Hatch

[Baiksu]

Can someone show me about hatch- Associative, Annotative scale, Gap Tolerance, please.

[ReMark]

What problem are you attempting to solve?

 

A hatch or fill that is associative is updated when you modify its boundary objects. That means if you were to hatch an object then use the Stretch command to change its length the hatch pattern would expand or contract to match.

 

In this example, demonstrating associative hatch, the lower leg of our object is stretched downward. The hatch stretches right along with the object.

[ReMark]

This is what happens when our hatch or fill is non-associative. The lower leg of the object is stretched but unfortunately our hatch remains where it was originally.

 

Understand the difference now between associative and non-associative?

[ReMark]

Annotative scaling can be applied to text, dimensions, leaders/multileaders, blocks/attributes, tolerances and hatches.

 

Have you used annotative scaling for any of these thus far? Do you understand the basic concept of annotative scaling to begin with?

 

From your AutoCAD Help file re: Overview of Creating Annotative Objects.

 

"When you add annotations to your drawing, you can turn on the Annotative property for those objects. These annotative objects are scaled based on the current annotation scale setting and are automatically displayed at the correct size. Annotative objects are defined at a paper height and display at the size determined by the annotation scale."

 

 

It should be noted that where it says "...displayed at the correct size" they are referring to within paper space layout viewports.

 

 

Are you familiar with the use of viewports within a layout?

[ReMark]

This brief article will acquaint you with the gap tolerance feature of the hatch command.

 

http://autocadtips.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/hatch-gap-tolerance/

 

I think I have provided you with the basis for expanding your knowledge re: hatch - Associative, Annotation and Gap Tolerance. If you have further questions continue to post them within this thread.

[PetterVitestam]

Sorry to revive an old thread but I was wondering about the relationship between annotative and associative? How come you can't have an unassociative ANNOTATIVE hatch? I don't see how they could be so dependent on each other.

[ReMark]

Why do you think they are dependent on each other?

Edited May 14, 2014 by ReMark

[RobDraw]

Like ReMark said, they are not dependent on each other.

[PetterVitestam]

Ah, I should have been clearer: I can not make an annotative hatch that is not associative. When the associative checkbox is unchecked the annotative one is unavailable. Therefore association seem to be a prerequisite for annotation, which I don't understand why.

[Dana W]

Ah, I should have been clearer: I can not make an annotative hatch that is not associative. When the associative checkbox is unchecked the annotative one is unavailable. Therefore association seem to be a prerequisite for annotation, which I don't understand why.

Because annotative hatches change size and hatch scale, they must be associative. Association binds the hatch to a particular boundary. AutoCad uses this boundary to re-calculate the new hatch properties when the scale is changed, thus an annotative hatch is re-scaled.

 

EDIT: My explanation is more of an assumption, or semi-educated guess about why they need to be linked, because I could not find an explanation anywhere.

Edited May 13, 2014 by Dana W

[RobDraw]

I stand corrected. Never noticed it before.

[Dana W]

I stand corrected. Never noticed it before.

Truthfully Rob, I did notice that the check boxes were linked only today, because I have never used annotative hatching. Never saw the point. Smaller scale, hatch lines closer together. Twisted view, twisted hatch. Seems natural to me.

 

OF course, at 1/8" = 1'-0" hatching can get ugly.

 

Further, my explanation is more of an assumption, or semi-educated guess about why they need to be linked because I could not find an explanation anywhere. I should have posted such in the previous post. I guess I will go back and edit it in.

[PetterVitestam]

It still doesn't quite make sense. Even an unassociated hatch has a particular size, and could be said to be associative with its own (invisible) boundary. You can create a hatch that is annotative and associative, and then remove the boundary and still keep the annotative qualities. It makes sense that a hatch would need to be confined into a particular size to be scaled correctly, but if that's what it means to be associative I'd like to see an unassociative hatch! Thanks for all the help Dana, in this and other threads

[ReMark]

"I'd like to see an unassociative hatch."

 

What's stopping you from creating one?

[PetterVitestam]

I wasn't clear. What I mean is that if we go by the assumption that associative for a hatch means that it has a specified boundary, a certain size in space, and that this is a requirement for being able to be scaled annotatively... then I'd like to see the hatch that does not fill these criteria, an unassociative hatch. However I know this is not the definition of associative, rather it means that it is using a boundary made up of objects that are not the hatch, and transforms according to those boundaries.

 

But I don't see how being associative in that way would be a requirement for being annotative! After all all hatches, even unassociative ones, conform to a shape and size by some internal boundary. The function of transforming the hatch based on objects aside from the hatch and the function of scaling a hatch does not seem connected to me. It should be possible to have an unassociative hatch, floating in space, and still have it be annotative. Am I missing something here?

[ReMark]

So you want to be able to create a hatch pattern that is annotative but you do NOT want it to be associative? And what problem in your drawing would that solve specifically?

Edited May 14, 2014 by ReMark

[ReMark]

Have I covered all the options?

[ReMark]

"It should be possible to have an unassociative hatch, floating in space, and still have it be annotative."

 

You are right. It is possible.

 

Now you should be able to get a good night's sleep without worrying about this weighty problem.

[PetterVitestam]

I see, then it makes sense. I started losing sleep over this because when you create a hatch and check the annotative checkbox, the associative one gets checked and greyed out. But then you can make it unassociative from the properties... I guess there is something awry in the hatch creation dialog box, that doesn't mean anything.

 

The problem it would solve would be that I'd know what I'd get when using annotative hatches, so that hatches I don't want to be associative wouldn't secretly become so, and mess something up later, just because I wanted them annotative.

 

I bet you could write a doctoral thesis on this though...

[ReMark]

I'll leave the thesis writing to you since the topic seems to have weighed heavily upon your mind.

 

I don't see how a hatch pattern could "secretly" or otherwise become associative without you making it so on purpose.

 

I think you have made "much ado about nothing".