Angle Dimensions

Using Autocad 2007 And Civil 3d 2008

When I Dimension An Angle Between Two Lines In Degrees, Minutes & Seconds The Text Doesn't Include A Zero 0 If, For Instance The Minutes Are 4. The Text Doesn't Include The 0 As In 04'. Any Way To Get The 0 In The Text?

go to didmension style>select the style you are using & click on modify

you cna see the option to choose zero supression on or of under primary units for both angular & linear dimension.

This may be of interest to you. You may need to register, but it's free.

http://www.theswamp.org/index.php?topic=29656.0

Dipali

I opened dim style and both linear and angluar zero suppression boxes are unchecked, yet, when I label the angle I still get 6°8'18" (without the -08').

It appears to make no difference whether they are checked or unchecked.

Thanks for the reply.

check the "dimzin" variable.

alanjt

Did that. No difference

Thanks

also, lpseifert - waiting for approval from swamp.

Thanks

alanjt

Did that. No difference

Thanks

also, lpseifert - waiting for approval from swamp.

Thanks

did you set it to zero?

It was set to zero when I started. I ran through 0-12 dinzin. no difference

It was set to zero when I started. I ran through 0-12 dinzin. no difference

oh, sorry. i was sure that would fix it.

hmm...

I thought that the DIMAZIN variable only applied to decimal angles, so not what the OP wanted

AutoCAD always has not been able to express sexagesimal angles nicely.

Autocad-Autodesk is suspiciously silent on the matter. I'm thinking it ain't happening.

Thanks for your help, all.

It's crazy that this even occurs. One would think, by now, they would have smoothed out all the Dimstyle bugs.

I played with this a little tonight and achieved nothing.

The routine in the link lpseifert posted is nice, but you lose all dynamics for you dimension. Is it really that important to have the degrees as 09°09'09"? Takes up a lot of extra room that I would rather waste on other things.

alanjt

From my perspective as a land surveyor, even though we rarely label angles, I would rather see 83°02'03" as opposed to 83°2'3", where someone perhaps unfamiliar with reading these angles assumes that the angle is 83°20'30". There seems to be no problem labeling bearings on lines, just angles.

Thanks for your concern and help. It's too bad Autocad doesn't share that feeling.

James Fivash

alanjt

From my perspective as a land surveyor, even though we rarely label angles, I would rather see 83°02'03" as opposed to 83°2'3", where someone perhaps unfamiliar with reading these angles assumes that the angle is 83°20'30". There seems to be no problem labeling bearings on lines, just angles.

 

Thanks for your concern and help. It's too bad Autocad doesn't share that feeling.

James Fivash

I've completed my share of surveys and have never heard of anyone complaining about an angular dimension missing leading zeros. With this day in age, surveying rarely ever has to show an angular dimension, unless it's from a plat/deed, and then, you are more than likely going to have to edit the dimension to display exactly how the plat/deed portrays it.