AutoCAD Running Object Snaps = #

[steven-g]

END, MID, CEN, QUA, INT, PER, and TAN. they are on permanently F3 to turn them off temporarily, or (for example) type CEN which will only allow that snap for the next pick point. I think whoever programmed NEAREST into Autocad just did it for a joke to annoy someone and forgot to delete it.

[rkmcswain]

I never, ever, ever, ever turn on running snaps.

 

See this related thread also:

http://www.theswamp.org/index.php?topic=45579.msg507590#msg507590

[Tuns]

I use nearest all the time. I also use Midpoint, Center, Endpoint, Intersection, and Quadrant. That's about it though.

[RobDraw]

I think whoever programmed NEAREST into Autocad just did it for a joke to annoy someone and forgot to delete it.

 

Although, I can understand where you are coming from because I like to be precise in my drafting, there is a use for near. In my world, MEP floor plans do not precisely locate all types devices. That onus is on the architect or comes from code requirements. We are responsible for saying that the device is needed, not the exact location unless the location is critical for the system to work properly. Light switches, for instance, only need to be on the wall near the door, thermostats go somewhere on this wall. A vast majority of our floor plans are at 1/8" scale and sometimes the linework on the drawings dictates where we place the symbols mostly because the symbol is much larger than the actual device. We have multiple references that say something like refer to architectural drawings for exact location or coordinate location in the field.

 

Although, I don't keep it on as a running snap, I do use it quite often.

[rkmcswain]

...there is a use for near..... I do use it quite often.

 

Absolutely. It ensures you are touching an object and not just (ironically) "near" it

[tzframpton]

I never, ever, ever, ever turn on running snaps.

Why not? Just curious is all, I'd like to hear your reasoning behind it as I have always trusted your knowledge in AutoCAD.

[nestly]

I am kinda curious for a example where it's critical that one object "touch" another object, but where they touch is not important.

 

I'm also really interested in Tannar's question, as this seems utterly masochistic to me. The amount of time and keystrokes I'd expend just having to activate Endpoint Osnap alone for Start, End and tracking boggles my mind.

[rkmcswain]

Why not? Just curious is all, I'd like to hear your reasoning behind it as I have always trusted your knowledge in AutoCAD.

 

if you miss a pick with a running object snap, the picked point is returned to AutoCAD anyway. You may or may not notice.

if you miss a pick with a object snap override, an error occurs and you must pick again.

[Dadgad]

I have my running osnaps on most of the time, as shown.

I find it hard to believe that there are those who would rather not,

we all have our own ways of doing things, but

like nestly says it just seems like a huge waste of energy.

Only rarely do I use the shift right click menu, mostly for

the Mid between 2 points snap.

Occasionally my MAGNET gets turned off somehow, and it really

throws me for a loop. Extension and Object tracking are very important

to me. Perpendicular tends to override anything in proximity,

which at times I will need to turn off, or else TAB through available osnaps

to find the one I intend.

My favorite 3D osnap is Center of face, but I rarely need it.

The regular 2D osnaps work pretty well for me even with 3D solids, so I usually use them, but typically in an isometric view.

Nearest is helpful when working with curves, but other than that has no use for me.

[RobDraw]

I am kinda curious for a example where it's critical that one object "touch" another object, but where they touch is not important.

 

Already answered in post #24.

[nestly]

Your previous response didn't really satisfy my curiosity because if you wanted to, you could drop your symbol blocks in a floorplan without using any OSnaps and no one would be the wiser on a 1/8" scale drawing. I appreciate and understand why you'd use NEA in your example, but I was really looking for a example where it's critical that the symbol/object touch another object precisely at one point along it's length, but where it touches isn't really important.

[Glen1980]

I have seen people using nearest snap for for lining up text in LT. You could argue that object tracking does that now since 2008LT but some people are stuck in their ways.

[eldon]

I thought that this was just a Poll on how many Running Object Snaps one used.

 

It seems to be overwhelmed by justifications for using a particular one. Not everyone works the same way. Some may even use Blipmode

[RobDraw]

Your previous response didn't really satisfy my curiosity because if you wanted to, you could drop your symbol blocks in a floorplan without using any OSnaps and no one would be the wiser on a 1/8" scale drawing. I appreciate and understand why you'd use NEA in your example, but I was really looking for a example where it's critical that the symbol/object touch another object precisely at one point along it's length, but where it touches isn't really important.

 

In my example, if it's supposed to be on the wall it gets put on the wall. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

What you are suggesting is poor drafting. You won't get yelled at for not putting it on the wall but you also won't get the more challenging tasks.

[nestly]

I don't think discussion about why/when others use OSNAPS (running or otherwise) is beyond the scope of this topic. I'm personally shocked that some have reported having ALL OSNAPS running, and even more shocked to learn some experienced users have NONE running.

[rkent]

if you miss a pick with a running object snap, the picked point is returned to AutoCAD anyway. You may or may not notice.

if you miss a pick with a object snap override, an error occurs and you must pick again.

 

Exactly. Isn't it ironic running osnaps can cause more inaccuracy.

 

I too use near all the time for the reasons already mentioned.

[rkmcswain]

I am kinda curious for a example where it's critical that one object "touch" another object, but where they touch is not important.

 

Say you have a line (A), and you want to draw a new line from (A) to some other point.

"Near" is the only way to ensure that your start point on (A) actually touches (A).

When you're done, and you measure the distance from the endpoint of the new line, perp to A, the result will be 0.0000000000000

[rkmcswain]

Exactly. Isn't it ironic running osnaps can cause more inaccuracy.

 

 

Yes.

We work a lot with entities that have a non-zero "Z" value.

You miss one of those picks and the XY location may be close, but the bust in "Z" will stick out as soon as you change your view.

[nestly]

Ok... I'll just have to take your word for it that there's a reason to do that. I don't think I've ever needed two lines to touch, but where they touch is of no consequence.

[Tuns]

I use nearest for making sure my leaders are on the object they're supposed to be on and not just in the general area of the object.