[BUG] Dimensions on non standard views get a Dangerous Failure

I might have a go later, if I have time. Looks interesting though.

It’s a good quirk/bug in LO to be aware of! I learned this one the hard way by almost sending out a batch of dimensioned plywood shapes that were all incorrect. Luckily I did a final cross-check against the model and realized that something was way off. It took a little while to figure out what was going on.

Unfortunately, the fix is not as easy as just changing the model axis either. The dimensioning of orthographic views correctly appears to be slaved to the standard views, which are not customizable.

Come back Dave! Come back!

You shouldn’t give up. You’re looking at this from a different angle.

We are looking into it as standard architectural practice for 2d drawings. If you aknowledge the following you can understand the issue we are having:

Layout 2D vs 3D dimensions.layout (244.7 KB)

So it looks to me as if you want scaled paper space dimensions instead of the real dimensions of the model. That strikes me as weird but I’ve been wrong all along.

I had a look at your SKP, but I couldn’t test the LO (I’m on 2015) so I did a test myself.

There does appear to be an issue ,make what you will of it. To be honest I wouldn’t be inclined to dimension the front of a shape like that personally, I would use the “left and back” they have all the dimensions I would need.

Every scene is set to 1:3 scale and not modified.

That’s what I mean.

I understand that it strikes you as weird as you don’t have a specific formation into architecture (which also applies to engineering, design or other such disciplines.) There are drawing conventions that you must follow on those tech drawing related disciplines.

The thing here is that SU doesn’t follow that logic and that breaks 2D drawing conventions, so even if it makes sense to you, it doesn’t make sense to most of us as usually we want to measure relative distances that are perceived only on 2D and not actual distances.

This is the logic of plan views, elevations, etc and that’s the logic SU follows everytime, except when the plan view derives from an off axis plan.

I believe SU team’s idea was initially for us to be able to dimension SU’s 3D parallel projections drawings (fake axonometrics). But those drawings have become the exception for SU users as plan and elevation drawings are becoming the norm.

EDIT: Sorry, I shouldn’t say “fake axonometrics”, but I didn’t remember the name. I should have said “trimetric axonometries” as those are the SU standard axonometric projections.

Hi Ian, yes you are seeing the issue. Imagine that the shape didn’t have a vertical wall so you couldn’t pick a face view (back, side, what have you) that would get the correct height dimension.

At that point, you would be forced to reorient the geometry to dimension correctly.

I reorient everything now, just to ensure that my dimensions aren’t wrong on the paper.

This topic was automatically closed 91 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.