dim text alignment

We are using dimstyles w/ the text aligned with the dimline. I am looking for the system variable that controls text placement when text does not fit between extension lines. There is an unequal offset between text and dimline, depending on which direction the dim is pulled to .... Example: If dim line is below text (or right of), they are in closer proximity than if dim line is above text (or to the left)....Thanks

 

Check our DIMTMOVE. Default is 0 (zero) but 1 and 2 are of interest.

 

dimtmove is the closest value I can find, but not exactly what I'm looking for. When I pull a dim above or to the left of an object, and the text wont fit between the ext. lines, it is reasonably close to the dim line (what I consider reasonable). If I pull a dim off to the right or below the same object, and the text wont fit between, the default position is farther away from the dim line, about twice the distance... Could it be a text issue? Default text style is simples.shx w/ 0.0 ht

 

As an aside, don't use simplex. Romans is closest to single stroke Gothic (the type of text ANSI dictates). Try Dimtmove 1 which will allow you to have a leader with your text. Note: if you already have dimensions, you will have to Update those that you want to use Dimtmove 1 with. Dimtmove 2 lets you move dim text without leader. Once having moved text where you want, re-set Dimtmove to 0 (zero) otherwise all future dimension text will be set to the Dimtmove you changed from the default.

 

It must be embedded in the program. Standard dimstyle does it too...Draw a square and dimension it on all sides, at a scale that forces the text from betewwn the ext. lines. Is the text of the dims on top and left not pushed closer to the dimlines than bottom and right? I dont know the variable names, but below are my current settings.

Text is aligned w/ dimline
Text moves first if not fitted between
Text is above dimline w/o leader

I think I have to much time on my hands today...

Thanks

 

As an aside, don't use simplex.

What's wrong with simplex?

 

ANSI dictates that font should be single stroke gothic. Simplex is not
even close whereas Romans is. Simplex was developed in the beginning
when ram was 68Kb and it took forever to regenerate Romans (or any other
more complicated font). I don't have an argument with anyone using
Simplex as long as they are satisfied with 5th grade font. My opinion.

 

Two things:
There are two simplexes. SIMPLEX.SHX and SIMPLEX_.TTF. The TTF file will
most assuredly regenerate slower than the SHX version.

Also,
Here is a routine that I made up and use for text placement of a dimension.
If I want it one way, I comment it out the appropriate line with a
semi-colon. If I want the other way, I switch placement of the semi-colon.

(defun c:mvd (/ dtmv ortho ent)
(setq dtmv (getvar "dimtmove"))
(setq ortho (getvar "orthomode"))
(setvar "orthomode" 1)
(prompt "\nPick dimension text to move: ")
(while (null ent) (setq ent (entsel)))
(command "dim1" "_.restore" "" ent "dimupt" "1" "dimfit" "5" "dim1"
"_.update" ent "")
;the one above or the one below.
; (command "dim1" "_.restore" "" ent "dimtmove" "1" "dim1" "_.update"
ent "")
(command "dimtedit" ent)
(while (= (getvar "cmdactive") 1)(command pause))
(setvar "orthomode" ortho)
(setvar "dimtmove" dtmv)
(princ)
)

 

Walt: IF you examine the coding in the SHP file for Simplex vs. RomanS, you'll find that the main difference between the two is the start point of the characters.

Romans characters have a little leading space; Simplex characters don't.

Or perhaps I'm looking at something different than what you call Simplex?????

 

Walt,

I think you meant TXT.SHX not Simplex... also my first PC had a whole 64KB
not 68KB.

 

You are correct, however, simplex is still lacking ANSI protocols and just
after I replied I realized I typed incorrectly - meant 64Kb.

 

Walt: Could you expand on "...lacking ANSI protocols..."? Not being acquainted with these, would like to hear more. or is there a site where I can educate myself on this topic.

Thanks.

 

See my previous - single stroke Gothic font, per Goetsch textbook on drafting.
ANSI also dictates that text height be 1/8".

 

Walt: Now I'm confused....Both RomanS and Simplex are single stroke fonts last time I checked.

RomanS has a larger expanded character set than Simplex.

Simplex characters start on the left margin; RomanS characters have a little bit of leading space.

In AutoCad, you can make the characters any text height you wish via text style definition.

Not trying to be picky; you seem to have strong opinions about Simplex. Just trying to learn why. It always seemed odd to me that there were two virtually identical fonts floating around.

Thanks.

 

Yes, guess I do. Probably wrong as was pointed out to me that I was confusing simplex with txt.

 

Could be that ROMANS is larger since SIMPLEX has not been a documented font
since R11.

Just trying to learn why. It always seemed odd to me that there were two
virtually identical fonts floating around.

 

I personally like Arial.ttf because it is much more legible. However, if I was
working for a company doing work for the US Govt. I guranatee they would require
single stroke Gothic, 1/8" high as they are unforgiving in using anything other
than ANSI standards.

 

I had initially thought that the text style might be affecting the relational placement, but I get the same results when the default text is set to something else as well...DINTMOVE value isnt applied evenly, depending on if the text is forced above or to the left, or if it is forced below or to the right of the extension....Enlightening stuff below about the difference between ROMANS and SIMPLEX.

 

Warren: Explain "larger" i.e., more widely used? Bigger letters?

I believe Simplex and RomanS are defined the same height: 15 inches real world.

Even though Simplex seems to be getting the shunning treatment from Autodesk, from some of the comments in posts on this forum, there are an awful lot of people still using it.

Largness is in the eye of the beholder, I guess.....