Topic: Dynamic block examples

[ELOQUINTET]

here are a couple dynamic blocks i've been developing. these are section details of our standard shade assemblies. the first is our standard bracket and housing. then the second is the tube and shade assembly which inserts onto the bracket. tell me what you think

http://www.theswamp.org/lilly_pond/dan/mecho%205%20standard%20bracket%20assemblies.dwg?nossi=1

http://www.theswamp.org/lilly_pond/dan/std%201.204%20tube%20and%20shade.dwg?nossi=1

[Birdy]

Here's one of my favorites.  Combines a wipeout with our elevation & section marks.  Used in paperspace. I've never seen anyone do this before, but.... Section/Elevation marks

I did kinda get carried away with the polygonal wipeout.  I'd make them with a lot fewer sides.  Someday I'll fix it in our template file.

Note: you may have to adjust the draw order (bring to front).

[Krushert]

Here's one of my favorites.  Combines a wipeout with our elevation & section marks.  Used in paperspace. I've never seen anyone do this before, but.... Section/Elevation marks

I did kinda get carried away with the polygonal wipeout.  I'd make them with a lot fewer sides.  Someday I'll fix it in our template file.

Note: you may have to adjust the draw order (bring to front).

If your are refering to wipeout in tag, I use them.  I just don't use the Section Marks as DBs.  There is nothing worse (to me) than having a line run thru a peice of text. 

I love wipe outs and really starting to using them heavily.  The one that I love is using a wipe out with window elevation block and then inserting them on a building elevations. It is easier to hatch an elevation by turning off window.  And even sweeter window changes in size or location.

[Josh Nieman]

Here's one of my favorites.  Combines a wipeout with our elevation & section marks.  Used in paperspace. I've never seen anyone do this before, but.... Section/Elevation marks

I did kinda get carried away with the polygonal wipeout.  I'd make them with a lot fewer sides.  Someday I'll fix it in our template file.

Note: you may have to adjust the draw order (bring to front).

If your are refering to wipeout in tag, I use them.  I just don't use the Section Marks as DBs.  There is nothing worse (to me) than having a line run thru a peice of text. 

I love wipe outs and really starting to using them heavily.  The one that I love is using a wipe out with window elevation block and then inserting them on a building elevations. It is easier to hatch an elevation by turning off window.  And even sweeter window changes in size or location.

I would suggest that you use "background mask" in mtext objects and dimensions rather than wipeouts, to avoid lines going through text.  Saves for when you forget to turn tframes off, as well as sometimes some printers/plotters/pdf-creators like to make solid black fills where the wipeouts are.

[Birdy]

cool.  then there's at least 2 of us
I'm sure there's more.  Back in the day, (previous CAD manager) we used to put these over our elevations in MS, and trim stuff out.  :ugly:

Man, I hated that!  It has since evolved into wipeouts, >paper space, and now, >dblocks.

Thanks Josh. Will check out your suggestion.

Never had any problems with lines going through text though.

[Krushert]

I would suggest that you use "background mask" in mtext objects and dimensions rather than wipeouts, to avoid lines going through text.  Saves for when you forget to turn tframes off, as well as sometimes some printers/plotters/pdf-creators like to make solid black fills where the wipeouts are.

Background Mask only works in Mtext and Dimensions not in blocks (or attributes) 
Unless this has changed (i am really hoping that it has)

[Josh Nieman]

I would suggest that you use "background mask" in mtext objects and dimensions rather than wipeouts, to avoid lines going through text.  Saves for when you forget to turn tframes off, as well as sometimes some printers/plotters/pdf-creators like to make solid black fills where the wipeouts are.

Background Mask only works in Mtext and Dimensions not in blocks (or attributes) 
Unless this has changed (i am really hoping that it has)

I knew it didn't work with attributes (much to my dismay)

It does work if it is an mtext object within a block though

[whdjr]

Here's one of my favorites.  Combines a wipeout with our elevation & section marks.  Used in paperspace. I've never seen anyone do this before, but.... Section/Elevation marks

I did kinda get carried away with the polygonal wipeout.  I'd make them with a lot fewer sides.  Someday I'll fix it in our template file.

Note: you may have to adjust the draw order (bring to front).

Can you repost as a '06 version.  I converted the one you posted but none of the DBs worked.

[Birdy]

apparently not. (?) unless I'm having a brain freeze.
we used this in '06, but I can (now) only save to '07 or '04... which of course, wont be dynamic.
mebbe someone with '06 will step up?....anyone?.....anyone?....Bueller?

[whdjr]

sorry... ...'04, '05, and '06 are the same formats.

[Birdy]

maybe this one? <crosses fingers>

[whdjr]

That one worked.  Thanx

[whdjr]

Here's one of my favorites.  Combines a wipeout with our elevation & section marks.  Used in paperspace. I've never seen anyone do this before, but.... Section/Elevation marks

I did kinda get carried away with the polygonal wipeout.  I'd make them with a lot fewer sides.  Someday I'll fix it in our template file.

Note: you may have to adjust the draw order (bring to front).

If your are refering to wipeout in tag, I use them.  I just don't use the Section Marks as DBs.  There is nothing worse (to me) than having a line run thru a peice of text. 

I love wipe outs and really starting to using them heavily.  The one that I love is using a wipe out with window elevation block and then inserting them on a building elevations. It is easier to hatch an elevation by turning off window.  And even sweeter window changes in size or location.

I would suggest that you use "background mask" in mtext objects and dimensions rather than wipeouts, to avoid lines going through text.  Saves for when you forget to turn tframes off, as well as sometimes some printers/plotters/pdf-creators like to make solid black fills where the wipeouts are.

Did you realize they added a 3rd option to the 'imageframe' variable?

Command line: imageframe

Enter image frame setting [0, 1, 2] <current>: Enter an option or press ENTER

0    Image frames are not displayed and not plotted.

1    Image frames are both displayed and plotted.

2    Image frames are displayed but not plotted.

[Josh Nieman]

Here's one of my favorites.  Combines a wipeout with our elevation & section marks.  Used in paperspace. I've never seen anyone do this before, but.... Section/Elevation marks

I did kinda get carried away with the polygonal wipeout.  I'd make them with a lot fewer sides.  Someday I'll fix it in our template file.

Note: you may have to adjust the draw order (bring to front).

If your are refering to wipeout in tag, I use them.  I just don't use the Section Marks as DBs.  There is nothing worse (to me) than having a line run thru a peice of text. 

I love wipe outs and really starting to using them heavily.  The one that I love is using a wipe out with window elevation block and then inserting them on a building elevations. It is easier to hatch an elevation by turning off window.  And even sweeter window changes in size or location.

I would suggest that you use "background mask" in mtext objects and dimensions rather than wipeouts, to avoid lines going through text.  Saves for when you forget to turn tframes off, as well as sometimes some printers/plotters/pdf-creators like to make solid black fills where the wipeouts are.

Did you realize they added a 3rd option to the 'imageframe' variable?

Command line: imageframe

Enter image frame setting [0, 1, 2] <current>: Enter an option or press ENTER

0    Image frames are not displayed and not plotted.

1    Image frames are both displayed and plotted.

2    Image frames are displayed but not plotted.

dude.  crap in a can, that's cool... I went to see if that was the same for "tframes' command... and it doesn't even list TFRAMES in the help file   I'll just keep using imageframes from now on... that works for wipeouts too?  the help file seemed to insinuate that it's only for referenced images.

[whdjr]

dude.  crap in a can, that's cool... I went to see if that was the same for "tframes' command... and it doesn't even list TFRAMES in the help file   I'll just keep using imageframes from now on... that works for wipeouts too?  the help file seemed to insinuate that it's only for referenced images.

uh... ...as long as you keep the can...

TFRAMES is part of the Express Tools.  It controls the system var 'imageframe'.  All TFRAMES does is turn the frame either on or off.  In order to get the third option you have to issue the imageframe command at the command line.

[Josh Nieman]

dude.  crap in a can, that's cool... I went to see if that was the same for "tframes' command... and it doesn't even list TFRAMES in the help file   I'll just keep using imageframes from now on... that works for wipeouts too?  the help file seemed to insinuate that it's only for referenced images.

uh... ...as long as you keep the can...

TFRAMES is part of the Express Tools.  It controls the system var 'imageframe'.  All TFRAMES does is turn the frame either on or off.  In order to get the third option you have to issue the imageframe command at the command line.

that explains why I didn't find it in the help file... I didn't look in the express tools help.

This is kind of silly... why update imageframe and not tframes.... actually... why HAVE 'tframes' ?

[whdjr]

dude.  crap in a can, that's cool... I went to see if that was the same for "tframes' command... and it doesn't even list TFRAMES in the help file   I'll just keep using imageframes from now on... that works for wipeouts too?  the help file seemed to insinuate that it's only for referenced images.

uh... ...as long as you keep the can...

TFRAMES is part of the Express Tools.  It controls the system var 'imageframe'.  All TFRAMES does is turn the frame either on or off.  In order to get the third option you have to issue the imageframe command at the command line.

that explains why I didn't find it in the help file... I didn't look in the express tools help.

This is kind of silly... why update imageframe and not tframes.... actually... why HAVE 'tframes' ?

The Express Tools are not 'supported' thus they don't get updated like we wish they would.  Actually I don't think they have been updated (except for version control) since R2000.  It does seem like the more popular ones eventually get integrated in the base product though.

[Krushert]

But the imageframe has no affect on the a wipeout though it is a raster image. 

I just tried it with a wipeout but got nothing.  Hopefully I did something wrong.

[Josh Nieman]

But the imageframe has no affect on the a wipeout though it is a raster image. 

I just tried it with a wipeout but got nothing.  Hopefully I did something wrong.

That's what I was wondering... for some reason I think I remember doing a couple different things and telling myself to always use TFRAMES.

I have a bad habit of knowing that there is a reason I am doing something a certain way... and forgetting why. 

[whdjr]

A wipeout is a polygonal area that hides whats under it when it is turned off.  It only has a frame so it can be selectable.  An image has a frame to make it selectable not to hide things under it.  They are two different objects with a small amount of overlap.  Sorry if there was any confusion on my part.

[mjfarrell]

Here is a sample of how a client has decided to use Visibility states with Sheet Set Values embedded in their title block.  BEWARE the 'feature' that setting the "Lock Position" to on will cause the Attributes to become invisible; and not in a good way.
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/ps/item?siteID=123112&id=7586586&linkID=9240817

[ELOQUINTET]

i just realized when looking through here that this thread was hijacked by a wipeout discussion. this was meant to be for blocks only urrrrgrh

[whdjr]

i just realized when looking through here that this thread was hijacked by a wipeout discussion. this was meant to be for blocks only urrrrgrh

Dude, you started the thread 2 years ago and you just now realized it got hijacked.....

[ELOQUINTET]

well i stopped paying much attention to it because once again there was very little participation. This place used to be very productive but nowadays I see more discussions about what music people are listening to than anything cad related 

[Josh Nieman]

well i stopped paying much attention to it because once again there was very little participation. This place used to be very productive but nowadays I see more discussions about what music people are listening to than anything cad related 

Or what new vehicle someone is driving.


Maybe you aren't looking hard enough?  Or... in the right forum... you get outside of Lagniappe, right?

[ronjonp]

...
This place used to be very productive but nowadays I see more discussions about what music people are listening to than anything cad related 

I feel the same way Dan...

[mjfarrell]

well i stopped paying much attention to it because once again there was very little participation. This place used to be very productive but nowadays I see more discussions about what music people are listening to than anything cad related 

hmmmm, perhaps you might be able to steer or stimulate the thread towards more active discussion.....

[David Hall]

How do you force the wipeout to the back?  I keep going into Bedit and sending to back, but as soon as I save, it comes back to the front.  Do you have to draw the wipeout first?

[daron]

draworder and when you go in to update them, use regen. It should set it right.

[Krushert]

Try setting the draworder when are not in the BE mode; where you see just the lines not the dynamics stuff. 
But then again I have separate files for my blocks

[Guest]

We can't use wipeouts here. 

DARN YOU REPRODESK!!!   :realmad:

[T.Willey]

We can't use wipeouts here. 

DARN YOU REPRODESK!!!   :realmad:

Use a solid hatch pattern.  Set it to back, and put the color 255.  This has worked for me before wipeouts.

[Guest]

We can't use wipeouts here. 

DARN YOU REPRODESK!!!   :realmad:

Use a solid hatch pattern.  Set it to back, and put the color 255.  This has worked for me before wipeouts.

What did you have for settings in the CTB file for 255?

[Josh Nieman]

We can't use wipeouts here. 

DARN YOU REPRODESK!!!   :realmad:

Use a solid hatch pattern.  Set it to back, and put the color 255.  This has worked for me before wipeouts.

What did you have for settings in the CTB file for 255?

255 will print black normally unless you go out of your way to do otherwise.  I use an RGB color to do so.  254,254,254 usually.  RBG colors ignore CTBs so you'd be safe.  I do that for company logos too where we actually need color.  Better than the boss going and turning random ACI entries into a color-plot and saving it locally only... think I finally broke him of that, though, when I showed him how easy it was to pick a RGB color.

[T.Willey]

We can't use wipeouts here. 

DARN YOU REPRODESK!!!   :realmad:

Use a solid hatch pattern.  Set it to back, and put the color 255.  This has worked for me before wipeouts.

What did you have for settings in the CTB file for 255?

I think it was set to use object color.

Edit:  Attached an example.  There is a hatch patter sent to back, and color 255.  In my ctb file I set it to 'use object color'.  In the preview it looks a little gray, but as you can see it prints white.