Hatch Pattern Making ACAD Files Huge

I found some hatch patterns from a stone supplier (Centurion or Eldorado; don't remember which now) that I really like and want to use. Problem is, using them makes the ACAD files huge- they routinely go from 1 MB without these manufacturer hatch patterns to 12+ MB with. Given that these patterns generally don't look any more complex than, say, the standard GRAVEL hatch pattern or AR-RSHKE, and given that I'm using them at 48 scale for architectural drawings, that seems a bit extreme to me.

As an example: AR-RSHKE added to all four elevations as a veneer increased the file size by about 0.3 MB. Using the FIELDSTONE.pat file increases the file size by about 8 MB...

Could there be something wrong with these patterns that conflates the file size somehow? If so, is there anything I can do about it?

(Using AutoCAD 2014 on a Windows 7 platform)

Is there any possibility that upon insertion you inadvertently exploded the hatch pattern resulting in a plethora of lines?

I tested the fieldstone pattern in a simply drawing where I first hatched a rectangle that was 6'x4'. File size: less than 70KB. I then added and hatched a second rectangle 40'x12'. File size: 80KB.

BTW...my hatch pattern has a scale factor of 1. Why does yours have a scale factor of 48? I am using the default acad.dwt template file (imperial) and my unit type is set to Architectural with a precision of 0'-0".

Just completed another test. I copied the 40'x12' hatched rectangle three times then saved the drawing. File size: 100KB.

Not exploded. That I did check.

As for the hatch pattern, some hatches from that manufacturer (Centurion; I double-checked) require different scales. It might be 1:1 for one, but 48 to make another look right (you know, otherwise you have stones that are 1" across). All of them from this manufacturer do the same thing.

To make matters more complex, I have the same problem with Eldorado's hatch patterns- I just checked that as well... So it has to be something with how the patterns are being placed, maybe? I have them loaded into the C:\Program Files\Autodesk\AutoCAD 2014\UserDataCache\en-us\Support directory so I can access them via the HATCH command, and because that is where acad.pat and acadiso.pat already are.

I do not see any connection as to where the files are placed although for testing purposes I appended fieldstone.pat to a copy of acad.pat.

Try to duplicate my test and see if you get the same or different results. Start with a new drawing.

Have a look at the size of the hatch files.

Acad.pat is 14KB and that includes all the standard hatch patterns.

Some of the fancy stonework hatches have a file size of more than one MB, and that means many more lines in the drawings

Non AutoCAD Hatch patterns do not have a standard repeat dimension (where the pattern repeats).

I'll mess with it more when I get a chance, but to a degree the scale doesn't matter. Be it 1:1 or not the file sizes are huge. I suspect that Eldon has hit upon the answer: no repeat dimension in these vendor patterns makes the patterns much larger than ACAD patterns.

Have a look at the size of the hatch files.

 

Acad.pat is 14KB and that includes all the standard hatch patterns.

 

Some of the fancy stonework hatches have a file size of more than one MB, and that means many more lines in the drawings

 

Non AutoCAD Hatch patterns do not have a standard repeat dimension (where the pattern repeats).

I'm thinking that this lack of a repeat dimension is the culprit more than anything else. So that raises the question: can anyone recommend some good patterns similar to those named that aren't so damned big?

I'll mess with it more when I get a chance, but to a degree the scale doesn't matter. Be it 1:1 or not the file sizes are huge. I suspect that Eldon has hit upon the answer: no repeat dimension in these vendor patterns makes the patterns much larger than ACAD patterns.

Sorry but I'll have to disagree. Using the same pattern as you did I got a totally different result.

A copy I have of Eldorado's FIELDLEDGE contains just over 20000 pattern lines to define its pattern, Centurion's FIELDSTONE 592. Both contain much redundant specification as we describe here:

http://www.hatchkit.com.au/faq.php#Tip9

The problem lies in the runaway nature of the hatch generators used to produce the published patterns.

FIELDSTONE stripped to its essentials requires just 191 lines, FIELDLEDGE 308.

We have automated this operation in HatchKit 2014. Results for the two discussed patterns are attached.

BTW A pattern takes roughly the same space in a drawing or project to store as its ascii .PAT file as each line requires of the order of 56 bytes storage plus some overhead which is of the same order as a text line.

Hugh Adamson

www.hatchkit.com.au

patterns.zip