Beiträge von Thorvald

Ok that's great. Oh I made a writing mistake: It is going to be from Vista 32 bit to Windows 7, 64 bit. But as you said it doesn't matter. I also just found that I had saved a copy of the contents of the 7.03 CD on my harddisk - so it will be very easy for me to transfer Dietrichs to the new computer. Nice!

Hi again.

Will this work also with computers that has different Windows versions - like from Vista 32 bit to Vista 64 bit? (I have Dietrichs version 7.03).

- And the winner is: Asus G73SW-91229V.

Very powerful computer at a very nice price (similar to 2200 EUR).

Hmmm, I cannot even change it. How to work with this?

Hi.

I was just wondering how height flags work. I have a section, imported from a Architect drawing, with height flags. But the height flags was not transferred - at least not the numbers. So I thought to make some my self. But how does it start at -623,694?? is it possible to tell the program, that this one should be a specific number and other height flags should be related to this one??

- And the feature can also not be integrated in older versions?? I'd love to upgrade to version 10, but I am not sure if my boss agree. Problem being that the upgrade will be very expensive, as we would upgrade from version 7...

Other suggestions for good U-value calculation software? I have downloaded BuildDesk trial, but I think I have tried it before. Probably I didn't like it too much, but maybe the new version is better.

Hi - does any one know of a good piece of software to calculate U-values of user defines and arbitrary constructions??

Is it possible to integrate the U-value feature of newer Dietrichs versions in older versions of Dietrichs. Or can this program be available as a stand alone piece of software (not too expensive, please).

Also line heat loss would be a nice thing to have in such a U-value calculation software.

In many cases if I want to show that here should be a bolt, I just make them for example in wall design. In my material database I have made some different sizes of round steel "things". - Could also be armature in concrete structures.

When input in wall design sometimes, one has to go to D-cam to rotate and or move it to correct position. I almost never use D-cam to construct objects.

Yeah - looks quite good as well. But ProgeCad is also a very good software I think. For example it can convert pdf to dwg.

I know Dwg TrueView, but that is only a viewer. I have just downloaded progeCad 2009 Smart, that is a free version of the ProgeCad cad-software. It seems like a very nive program - very much like AutoCad and I could consider to buy the full professional version, as it costs less than 300 Euro - and who knows how much AutoCad costs today...

Does there exist stand alone programs, that has the only goal in life to scale dxf / dwg drawings? And perhaps it has a function to ignore dimensions (scale dimensions without changing the dimension values). Perhaps the same program also has a function to convert / save as, dxf drawings to dwg and the other way around.
??

Aahhh ok - that is indeed a different and more complicated situation.

So you didn't know what format the drawing was made in? - Or maybe it's just much more simple in the metric world.

Well - that sounds complicated. You know what scale you have made your drawing in and you know what scale you want. For example I have made a drawing in 1:75. Let's say the electrician want it in 1:50. Then he simply scale my drawing with a factor 75 / 50 = 1,5. Or if he want 1:100: 75 / 100 = 0,75. Easy and simple. Or he want the drawing in 1:1, because when you work in modelspace in AutoCad you work in 1:1. Then the factor to scale with is 75 / 1 = 75. What you are doing sounds way more complicated than it has to be.

Yeah - but they know what scale my drawing is, because that they can see on my drawing. They just need to know that they should scale it to for example 1:1 before they start to draw the electrical installations for example. So from my point of view it shouldn't be a big problem in AutoCad to say "scale all" (or what the name of the function is) and scale it with a factor 75, if my drawing is 1:75. See attached example - oh can't - dwg and dxf are not allowed attachments - but you probably knows how a drawing exported to dwg looks anyway.

The reason why we came about to talk about it, is that the electrician said that only 1:50 and 1:100 is standard in AutoCad - but I can't see why he is saying that, because normally you work in 1:1 in AutoCad.

Hi.

When I export D-Cad to dfx and then convert dxf to dwg - because in some cases other people need the drawing in dwg - I have encountered that it is a problem that the dwg-drawing is in the same scale as in Dietrichs. In Autocad you would normally work in 1:1. It seems like they don't always see that they should just scale the drawing they get from me to 1:1, before they start working on it.

I don't know if this import function have improved in the newer versions of Dietrichs - t.ex. with a function to scale the drawing to 1:1 as it is exported to dxf. Also it is my experience that the export take all layers in the drawing even though it is not all layers that are used. So before an export one has to clean up in the layers first. It would be better if Dietrichs only exported the layers that are "on".

But can I somehow with Dietrichs scale the drawing to 1:1 during the work of exporting it to dxf - or during the convert from dxf to dwg. I use A9Converter to convert from dxf to dwg. Maybe there are other, better free programs?

Hi.

Yes, it helped to say that the slices 0 and inwards, are core slices. I just don't think I normally do that and normally it works (I think). But anyway it doesn't matter that more than the slice 0 is said to be core slice - it's just a practical definition.

Yes? How to solve that?

Hi.

I have some roof build-up. But for some reason not all layers of the roof build up is seen in roof calculation section view or in D-Cam section view. All layers 0,+1,+2,+3 etc. are shown, but none below layer 0. In the definition of the roof properties I have set all layers to show a panel of the layer.

What can be wrong, what can I try to look at, to fix it?

Yeah, there are some good examples there.

Why I have to be crazy to try it? Hahahahaha. That would be a welcome challenge (I think). Hehehehe. But you're right - it doesn't look easy.

But that also means that there are no automated way to do it. Hmmm, maybe there is an easier way. Hmmmm, thinking, thinking.

Why not just make for example a short column piece, with hexagonal base (for example) and slightly angled edges. Then copy that on top of each other and rotating it a little each time. Then when finished, combining these pieces to one column. That would give the sort of twisted columns I first reffered to - I think.

Maybe?