Why Groups?

[mammajamma]

Groups have been around in AutoCAD for quite a long time (nearly, I think, as long as I've been using CAD). My question to you is, "Why? Why not just make a block?"

The only result I've ever encountered from a bunch of objects being "Grouped" was total confusion by the users on the receiving end. We just got a vendor drawing that was made up of seemingly random Groups (and unnamed, at that). The recipient was completely flummoxed until I remembered about Groups.

 

~wishing there was a head-scratching smilie~

[rkent]

It was something Microstation had in the 90's and so Autodesk added it either based on user feedback or just keeping up with the competition. I haven't found much use for them over the years. Sometimes a block seems like too much and individual objects are too little, with a group being just right (but not often).

[DANIEL]

I don't find much use for groups myself either, but like rkent said, I there is a place for them, though i still think the same end result can be accomplished through good block management, layer discipline and or xreferences.

[SLW210]

It comes in handy if you have individual objects that you want to move together as one. I used it more when I did machinery design years ago. It is better than Paste as Block IMHO. It does have advantages over making something a block, though I seldom use them these days.

[tennis4you]

I used MicroStation for 15 years and recently moved to AutoCAD. AutoCAD has blocks, wblocks and groups and it seems like a lot. Grouping something in MicroStation was the click of a button and you did not need to assign a name to it. It also did not explode when copy and pasted (which drives me nutz).

[tzframpton]

I used MicroStation for 15 years and recently moved to AutoCAD. AutoCAD has blocks, wblocks and groups and it seems like a lot. Grouping something in MicroStation was the click of a button and you did not need to assign a name to it. It also did not explode when copy and pasted (which drives me nutz).

You can create blocks with ease too, without assigning names to it.

[rkent]

I used MicroStation for 15 years and recently moved to AutoCAD. AutoCAD has blocks, wblocks and groups and it seems like a lot. Grouping something in MicroStation was the click of a button and you did not need to assign a name to it. It also did not explode when copy and pasted (which drives me nutz).

 

With 2012 at least, grab some objects, right click, group>group. A group is made.

 

EDIT: Or one pick on the ribbon for groups.

Edited October 13, 2011 by rkent

[mammajamma]

In 2010, it's way more tedious, and I still don't see the advantage over blocks, named or otherwise. In fact, I just made a group out of a bunch of lines, and, while they all show up when I select "highlight" from the Group dialogue box, I can still manipulate them independendently, so what's the point? I may be doing something wrong, but I tried several options within the dialogue, all with the same result, so it's obviously not an intuitive command.

I think I'll stick with blocks, thanks.

I was just curious about the possible reasons for using such an antique command that seems underutilized. Now I know why that is.

[rkent]

Pickstyle has to be set to 1 or 3 to be able to select the group, otherwise you will pick the individual objects. If you move something that is part of the group while pickstyle is set to 0, and later change pickstyle to 1, all the objects are still part of that group.

[tennis4you]

I think I need to stick with blocks too. For a group not to stay a group when copy and pasted makes it pointless for me. If it stayed grouped then it would be perfect for at least what I need.

 

And as a side note, I am enjoying AutoCAD after using MicroStation for 15 years. I like both of them. Some things are faster in MicroStation, some things are faster in AutoCAD. The more I have learned here the better AutoCAD gets for me, you guys have made my transition much easier!

 

Now if AutoCAD could adopt the Accurdraw function from MicroStation AutoCAD would be the bomb!

[mammajamma]

Pickstyle has to be set to 1 or 3 to be able to select the group, otherwise you will pick the individual objects. If you move something that is part of the group while pickstyle is set to 0, and later change pickstyle to 1, all the objects are still part of that group.

 

As I said, not intuitive.

Thanks for the info, though, in case I run across a group again.

[rkent]

.....

 

Now if AutoCAD could adopt the Accurdraw function from MicroStation AutoCAD would be the bomb!

 

The name is Accudraw, but anyway, I think most if not all of that functionality is in AutoCAD, just not called Accudraw.

See: DYN input, UCS, Polar, Osnaps, Ortho, acad.pgp

[rkent]

As I said, not intuitive.

Thanks for the info, though, in case I run across a group again.

 

I am not sure how much of AutoCAD is intuitive, but in the Group manager there is a check box for Selectable. Seems fairly intuitive. Not selling the Group command, as I said I rarely use it, although I might use it more in 2012 since it is one click away now.

[swats]

Blocks do not work with the soldraw command. The company I work uses a lot of modular clamps that have several nuts, screws, and washers. I use groups to keep everything together. Then when I do my assembly drawings I can use solview/soldraw to create my isometric views.

[tennis4you]

The name is Accudraw, but anyway, I think most if not all of that functionality is in AutoCAD, just not called Accudraw.

See: DYN input, UCS, Polar, Osnaps, Ortho, acad.pgp

 

Yeah, typo on my part, I type too fast sometimes.

 

I will have to look into DYN input, I have no clue what that is. Ortho is the closest thing I have found to Accudraw but since the snaps overwrite the ortho (at least when I try it) it is worthless for me. As you probably know, all you have to do is hit the "Enter" button to lock Accudraw into a plane. I never drew a single line without Accudraw in MicroStation. Not having it is one of the "slower" things for me in AutoCAD. Sadly, it is much slower.

[mammajamma]

Blocks do not work with the soldraw command. The company I work uses a lot of modular clamps that have several nuts, screws, and washers. I use groups to keep everything together. Then when I do my assembly drawings I can use solview/soldraw to create my isometric views.

 

Well, that seems reasonable.

[rkent]

Well you can continue to believe that you can't do things in AutoCAD that can be done in MS, or you can ask specific questions to someone that knows AutoCAD so you can be shown the equivalent functions.

 

Osnaps will override ortho, either you want ortho or you want to snap to something, they often don't line up. I am probably not understanding your example.

 

For locking onto planes, I assume you are working in 3D, turn DUCS on, move your cursor to a solid object, it will automatically adjust to that plane.

[tzframpton]

Or, instead of ORTHO try POLAR. Set your Angles and you're good to go.

[DANIEL]

the only advantage I see in microstation is its text capabilities

[danellis]

In 2010, it's way more tedious, and I still don't see the advantage over blocks, named or otherwise. In fact, I just made a group out of a bunch of lines, and, while they all show up when I select "highlight" from the Group dialogue box, I can still manipulate them independendently, so what's the point? I may be doing something wrong, but I tried several options within the dialogue, all with the same result, so it's obviously not an intuitive command.

I think I'll stick with blocks, thanks.

I was just curious about the possible reasons for using such an antique command that seems underutilized. Now I know why that is.

 

I don't use groups much myself, but I when I was first told about them one of the advantages of them given was this precise behaviour: that they could be manipulated en-masse like a block or indivdiually as needed.

 

dJE