Mystery rectangles showing up?

I found this command once, but can't remember it. We recieved some drawings from an architect that had blocks in them that were part of a building. When we exploded the block to manipulate layers and add in electrical equipment the rest of the building appeared. What is the command that is used so you only see part of an object such as a block or an xref?

thanks
Jeremy

 

XCLIP ??
DVIEW CLIP ??
LAYERs off ??

 

It sounds like the whipout command was used.
The polylines are or were the frames. The polylines act like an image. If you don't want to see what is hidden behind them use the display order control command to bring the polylines to the front.

 

olivers1: It would be better for you and your business NOT TO EXPLODE BLOCKS. If fact, when working on drawings furnished by others, forget you even know there is an explode command.

How can you determine the intent of what the images mean if they are exploded?

There are other ways of doing what needs to be done; take some time and look through the help files.

 

The biggest reason we explode blocks is so we can change the received drawings to 1 color. You can manually select all the colors in the drawing and change them to the color we want for backgrounds, but it still doesn't get all of the colors in a block changed. If there is a better solution I would like to hear it.

 

change all xref layers to one colour? this will work if the original drafter used ByLayer colours

 

Use REFEDIT to redefine the block.

 

Look in the customization group for a routine posted lately to change all
entities in blocks to bylayer color. You shouldn't need to make any change
to the received drawing other than this -- and you should discuss these
non-bylayer objects with whoever originated the drawings, with the goal of
not having this problem in the future.

If there are only one or two offending colors nested in blocks, it would
better to redefine your pen settings so that those colors also plot as
"background" rather than edit the drawing to make them your favorite
background color.

When you're working off anyone else's drawings (which will almost certainly
change while the project is in progress) your goal should be to do NOTHING
to those drawings. Ideally, you wouldn't even open those drawings or modify
them in any way. Just xref them, set the xref layers to the "background"
color that suits you), and go to work. You should be able to update your
files for a change simply by replacing the xref. You shouldn't create a
situation where you have to do a round of work on somebody else's files, on
each and every revision, before you can start your own work.

Exploding all blocks is the worst thing you can do. It creates more problems
than it solves, and it shouldn't be necessary.

 

Frankly I am amazed that people are using drawings as they come in. Most of the time the drawings have so much extra stuff that we can't see our electrical items when placed into a received drawing. As for adjusting our pen sets, typically the pen set, layers and colors we can use are dictated to us by the customer. We receive drawings all the time that have blocks with forced layers in them. I agree I would rather use them as they come in the door, but when we have tried this the drawings become very confusing with all of the extra stuff and not everything being on the back layer. I am interested in the tool that was spoken of that takes all block elements and changes their color to Bylayer. That would help us out tremendously.

Thanks for the suggestions
Jeremy

 

Isn't the "extra stuff" on identifiable layers that can be frozen? As an
architect, I've often been in the position of supplying drawings to
engineering consultants, and I've always made sure that they CAN use my
drawings exactly as provided. Meaning that each consultant can freeze layers
that aren't pertinent, and all items are color bylayer so that they can turn
all the visible layers to a background color. This is done by attaching the
drawing as an xref and controlling the visibility/color of the xrefed
layers, not by altering the drawing to put everything on one background
layer.

I can understand your situation, if the drawing is truly so bad that it
can't be treated in this manner. But that's how it should be done. If you
can't persuade them to produce more compatible drawings, then I guess your
only option is to charge them more for the extra time and work and
possibility of coordination errors, due to the unnecessary process of
tweaking their drawings for them. And again, if you're going to do their
work for them, then it should be in the direction of *fixing* their drawings
to xref properly, not blowing them to pieces -- redefining all blocks to
color bylayer is infinitely better than exploding all blocks.

If your field is electrical, then in my experience you probably don't much
more than walls, doors, and windows to appear, and maybe some fixture type
items, if they help in clarifying position/orientation of your electrical
stuff. It's difficult to imagine a drawing so badly organized that these few
layers couldn't be isolated and the rest simply frozen. If they're putting
furniture on the wall layer, or doors on a structural steel layer, then you
need to show them the problem.

 

There is no reason to change a draqwing from an outside source to use it as a background. Proper training in the use of Xref's would solve your issues.

 

That's only when the drawings coming in are drawn correctly. We try to not
mess with the base files being sent in but in many cases our clients
(architects) are only drawing to suit their needs - Stuff on layer 0, lines
that are not 'bylayer' and worse. Some modifications are necessary.

Matt

as a background. Proper training in the use of Xref's would solve your
issues.

 

I agree when the drawings come in with everything on unique layers and the colors aren't forced, freezing unneeded layers and adjusting colors works great. But we still get many drawings from process people and building people that are hard to use. Believe it or not we will receive drawings that have 10-15 drawings in the model tab. Each one will have a border with current rev info.

One question I still have. So are people changing their xref colors in the drawing used as an xref directly, or are they changing them in the drawing they pull the xref into?

Thanks
Jeremy

 

When possible we don't change the arch. drawings at all, saves time. Maybe
I should capitalize the when possible part............It only works out
about 10% of the time.

Matt

colors aren't forced, freezing unneeded layers and adjusting colors works
great. But we still get many drawings from process people and building
people that are hard to use. Believe it or not we will receive drawings
that have 10-15 drawings in the model tab. Each one will have a border with
current rev info.

the drawing used as an xref directly, or are they changing them in the
drawing they pull the xref into?

 

When that happens we send them back. We don't budget time to fix mistakes made by others.

 

That is a luxury not shared by all.
Matt

made by others.

 

Sounds like it's time to review the contract.

 

Geez, people. Lighten up. Maybe Matt or olivers1 has any say in the
contract. Who knows, but in time constraints, sending a drawing back
sometimes can't happen for the drawings to get out by the deadline. It'd be
nice to force them to do so, but it's hard for one company to tell another
what their standards should be....

I think it would be especially hard for a consultant to tell the architect
to have better standards. Usually, the architect can have some say in his
consultants drawings, for project consistency, but that's about it.

I'm speaking as one in an architectural firm. My firm doesn't even use
AutoCAD, and there's some translation nightmares that happen when we send
our consultants files. We don't always remember to take care of the
nightmares beforehand, and that's when the consultant will have to handle
it.

But they don't always use our latest stuff anyways, so it's a wash.<BG>

 

Actually it's quite easy at contract if the data is covered in the RFQ.

 

That would be nice but unfortunately it won't happen. I don't think the
industry in this area could be forced into drawing "correctly" even if
drawing specs were covered in the contract - there's just too much work
flying around. Repeat offenders do however get a little extra tucked into
their prices for the hassle. If it were up to me (and it's not) we would be
more aggressive about it or more selective of our clients but my boss (like
most) just don't see the waste of time or don't care.

Matt