Leaderboard

Totally inappropriate response Jamin. Good luck with your next CAD problem. The members who have posted in this thread include 2 forum moderators and collectively have a total of about 65,000 posts.

I don't work in feet god bless metric makes life so much easier. Anyway my take on metres to feet. Tried to get distof to work. ; tol 1/16" (setq a 3.25 str "") (setq ar (/ a 0.3048)) (setq ai (fix (/ a 0.3048))) (setq b (- ar ai)) (setq str (strcat (rtos ai 2 0) "'")) (IF (> b (/ 0.0625 12.0)) (progn (setq c (* 12.0 b)) (setq inch (fix c)) (setq str (strcat str (rtos inch 2 0) "\"")) (setq frac (* (- c inch) 16.0)) (if (/= (fix frac) 0.0) (setq str (strcat str (rtos frac 2 0) "/16" )) ) ) ) (princ str)

Did you already attempt to install this version and then quit before it finished? Or did the installation fail for some reason? If so, take a look at this article: https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/Product-Already-Installed.html

Maybe this will come in handy - RoomDim

Back in the early 70's I used to draw radio controlled scale model airplane plans extrapolated from 3 view drawings of airplanes that had overall dimensions. There used to be a series of books one could buy at the local hobby shop with different eras of military or civilian planes. I don't remember anything about the publications other than they were about letter size and the drawings in them were very well detailed and precise to the scale. There was no internal details nor any drawings other than the external three views. The plan view was usually a half & half top & bottom view. I'd transfer the outline at scale to velum and then add in the parts I'd need to hold the engine, tank, servos pushrods and the like. The design was with balsawood construction in mind. My most memorable one I did was a P-47 Thunderbolt with the "razorback" cockpit configuration, my all time favorite WW II fighter. It was one of only two I ever built from my own plans and the most successful one in that it actually flew very well. Damn, that was almost 50 years ago now. I remember marveling at how easy the center of gravity was to get right. Very little weight was needed to balance it out of being nose heavy.

Lee Mac has a number of very useful Area related lisps available on his site. I have never needed them, but they are highly configurable, and as with all of Lee's lisps, brilliant. Lee very generously makes these freely available to the global cad community as share-ware, with a Donation option, always a good idea, for such productive tools! Thanks Lee!

i noticed the LSP is designed to insert the size in meters but then convert meters to feet, correct? My gut tells me this is the cause of the anomaly. It looks like the correct conversion factor would be: 1 meter = 3.28083989501312 foot So your meter to feet number in "precision" in your LSP shows .32808333 but it looks like this should be .328083989501312 Other than this, It is possible to have an error factor in Autocad depending on what drawing units you are using in your DWG. But I'm sure there are others more versed in this than I that can explain it better. I am not an expert as I've used imperial for the last 17 years lol. SO if you are using imperial inches UNITS in your dwg file, the LISP will add the dimension in meters - right away that number will be wrong. Then that number gets reconverted back to feet by the LSP but that original metric multiplier would still be incorrect (in this example, at least). So the feet text would also be slightly off in theory. Maybe there is an error with inches in a metric DWG but from what I recall the error is more associated with metric objects in an Imperial DWG because of how autocad does the conversion.

I came across this link https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2020/ENU/AutoCAD-Core/files/GUID-5070C6C7-EAEF-45F0-ABB8-F894E585C54D-htm.html I will paste the relevant part here: The XREFOVERRIDE system variable affects display and plotting, and works in conjunction with the VISRETAIN system variable. Consider these scenarios: If you want the xref layers to retain their layer settings, it is recommended to set VISRETAIN and XREFOVERRIDE system variables to 0. If you want the xref layers to retain the overrides you made in the current (host) drawing, it is recommended to set VISRETAIN to 1. This assumes that the visual properties on the external reference objects are set to ByLayer. When XREFOVERRIDE is set to 1, objects on xref layers are treated as if their properties are set to ByLayer. When XREFOVERRIDE is set to 0, objects on xref layers honor their object property assignments. The VISRETAINMODE system variable provides you with more options on how you want to control and manage the xref layer property overrides in your current (host) drawing when you have set VISRETAIN to 1. By default, the VISRETAINMODE, a bitcoded system variable, is set to 0. To specify more than one layer properties that you want to automatically sync, enter the sum of their values. You can choose any combination for the xref layer properties that you want to reload from the referenced layer settings even when you have set VISRETAIN to 1. But, if you do not want to synchronize xref layer properties, you should keep the default value for VISRETAINMODE. Legacy Drawings and Xref Layer Property Overrides Settings If you have a legacy drawing, which you opened in AutoCAD 2018.1 or later versions, any changes to the referenced layer property will not get updated automatically in the current drawing regardless of what value you have set for your VISRETAINMODE sysvar (changed the default value). This behavior ensures that anytime you open a drawing that is authored in an earlier version of AutoCAD 2018.1, it maintains the visual fidelity between AutoCAD 2018.1 and previous AutoCAD releases and there is no change in behavior. To make VISRETAINMODE take effect for legacy drawings, you need to save the current drawing in AutoCAD 2018.1 and reload the xref drawing to see the changes.

It sounds like you have SNAP enabled. By default, the F9 key will toggle SNAP on and off. Tap the F9 key and try again.

SLW is correct. Watch out for nested blocks, that is, blocks inside of other blocks. You may also find anonymous blocks, whose names start with an asterisk. If there are blocks that you use on a regular basis, consider adding them to your template(s). That way you don't have to bring them in every time.

I’ve taken offence to the fool with the hulk profile he was not helpful and hasn’t read my responses then gives me the SMH, c’mon.. I was only after some clarity around something I clearly don’t understand. I’ll be deactivating my acct ASAP.

What tools? Please explain.

Extra tools are usually lisp routines, which are not transferred with the drawing. Techniques are the way that the end result is produced and are within the draftsman. If you have any complex linetypes, then the second user would have to have the shape files to see the shapes, and the font file if it was a non standard one. You could DXFOUT with entities only.

What are these 'tools' we are used to talking in actual AutoCAD terms, commands, variables etc. Unfortunately we cannot see your file and what it contains so can you explain in AutoCAD terms what you are refering too?

Hello I did the routine but the autocad has an error when using FIX to remove the decimal part of the number. Drawing a 3.0480 x 3.0480 rectangle the same routine returns different values. Even if you use 3.05 when converting meters to feet and drawing a 3.050 x 3.050 rectangle, we have an error in the FIX. I found differences 2.7e-12 between the same numbers. Sometimes (fix 10.0) = 10 and (fix 10.0) = 9. I don't know why. Invert the sequence of the points. Bottom left to top right. Bottom right to bottom left. I gave up. I do not speak English. Sorry my english from google translator. Original in Portuguese. Olá eu fiz a rotina mas o autocad tem erro quando usa o FIX para retirar a parte decimal do número. Desenhando um retangulo 3.0480 x 3.0480 a mesma rotina retorna valores diferentes. Mesmo que use 3.05 na converção de metros para pes e desenhando um retangulo de 3.050 x 3.050 temos erro no FIX. Localizei diferenças 2.7e-12 entre mesmos numberes. As vezes (fix 10.0) = 10 e (fix 10.0) = 9. Não sei porque. Inverta a sequencia dos pontos. Inferior esquerdo para o superior direito. Inferior direito para o inferior esquerdo. Desisti. Eu não falo ingles. Desculpe o meu ingles do google tradutor. room size.LSP

You’re one of those interweb fuckwits hey