The only thing I want is for the hatch to start from the centre of the room and work outwards. This is so I have a centre run of tiles and then they work outwards at 600mm each tile until they reach the outer wall and the last tile will be reduced equally at each side.
I am working with a drawing that has a ceiling grid hatch that i set to 2' each way, moving the origin to the center point of the room does not adjust the grid to be centered in the room. Any input is appreciated.
Tile Hatch Autocad Free Download
Download Zip 🔥 https://urllie.com/2yGamO 🔥
It is very infrequent that I see a ceiling grid that is a hatch. Whenever I need to adjust one, I explode it. I can see how making one can be done quite quickly with hatch but I've always found it a lot easier to adjust one that is lines.
Thanks Rkent - I was selecting the origin point and and moving it to the midpoint of a line across the room, no joy. But selecting it with hatchedit and choosing the origin at the midpoint did it. Not sure why that is not the same procedure to AutoCAD.
I here ya Rob, but exploding is loses all the advantages that the hatch provides. Now you know how to align it, so hopefully you will not explode it in the future. Do you do the same with blocks or do you redefine?
I was already aware of how to adjust a hatch. I was just stating that I prefer to make adjustments to lines rather than a hatch and will continue to do it that way. BTW, I do not appreciate what you are implying with the question about blocks.
Rob - that was a question, not an implication. I know different people handle it different ways. I now a lot of people that have been using AutoCAD for 10+ years and still explode blocks. Sorry if I stepped on your feelings - that was not the intent.
Why would you ask that question in the context of this thread unless you were implying that, in addition to exploding ceiling grid hatches, exploding blocks is also wrong? You probably know that it is usually a bad practice to explode blocks and asking someone if they explode blocks in the context of your message implies that they use improper procedures. I think that most of the people here would agree with me, even if they don't like me. I believe that is exactly what you were saying.
Actually I did not choose that, as I just joined this forum yesterday I did not tweak all the settings. It has now been changed - Feel free to email me personally. To your post though, I already apologized for my mis-read - Twice! So for the third time, I am sorry - I am now done with this exchange.
Hi, I tried creating a *.pat for a Spanish roof tile but it's coming out like a random of discontinued line after it starts repeating the hatch pattern. I can create a block to get the pattern I'm looking for but a *.pat would be better and not bog down the file / slow when drafting. The attached image: the right hatch is the correct version and the left hatch of the image is the incorrect version that I'm getting. I've attached the *.pat file as well Any thoughts? Thanks
That looks to me like a case of X- and Y-offset values being figured relative to zero rotation, instead of relative to the direction of each lineset separately for itself. It might be possible to troubleshoot if you can post the .DWG file that I assume is the source of your "correct" image.
with the pen up for close to 39,000 times the distance that it's down, both of which I would think could be simplified to something a little less extreme, with some slight changes in direction angles.
EDIT: I managed to get the pattern to work in a limited area and was able to make my own basis. BUT it raises other questions, just within the area where it is close to working right:
I notice that the "under" tiles are at different levels in relation to the rest of the pattern [the red ones are higher than the yellow ones]. And the "over" tiles are not consistent, either -- the green one is higher than those I left white, and the magenta one should be doubled like the cyan ones, with the second one there presumably above the magenta one, meaning the close-to-vertical lines going upward from there should be shorter. Etc., etc. Maybe that's part of the reason the .PAT file has 235 lines....
That is correct, they have different "level" because the double tile shifts things up. Perhaps trying to keep them on the same level even when having the double tile will help simplify the PAT file of having less than 235 lines.
It is better closer to the origin but within one unit away you can notice the disconnect in the lines, so if I were to use this hatch, 20'-40' range, it's quite noticeable unfortunately. Quite amazing to cut it down to fewer than 80lines though compare to the 235 lines
I have a custom hatch pattern that i need to edit to make the vertical line 9" from the 0,0 origin. So the tile will be 36" long then be 6" in height. I thought i understood this but i am doing this wrong. I understand the first number is the angle that the line is to be drawn at. The second number is the x & y offset. The third & final numbers are where i get confused. I thought that since i am rotating everything 90 degrees & drawing a line 6 " long that the code would be
Well, its closer than what i had. Basically, the first bottom tile at origin point 0,0 will be 36" long by 6" high. The text tile in a vertical direction will start at 9,6, & then the row above that will be 9,6 from that point.
Please note you should load the HatchKit Add-In for Revit and utilise its Import command to load this pattern to Revit (any version between 2013 and 2018 inclusive) as it will be rejected as too large by the Revit Fill Manager.
Either something was drawn wrong in the objects from which Hatchkit was asked to generate that code, or Hatchkit itself is flawed. What's with a line set at an angle of 89.9447802041 degrees, and an X-offset value of 113364.057228 units? This should have only 0- and 90- degree directions [or could include 180 and/or 270, but there's no need], and offset values like 303/603/903/1203.
To be honest, there was an error in my posting, to draw the pattern within a rectangular arrangement you will need 72 elements, not 16 and certainly not the 8 that form the pattern I published. Rather less work to lay out.
This pattern has an enclosing template 906mm wide by 603 tall overall which drifts a little to the left if laid so each 4-way grout joint exactly lines up and the enclosing rectangle for such an orthogonally laid pattern can be surprisingly large and daunting to fill in.
Well, I find that this can't be done in the usual way--something's got to give. Either A) you accept the skew in the HatchKit version, or B) you make the sizes nominal between centers of joints, or C) the larger tiles have to be 600 units high x 603 units wide, as in the image [which visually exaggerates the joint widths for clarity], or D) you accept a slight offset between vertical joints, which will require a very much longer pattern definition, or E) you do it as a single-line pattern, without showing both sides of the joints.
The only way for this to work practically as a pattern definition with clean angles and offsets and 8 lines of code is for things to line up in a certain way -- the white segments [chosen arbitrarily -- the right edges of the tiles in every third course] would be defined in one lineset definition, and for that to be viable, must align. If the joints line up for that purpose [the yellow phantom lines], and the smaller tiles are 300 units wide, and the joints are 3 units wide, then the larger tile must be 603 units wide.
If the larger tiles are really 600 units wide, then there will be a slight offset/misalignment between vertical joints, either at the crossings [EDIT: looks like that's @hugha's approach in Post 11] or comparing joints 3 courses apart [which is what would take the very much longer definition in my D) option above]. And that must be true for the physical installation of tiles as well as in the AutoCAD pattern definition, which means that a single-line pattern would have to be slightly off from the reality.
If the tiles are laid so all 4-way grout intersections form a straight cross then every third row will drift to the left by 3mm. A practical installer would cater for this by laying each third row offset to the right by 3mm or more tidily each row by 1mm to avoid the extra work of cutting successively larger strips from the majority of tiles along the left and right.
I haven't read your requirements to code for what you exactly need, but I did something for myself based on pattern picture you provided... It's based on my hatch make routines... So here is it (mortar - gaps are equal in x/y directions - I haven't dive even more in the task as I think it's good and as it is now)...
I saw you gave kudo and soultion to the offered hatch pattern example, but isn't my version more flexible... All you have to do is spend some time input values and pat file will be created... From that on you would be able to reconstruct it to work with Revit model hatching... If you are interested, I have and Kent's right version (your choice), but I didn't get kudo or any acknowledgement for my efforts... So I am not posting it until I don't get some credit for it, FYI...
I personally will never, never, hold any possible solution back or hostage because someone didn't give me a kudo and beg for one before posting my solution. Giving kudos is voluntary and should never be a condition before helping anyone no matter what. But that's me.
Why to post it then, when no one will grant me that I'll get one if I post it... This way I am knowing that I am on right path to get some credits... It's not fishing, I usually do things for my personal purposes, and if I see that I can help I do so, otherwise you wouldn't see no any code that I posted... If you are expecting that someone will voluntarily post his copyrighted material just for publicity I think you are wrong... After all we all do thing for some reasons, I just don't see that anyone is earning for his devotion and spending time giving solutions and explaining problems that evolve through time to grant him/her decent conditions for further research and improvement in both directions and personal and for community... 152ee80cbc
cara main pb di laptop tanpa harus download
best love couple whatsapp status video download