've learned:
1) Make sure BASE is 0,0,0 in all your drawings UNLESS you use this to your advantage (I have never found a need to have BASE anything but 0,0,0). All I've found is that this messed me up in quite a few blocks.
2) I make sure my block has a corner, center or other significant position located at 0,0. That will be my insertion point. I've only used the basepoint parameter in 2 blocks so far...and there are a lot more than 2 blocks in my library.
Just my 2 cents...
and that, I think, is definately worth the 2 cents... we always use 0,0 it just makes xrefs a whole heck of a lot easier..so I will have to bring that wisdom along into my block world too..
-
nothing to do with the BASE command
Well, in the original block definition, the visibility grip, when editing the dynamic block, was located at the lower right corner of the box. When you insert the original block into another drawing, the visibility grip moves approx. 30 to the right...which is what the BASE VARIABLE is doing...moving that grip over 30. Change the BASE VARIABLE in the original dynamic block to 0,0 and everything works the way it should...just to clarify
-
To further clarify...it seems the GRIPS are being affected by the BASE being 30,0,0 and not the entities. I believe this would be due to there being a BASEPOINT parameter which will lock the entities to 0,0, but the BASE being 30,0 would shift the GRIPS to the right 30 units...I believe...
-
I think the 'solution' is the problem.
There are a couple of ways to 'fix' this particular block.
And we have discussed procedures to prevent ever needing to 'fix' broken blocks.
Define your Blocks with logical Insertion Points as CG says she is in the habit of doing.
Do NOT Change the BASE of any drawing or block.
And then ones blocks and their dynamic grips and attributes will behave as expected happily ever after.
-
I think the 'solution' is the problem.
:lmao:
k, have fun with this one then...
The 'solution' fixed the problem...the problem was the BASE NOT BEING 0,0, as in, it was changed SOMETIME. BASE starts out as 0,0 on every new drawing...if you just willy nilly move the grip until you get the desired result, you'll have fun adjusting a ton of blocks. THAT IS NOT A SOLUTION.
Geez...just trying to help...and THAT is the only reason why the block is behaving that way...
-
I think the 'solution' is the problem.
(http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/strollerderby/2008/10/08-15/did-you-ever-tell-your-kids-to-shut-up.jpg)
-
I wont be adjusting any grips...as I define ALL of my blocks correctly to start with. And I don't change Base points ever!
The moral of this story;
don't move or use the BASE command; unless you really goofed up to start with and FAILED to define your blocks with valid insertion points to start with
and define your blocks with good insertion points
-
I wont be adjusting any grips...as I define ALL of my blocks correctly to start with. And I don't change Base points ever!
The moral of this story;
don't move or use the BASE command; unless you really goofed up to start with and FAILED to define your blocks with valid insertion points to start with
and define your blocks with good insertion points
Look, we were asked why this block was not working correctly...there is a basepoint parameter that overrides the BASE variable of 30,0 in THIS BLOCK. THE BASE VARIABLE IN THIS BLOCK IS WHAT'S MAKING THE VISIBILITY GRIP MOVE 30 TO THE RIGHT. WE WERE ASKED TO FIX THIS BLOCK...THAT'S WHAT I DID.
You can go on and on about practices and such, but that's not what we were asked...we were asked to fix THIS BLOCK. Preach on in the sticky post in the dynamic blocks forum.
-
I wont be adjusting any grips...as I define ALL of my blocks correctly to start with. And I don't change Base points ever!
The moral of this story;
don't move or use the BASE command; unless you really goofed up to start with and FAILED to define your blocks with valid insertion points to start with
and define your blocks with good insertion points
For those of us who work in the real world, and not academically, we are often faced with situations where we have to fix broken things. You're right though, in a perfect world, everything is done perfectly, and no one ever has stinky farts.
The rest of us work in the real world though.
-
For those of us who work in the real world, and not academically, we are often faced with situations where we have to fix broken things. You're right though, in a perfect world, everything is done perfectly, and no one ever has stinky farts.
The rest of us work in the real world though.
Thank you! That's what I'm trying to get across...just trying to fix why THIS ONE is broken.
-
however should one NOT correct practices; then one is left correcting the 'problems' those practices create
I do work in the real world..and part of what I teach is how to not have problems directly related to ones procedures from real world experience.
Though there is nothing I can do about stinky farts, other than hope you excuse yourself and don't get any on your boxer shorts.
-
I am editing existing non-dynamic blocks so I am not starting from scratch..... I have sooo much to learn uggg....been watching some tutorials...
This sounds like your best course of action is to KEEP the existing geomtry where possible and create the blocks over so you are not fighting with unknown insertion points, or other variables that you will not be aware of until some other block(s) fail to behave as this one has. In the end you would save more time and have more control over the blocks.
-
I do work in the real world..and part of what I teach is how to not have problems directly related to ones procedures from real world experience.
You contradict yourself in the same. You are right Preacher, you are so good.
Those who can't, teach those who can.
-
(http://www.theswamp.org/screens/mp/snacks.gif)
-
I do work in the real world..and part of what I teach is how to not have problems directly related to ones procedures from real world experience.
You contradict yourself in the same. You are right Preacher, you are so good.
Those who can't, teach those who can.
To clarify; my advice isn't based on a purely academic or theoretical approach to the application of autocad.
However from my experiences teaching, quite often the 'problem' that needs to be solved is one created by the 'procedure' that is being employed. And that by education the procedure can be revised, thus eliminating the problem it was causing.
-
...
-
And that by education the procedure can be revised, thus eliminating the problem it was causing.
That's great and all, but I'm flat out saying your wrong with your education on this topic. This PROBLEM is only caused by the BASE being set to 30,0. When inserted, this will shift the entities to the left 30 units and leave the visibility GRIP where it always has been. THE VISIBILITY GRIP IS NOT MOVING!!! IT'S WHERE IT SHOULD BE!!! THE ENTITIES ARE BEING SHIFTED TO THE LEFT BECAUSE OF THE BASE VARIABLE WITHIN THE BLOCK ITSELF!!!
Insert the original block into any drawing, draw a line from the lower right corner 30 to the right and then select the block...the visibility grip is right at the end of the line. Open the original block, say no to open in editor, type BASE and change to 0,0 and save. Insert that block into any drawing and the entities insert at the BASEPOINT PARAMETER THAT COTTAGEGIRL SET UP INSTEAD OF 30 UNITS TO THE LEFT. THIS SOLVES THIS PROBLEM.
THERE ARE NO WRONG PROCEDURES HERE. ONLY FIXING A VARIABLE THAT IS CONFLICTING IN THE BLOCK DRAWING.
THE VISIBILITY GRIP IS RIGHT WHERE IT SHOULD BE, BUT THE BASE BEING 30,0 SHIFTS THE ENTITIES (LINES, ETC) TO THE LEFT 30 UNITS, WHICH OVERRIDES THE BASEPOINT PARAMETER THAT CG SET UP!!! THAT IS THE PROBLEM!!!
GOT IT NOW????????
-
...
-
YOU KNOW DAMN RIGHT!!11!!
-
...
-
the 'procedure' that needs be corrected is that someone needs to NOT enter the BASE command and change the insertion point of the block/drawing
the block creation procedure needs to be addressed such that a usable insertion point is defined at the same time the block is originally created thus eliminating the need to use the BASE command to alter the insertion point
changing the BASE point is merely a symptom of the procedure used when the block was defined (failing to properly define the insertion point), or thereafter when it was discovered that the block didn't insert as expected
-
Have no idea where is going.
(http://www.gifbin.com/bin/1236956401_camel2.gif)
-
the 'procedure' that needs be corrected is that someone needs to NOT enter the BASE command and change the insertion point of the block/drawing
the block creation procedure needs to be addressed such that a usable insertion point is defined at the same time the block is originally created thus eliminating the need to use the BASE command to alter the insertion point
changing the BASE point is merely a symptom of the procedure used when the block was defined (failing to properly define the insertion point), or thereafter when it was discovered that the block didn't insert as expected
So do you have a time machine to go back and fix what was already done?
-
the 'procedure' that needs be corrected is that someone needs to NOT enter the BASE command and change the insertion point of the block/drawing
the block creation procedure needs to be addressed such that a usable insertion point is defined at the same time the block is originally created thus eliminating the need to use the BASE command to alter the insertion point
changing the BASE point is merely a symptom of the procedure used when the block was defined (failing to properly define the insertion point), or thereafter when it was discovered that the block didn't insert as expected
So do you have a time machine to go back and fix what was already done?
No, and that would be why I suggested CG use a different procedure as she edits/modifies these blocks moving forward in an earlier post...once the actual 'problem' was identified
-
No, and that would be why I suggested CG use a different procedure as she edits/modifies these blocks moving forward in an earlier post...once the actual 'problem' was identified
Who's to say she changed the BASE variable for that block? Who's to say she created the original block. That's what I'm getting at. You can teach all you want about proper procedure, but you're not teaching what caused the problem.
Just criticizing someone's technique, if it's even their technique, doesn't teach why things are acting the way they are. You telling me I put the wrong oil in my car doesn't tell me what oil I should be using...
And with that...I bid you adieu
-
Who's to say she changed the BASE variable for that block?
obviously it is or was changed...irrespective of who changed it. And it sounds like CG indicated SHE already has good practices where block creation is concerned so there should be no critique of her method implied.
the upside of our discourse, would be that user now knows the evils of the BASE point of a block/drawing being altered, and perhaps can or will now share that information with those she works with...for all we know there is someone over in that office that's just silly about using the BASE command and hasn't a clue about the swath of mayhem they are trailing...
and as she did not create these blocks she is now charged with administering, a best course might be to just salvage the usable geometry from these illegitimate block children, and recreate the blocks such that she controls the variables...
-
All your base are belong to us.
-
I leave to go to a designer show house...and look what happens?!?!? kittens and chicks in bathing suits!?!? Honestly, I am crying I am laughing so hard right now.... thanks for all the helpful (and not-so-helpful) insights :lmao: Unfortunately AQ... unfortunately I live in a VERY inperfect world, one in which I know very little and have to do many things... so I have to take Dommys side on this....i do try to start clean with my blocks, but I have thousands in my library. I am off to spend some time listening to the dulcet tones of Mike Williams Tips- tutorials on youtube.......
-
I am off to spend some time listening to the dulcet tones of Mike Williams Tips- tutorials on youtube.......
Wha?! :? Another one of us?
-
I am off to spend some time listening to the dulcet tones of Mike Williams Tips- tutorials on youtube.......
Wha?! :? Another one of us?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMnDqXXZu3M&feature=related
-
Going to have to check from home.
-
I am off to spend some time listening to the dulcet tones of Mike Williams Tips- tutorials on youtube.......
Wha?! :? Another one of us?
Or is that the other you? :laugh:
-
.... but I have thousands in my library.
given this; it still suggests you not fight all the unknowns contained in that multitude of blocks
that you should use the geometry, and redefine them from within a template file that has all variables set as desired,
otherwise the story is, it's you versus 600,000 blocks.....
it will save you time and headaches
-
me thinketh the canuckian version does not speaketh with such twang
-
If you remember correctly, no... I don't. :)
-
I remember thinking your voice didn't match your pix, but not necessarily in a bad way, and ... no twang.
-
My voice sucks... but then again, so do my pics, so it all evens out, right? :P
-
Actually, you're so dead sexy I had to change my g-string.
Twice.
-
ACK!
-
Can I use that grater when you're done with it, Krush?
-
me thinketh the canuckian version does not speaketh with such twang
that was my thought...LOL