Can this view be changed to another?

[SFG13]

Hi,

 

I have an object that I want to change it's view to make it look similar to the ones in the picture below, can it be done?

4-22-010 1.dwg

[ReMark]

Yes, I'm positive it can be done. Now I bet you want to know how, right?

[SFG13]

Definitely ReMark! I tried using different views but it wouldn't come out the same. I even tried moving the UCS but can't get it close enough.

[ReMark]

You're on the right track with the UCS but I'll give you a hint. The key (the pun is intended) is to look at the keyway in the center of the object. In which direction is it pointing? Up...right?

[SFG13]

Yes it's in an up/right position.

[ReMark]

The second hint, which is really no hint at all, is to change the orientation of your UCS. You want "Y" to be pointing to the top of your screen. My question to you is which way will "X" point? Will it be to the lower right-hand corner, upper right-hand corner, upper left-hand corner or the lower left-hand corner of your screen?

[SFG13]

Lower right hand corner, except the keyway is pointing lower left?

[ReMark]

I've reproduced the orientation but my X axis was pointing to the upper right hand corner of my screen not the lower right hand corner. Sorry.

 

Here is the result.

 

 

Almost 7 p.m. where I am. Gotta run. I have the latest episode of 24 on my DVR and I'm dying to see it. I'll check back later if I have a chance. I know you can do this. Just keep that keyway pointing to the top of your screen. Good luck.

[SFG13]

Okay cool. Thanks for the help ReMark!

[ReMark]

So, do we have a winner yet?

 

You could also try using the 3DRotate feature of AutoCAD.

[ReMark]

Another view of your object with the UCS visible.

 

 

Required changing the orientation of the UCS then rotating the object 90 degrees.

[SFG13]

Hey ReMark,

 

I used the 3DRotate that you suggested, although I had some difficulty manipulating the angles and getting just the closest position I could but I would say I'm satisfied with my results. I've seen other student's work and the position really doesn't have to look exactly like the professor's but as long as the objects are correct. Thanks a lot for the help! Chesk it out!

4-22-010 1.dwg

[ReMark]

SFG:

 

I'm not your professor and "close enough" is not good enough in this case. You should strive to get it exactly as shown. Close enough is OK for horseshoes and for those who are taking the course just to earn the credit. If you want to be the best then close enough shouldn't even be a part of your vocabulary.

 

Please give it another try.

 

Start with your original plan view. Forget 3Drotate for the moment.

 

Type: UCS > X > 90

 

Type: UCS > Y > 90

 

Now relocate your your UCS by typing: UCS > O (for Origin) and when prompted select the endpoint of the leg opposite the red "X" axis you see in my image above.

 

Type: Rotate. Use the Origin of the UCS that was just created. For the angle type in 90. The result should match the above.

 

Then start all over again and do it a second time. But before you do make a second copy to use for your final task which is next.

 

Finally, see if you can achieve the same result using 3Drotate on the copy you made previously.

 

I believe you ARE capable of doing this. Go slowly and methodically and you will achieve the desired results.

[ReMark]

SFG: Have you given it another try yet? If so, what was the outcome?

[MikeScott]

If all they want to do is change is the view, shouldn't they just use 3dorbit?

[ReMark]

3Dorbit? I'm not sure how exact one could be using that command. "Close enough" doesn't cut it for me. The OP should be able to reproduce the view exactly. Would you like someone to design a major jet engine component and show its relationship to surrounding parts by specifying "close enough will do"?

[MikeScott]

If the view is merely to show the construction, I'd say yes, close enough is fine.

If it's an unintelligible drawing at .0004 degrees away from this specific angle, then by all means, jump through a bunch of hoops for it, but otherwise, the intent is typically just to get a good view of the part.

 

Otherwise, you can use vpoint and manually enter the numbers if you need to set/match a standard.

[ReMark]

I don't know what the specific instructions were.

 

I looked at his "before" and "after" drawings and I still have a problem with the "after". The UCS is pretty weird and I think what he has is a view of the back of the object not the front. Does it matter in this case? Perhaps not but what if it were a really more complex object. The view could be entirely different. The point I'm trying to make is to be as accurate as one can. Starting off accepting less than accurate results can only lead to trouble down the road. Teach em young and teach em well. Less problems that way in the future.

 

I don't think this particular student will quite know how to deal with Vpoint and manually entering the numbers.

[MikeScott]

Yeah, that makes sense. I keep forgetting that classroom stuff should be done precisely.

 

I just figured that unless the teacher said "match this view," and/or provided specific details, they expected the view to merely be similar.

 

This goes along with asking the student to do something they weren't taught to do, and us teaching them 150 ways to do something when the teacher intended for them to toy around with one specific command until it made sense.

 

I'm not slighting your methods though.. you're absolutely right. It may be a little harder at first, but the knowledge on how to be precise, may be useful later.

[ReMark]

Since the object in question is pretty much the same view from the front or the back I suppose any view that depicts the entire face would be good enough or close enough. So, in theory, you're right.