problems in the result of a dynamic lock of a 2d port

[Jan.M]

Hello everyone, my name is Janluca, I've just written, I'm finishing studying to give the exam of the 2013 autocad course and I hope so much that someone can help me.
I was exercising to create a block of a dynamic door, for the accuracy of the "metre door" and the final result is not exactly the exact block that is in the designe center; I know what's already there, so why do it again? in case I have to create a design with similar features, like a gate or other things, to be able to do so.
I honestly don't know how to make me understand, I hope to be able to upload the attachment so things would be easier.
in the drawing there are 5 blocks of the door, in red at the top right there is the block that I created, at the left and under the red door the inverted block of magenta color and in the bottom left the inverted block or from the left or from below and finally in white above the four blocks there is the original block).
My problem is when the door is reversed or left or down and I try to increase the width of the door, or to decrease it with the parameter of the constraint, this is deformed, while when vine reinverted from left to bottom or from bottom to left the block behaves regularly when changing width to the door, why?
I have tried several times to recreate it, to try to understand where I was wrong, to make all the properties coincide between my design and the original design of the designe center, however, despite all the properties are equal, at least to me it seems, I can't come to the end and I can't understand why.
thanks in advance

 

[Jan.M]

Hi, I would like to thank all those who have read my discussion, especially if someone has tried to verify and seek problems. I know that it was not an "appetible" question like others but I hoped to receive at least some answers, of the kind I'm sorry but I didn't find anything, I know how to do or any other answer, it would be sufficent, at least I know that someone more experienced than I would try. Good day to all

 

[confutatis]

do not rush, people also have other to do than answer on this forum. from 22:03 yesterday you didn't give people much time to answer.

 

[Jan.M]

do not rush, people also have other to do than answer on this forum. from 22:03 yesterday you didn't give people much time to answer.

Hello, I certainly expressed myself badly and how I wrote it I can have been misunderstood. In response I wanted to intend to leave a comment as you did, so that I could understand if someone wanted to try to solve the problem for any visitors and maybe hope that someone who had already visited him could be made alive leaving a message like you did, at least a person who responded now is:wink:
I suppose who can answer is quite experienced, that is, a person who works, maybe with family and therefore has little time and who looks at the forum every now and then; in fact I have 234 visits in more than 2 months and "not from yesterday"as you wrote.
sincerely after the 120 visits I did not think they could visit my discussion so many other people otherwise a courtesy request I would have made it already then: "If you were so brilliant to leave a comment after reading my discussion so as to understand who was interested in trying to solve my problem, thank you very much for the time devoted to me".
I don't want to look like a bad person or who doesn't respect the next one, though, putting you in my shoes..., I see that I have 234 visits and of these I don't know if someone is trying to solve the problem, that after it is able or not to give me the solution that is another speech, though, at least I know that someone is trying, of course knowing that it could take a long time.
I think, a negative answer, I'm sorry, but I can't, I want, etc... It is an answer that you would not want to hear but always better than not know anything.

 

[confutatis]

oops, it is true, I confess that I have not looked at the date but only the hour, not always bazzico in this forum. All right, I'll do 500 pushes as punishment. . .

 

[PlannerRoad]

from the first impression, instead of putting different constraints of "stirification" was not the case of placing rotation constraints?
with the iron constraints it is natural that in the case of increase of the size is deformed, the only constraint that I find on scale concerns the arc.
I don't have time to analyze it in depth.

 

[Jan.M]

Sorry I was late, but I had problems with the internet and at that time I was preparing the 2012 autocad exam.
the door is identical to the one in the designe center, or rather I tried from scratch to remake that block finding alas of problems without being able to understand why.
then I tried to make two blocks, a closet and a window following the instructions on the book and I had difficulties, in the sense that, sometimes, changing the intersectional selection method, from top to bottom and not from bottom to top changed the result. So I don't know, if it could be a problem with my program, which maybe isn't perfect being for students, or other issues I don't know. thanks anyway for the time dedicated to me.