creates region: has it improved in 2010?

[warburg]

I don't think so. how many to drink to create areas to extrude, for years I look for lines that do not close and that autocad never signals you, with all its beautiful intelligence you have to go to search with the lantern and lose a piece of liver after the other... :angry:
In short, is it not that in 2010 they finally decided that if I click the region command on a certain fence of lines and this fence is not created because it is not perfectly closed, then after spending thousands of euros you would deserve also that the program itself signaled where the problem is? Catia and nx, I do not claim, but at least these small improvements. . .

 

[Shape]

I don't think so. how many to drink to create areas to extrude, for years I look for lines that do not close and that autocad never signals you, with all its beautiful intelligence you have to go to search with the lantern and lose a piece of liver after the other... :angry:
In short, is it not that in 2010 they finally decided that if I click the region command on a certain fence of lines and this fence is not created because it is not perfectly closed, then after spending thousands of euros you would deserve also that the program itself signaled where the problem is? Catia and nx, I do not claim, but at least these small improvements. . .

1)To make an extrusion it is not necessary to create a region but a polyline is sufficent so if it is not closed just go on the properties and select "closed".

2)There is a specific command to create a contour (region or polylinea) from an internal point... _boundary

3)is from different versions that exist these options (2000) I believe... so in fact there are no improvements in 2010, there were before.

In conclusion... considering the investment that is made to use autocad, I highly recommend requesting the paper manual (it is free) and read it for good.... There's almost everything, or at least there's a description of all the commands and features... both new and old.

 

[warburg]

apart from extruding with the tools it wants and with region you can completely legitimately create the basis for extruding. . . only that it is a disastrous tool if you have hundreds of lines (thick head), and from what you say I deduce that it is such also in 2010 (that is disastrous); apart from this, thanks for the advice.

 

[Shape]

apart from extruding with the tools it wants and with region you can completely legitimately create the basis for extruding. . . only that it is a disastrous tool if you have hundreds of lines (thick head), and from what you say I deduce that it is such also in 2010 (that is disastrous); apart from this, thanks for the advice.

in fact you did not understand what I meant....

you can use both an aregion and a polyline, if you want to create it without selecting the individual entities use the comndo _boundary.

I am not an autodesk dealer, so I have no interest in defending autocad. only that one can not claim that he autonomously creates a circle if you have placed a square.

has a philosophy of work (just or wrong) and therefore it is necessary to create the seconode model certain cryptors. so I wouldn't call it disastrous but simply you are leaving from a base that is not done very well!!!

then everyone is free to think it as he believes.... but I have encountered other problems in loft modeling, different extrusion paths mapping materials etc... but I've never had a problem in creating a polyline or a region to extrude. . .

 

[warburg]

but I do not claim that autocad designs me a circle instead of a square, if please let me read where I wrote it I will be grateful. I would expect it to help me draw quickly and assist me, aided design etc. while I do. and when I want to use (repeat, I am not using a command to do something that does not compete with him, despite this would be part of my freedom to interpret the sw) the region command to unite hundreds of lines, arches, polylines for example belonging to a plant of a building of 1456, detected by a colleague or a technician and then put down as it seemed, do you think it is dignified that the program does not tell you absolutely we are talking, sometimes, of tiny differences, infinitesimal things, very rognostic to find, and really you do not understand why with all "intelligence" of the software you have not managed to make so that at that time the two lines that do not close are reported. I wonder too much? The program provides me with a command to do something. I use it and this doesn't appear. He tells me there's a mistake. in the logic of the cad, to me it would seem quite normal that the software made me understand where the error is: is it so difficult to realize in 2010? Then we read some mechanics who tell us that our programs are back thirty years, I believe...
you say I can use boundary: Well, I knew it already. but you will also know that this command changes existing lines once it joins them. That is, in the area where there is lack of contact he recovers it by stretching and making them meet. Well for me this is not very good, because although I do not always have to deal with the millimeters (and the changes that often intrude are of this order) in not few situations it is annoying that a line change angle and length even of very little without that I notice it. I have to see the error, and decide how to make the change by keeping right angles and lengths of the relief or project.

 

[Shape]

I have to see the error, and decide how to make the change by keeping right angles and lengths of the relief or project.

I don't know if it's Monday or what but it's not that I like your tone maolto... cmq... that result (but obviously I do not claim to know) _boundary does not change anything, if anything is when you close a polyline from the properties that autocad interpolates the two extremes that do not coincide. . .

then since the _boundary command you will know that if you remove it from "individual island" and select an inert point..... he will tell you "the contour is not closed" "ok" or hear you hear "observe" eek: miracle... It shows you where the problem is... highlighting the part of polylinea that manages to merge and generating two circles at the ends.... if you do not see just make a pan to view them. . .

said this... I think we realized that like all the software also autocad has its limits... but what you might have to ask... is the right software to model in 3d buildings of 1400 and whistle after sempronio (who made the relief) put it down as you believed?

It is correct to start from the design of sempronio.. . .
Is it better to pass the perimeter with a polyline controlled by you?

You know looking at c.s.i. in the evening many believe that technology (you know the monitor that the manipoli with the hands) is a technology in vogue in all design studies.... but ... it is not so..... you still use the mouse.. and the monitor can't read in the thought. .

 

[warburg]

Dear shape, thank you for your advice expressed with so much generosity and kindness, but above all wisdom and competence in the field.
kissing
C
ps: I add: thanks also for the c**o socket: "you're looking at c.s.i. in the evening many believe that technology (you know the monitor that the manipoli with the hands) is a technology in vogue in all design studies.... but ... it is not so..... you still use the mouse.. and the monitor can't read in the thought. . "

would you be the moderator? That's great.

 

[Shape]

ps: I add: thanks also for the c**o socket: "you're looking at c.s.i. in the evening many believe that technology (you know the monitor that the manipoli with the hands) is a technology in vogue in all design studies.... but ... it is not so..... you still use the mouse.. and the monitor can't read in the thought. . "

would you be the moderator? That's great.

It was not ironic my consideration, and not even a grip for the melts... was a general consideration and not addressed to you in person.. .

It simply wanted to focus attention on a concept that many neglect...and that at the basis of a qlc software there is a precise logic.... and you can't criticize if you don't do something. If we don't respect those rules. . .

cmq since, I am the moderator as you have pointed out, I invite you to argue your answers without using words that in technical forums have little to do.... especially if you turn to a moderator.

 

[warburg]

I've been seeing different types of forums for many years, and it's always fantastic when someone writes to you, in a thread where you're just the two, you're a little crazy and then he says well I didn't mean you, I was talking in general, you know what it is.
fantastic, really:smile:
Now I leave you, I have to go see si-eh-sai from my monitor reading in thought.

 

[Shape]

and it's always fantastic when someone writes to you, in a thread where you're just the two of you, you're a little dumb and then he says well I didn't mean you, I was talking in general

Usually a forum and also read by other people who do not intervene in the discussion, so the general considerations I put them because I think a discussion is not only for those who have the problem... but also to those who read it without having a specific problem... .

I repeat, you felt caught up in the ass, but it wasn't an attack against you. . .