There is a command in SectionTools called “_ExportClipping2DLayouts” with the option to export your section to DWG. Does it do what you need here?
In webflow (for webpages) there is an option called z-Index which could also be interesting for the layout line priority. Here is the link: https://youtu.be/GPadt8wmGXM?t=99
I think sticking to current Annotation style is a good start. Then user can create his own annotation style for sections and assign those text objects to it. (Or do it before creating the section)
It could be like a default setting for dialog “Press Enter to accept options”, not neseccary to start from point picking.
Currently we have Horizontal section placement after hitting Enter by default. I think it’s more preferred to have points picking.
I’m still not very clear how to incorporate the “Dir” options. Can you describe the command flow step by step, and options that should appear in each step as you envision it?
Yeah…your posting is too far away off my point. Looks like it has nothing to do with mine.
With a few adjustments these Clipping Sections will be a really nice tool − having plan views from 3D equivalent to, say, Vectorworks is not so far away, within the efficiency and flexibility of Rhino !
Right now the workflow is quite convoluted, based on not so obvious commands. Very immediate improvements that I see on my side are :
- Section parameters directly exposed in properties (planned if I remember correctly some older posts in this thread).
- Ability to select in viewport the 2D layouts to move them around (already mentioned).
And some suggestions that are less critical :
- I support the idea to have the ability to place clipping layouts straight into the layout space. That makes a lot of sense (given they have a scale parameter − already mentioned again).
- Been able to change the color of the section hatch regardless the layer color : for exemple, to have a black section curve and a grey solid hatch for the same object. (Edit : this is in discusison here.)
1 Like
Ok. I’ll try.
- Keep first step as is (object selection).
- Keep all the parameters of next step as is.
Press Enter to accept options ( Dir=Horizontal Attributes=FromSourceObjects Output=CurvesOnly DepthMode=Infinite Name=SEC ArrowSize=1 SaveToNamedView=Yes ) - Make Dir option a saved option (for future runs). Rhino should remember the setting.
- At stage 2 in case of any ortho dirs after pressing Enter we’ll get the same behavior as in current version.
- In case of Custom Dir option after Enter key we’ll get asking for two points.
- Since in current version we have multiply mode of adding sections I’d prefer to have repeatedly ask for pair of points in Custom mode. But somebody may need a bunch of parallel sections in custom direction.
That’s why I think it’s a good idea to have an additional option like Mode withMode=MultiandMode=Copyparameters.
Multi - ask for a new pair of points for each new section.
Copy - use first pair of points as a direction for adding new sections in this command session. - Arrow types could also be linked to the settings from current Annotation style.
P.S. Personally I still waiting for upgrade of Clipping Plane results (thickness, linetype of clipping curves). It’s way more intuitive to have sections by Clipping planes without additional curves creation. But this is my vision and my work case.
Many others could need those section curves.
A ClippingSection panel will be added.
Currently, you can run EditClipping2DLayouts command to change placement point of your layout. Once the properties panel is added, there will be a button to trigger a change of location for the layout. I understand that you’d like to select and move directly, but what if you move parts of the layout? What happens in the next update?
We can look into placing the layout in a detail in the Layout space, but not on the page itself. There is the scale issue that adds complication.
This might be supported at some point when SectionStyle start supporting additional properties.
Thanks for adding the details. I’ll look into this workflow.
Really? Come on. Is it too complicated to treat the section view as an entity and add a scale parameter to it, so it can reside where it belongs - on a layout? Shy away so quickly from technical difficulties, when it would make so much sense to solve them?
Let’s not beat around the bush. This whole topic of record length is all about improving ‘layout and drafting’, right? Things like this are key to making this a complete and logical workflow. As well as DWG export from layouts.
Having 2d things strewn all across model space is age old Autocad thinking. Rhino should learn to do better. There has to be an inbetween, dedicated environment for all 2d graphics derived from 3d objects, and it’s there: layouts. Put the section there, draw on top of it if needed, export. Just like in any other serious BIM or construction application.
Can’t put it more clearly. Hope you see the picture.
Thanks!
4 Likes
I think I see where you are coming from. This opens up a new degree of complexity. Like do you now need a different dimension style for each potential scale of the detail? What if the detail is simply scaled to a random scale to fit a page? And how does the program know when you are drawing a dimension on one particular detail when there are multiple details on a page? Like is there a boundary? It’s all possible but would require some programmatical magic.
AutoCAD’s “DIMASSOC” variable automatically detects the scale of a dimension when you place your dimension in paper space. It’s a cool feature but I’ve seen it cause more harm than good (there are also additional behaviors attached to the feature).
Maybe a 2D detail with a clearly defined boundary, and any dimension within that boundary is scaled (automatically) according to the detail’s scale? even if it’s something unusual like 1:16.8776 (maybe scaled to just fit within a space or whatever else?).
Revit utilizes “views” which are sort of detached from other spaces. Any annotations in those views are only in that view (unless you duplicate the view or the annotation is intended to appear in multiple views such as sections, elevations, etc…). Similar results can theoretically be achieved using layers and working in the viewport. As cool and innovate as Revit’s system is I was considerably faster in AutoCAD. Things like site instructions added onto otherwise completed projects was a bit of a pain in Revit compared to AutoCAD. I really liked my Model Space/Layouts.
I’ve half figured out how to work with 2D details in Rhino. I think one potential solution could involve using what’s already available (for example, layer states) and coming up with some sort of workflow. Talk is cheap of course, so if I ever come up with something good along those lines I’ll definitely share!!
A dedicated inbetween environment for all 2D graphics regardless of layout
(give like for this wish)
2 Likes
Thanks for the extensive reply !
I think there is misunderstanding here ? The goal is not to be able to edit the layout content, just to be able to select it as an entity directly and perform simple operations like move or rotate on it (yesterday I ended up with 2 layouts of similar sections placed with opposite orientations and no means to rotate them).
In other words, instead of having to find the related section to a layout (in an architectural project where there might be dozen of them), select it directly to move it the bit you need because after the update the section is larger and layouts overlap. In some way, layouts could be considered as uneditable blocks in the behavior ?
I don’t get the distinction between Layout space and pages ? Doesn’t Layout space only exist related to created pages ?
I understand there’s technical difficulties about this, along the fact that workflow associated isn’t obvious. As I said, I consider this not critical, more like a nice bonus. I’m far more interested about having a reliable tool, even in model space only.
There is the “Angle” property, but I do understand it is not as intuitive. I’ll give it a thought.
I couldn’t agree more, a table of contents creator is sorely missing, and been asked for so much over the years. Something along the lines of how Worksheets are in Vectorworks, a live, dynamic table of contents, its still so manual and has been for years and years 
Hi Keith,
AutoCAD Dimassoc controls whether the dimension is created exploded or associated together.
Rhino dimensions are already associated together and they are history enabled by default.
Type the History command in the command line you will see these options:
Rhino history settings ( Record=No Update=Yes Lock=No BrokenHistoryWarning=Yes RecordAnnotationHistory=Yes )
If RecordAnnotationHistory is set to No change it to Yes. This is persistent and remember on your system.
Rhino annotations also scale automatically if you use the Rhino document setting: Enable Layout Space Scaling:
When this setting is on or checked, the text and dimensions created in any detail with any detail scale or created on the layout, display identically. This is because the annotation object looks to the style for the Font, arrow size and other “size” type settings and displays the annotation full size with these settings. So if the Font size is .125in or 5mm, and the arrow size is .1" or 4mm, that is how it is displayed both in the details and on the layout.
It looks like this on a Layout that has two details set to different scales, with dimensions in both the details and on the layout. They all appear the same size on the sheet and print the same size.
Let us know if this helps.
Sincerely,
Mary Ann Fugier.
2 Likes
AutoCAD Dimassoc controls whether the dimension is created exploded or associated together.
True. There’s actually 3 settings believe it or not: “0” explodes the dimensions and prompts the user to manually enter a value (with the actual measurement being the default option). “1” allows for what most people think of as normal behavior: An un-exploded dimension that displays the actual distance (unless we override it or have something going on in the dimstyle). And “2” will both associate the dimension to an object (or objects), but also it will associate it with a viewport and that viewport’s respective scale as well, should the dimension be drawn in paperspace over top of a viewport, and snapped to objects inside the viewport.
“2” is really nifty. It might be similar to what you’re describing in Rhino. I’ll have to try it out and your post will be super helpful when I do that. Thanks for sharing all of that!
I previously had some sort of issue/crossed wires with the Model/Layout scaling checked. I can’t recall exactly what the issue was however so I don’t really want to comment. I think it was along the lines of having to commit to either annotating in model space or paper space but not both.
If you have a model that is not working, please email it or a “sanitized” version to me mary@mcneel.com. (A sanitized version is one that you SaveAs and delete anything you do not want to share.)
I would be happy to looking why it is not working in your model.
Thanks again, Keith.
Sincerely,
Mary Ann Fugier
Same
Can’t stand the way Section tools works, but also grateful that it existed when i needed it more than anything. IMO from what I can remember, too messy, too fussy with the layers and camera states… gets over complicated. And doesn’t it slow my work flow down? Sections should work like viewbase in autocad. But I’ll tell you, the hatches it creates are not great… and it always defaults to this solid hatch which prints like sh%$… maybe i can change this but maybe i can’t…
2 Likes