block or xref

I have a job of, uncertain parentage. it's a bas___d.
there are posts with curved brackets under a deck. the deck is rounded, the posts set at odd angles round the curve, so the
elevation just screams to be 3d.
I am under orders to draw it 2d. not that I very often follow instructions like this, but...
in the spirit of compromise, I will let them have their elevation 2d, but I am doing the darn deck in 3d anyway. I intend to paste the two together and plot. no one (else) will ever be the wiser. this will save headaches of editing when they change all those windows on the back elevation willy nilly as well. HIDE.
page 2
my 2d elevation, I don't want to have to edit it in my 3d deck drawing. now I will ask my question.
I have never created an xref, just worked with other people's xrefs, and only when forced to do so. never saw the need. blocks I understand.
it's just me, I don't need to communicate with a group. I will be keeping the elevation in a 2d file. I am leaning tword making a block of the back elevation and iserting it in the 3d file so the only manuipulation I need do with it is locating it and forgetting any editing there. if editing is required, I will redefine the block by inserting it as a dwg.
would there be any advantages to using an xref?
are they just glorified blocks that are convenient for people who work in groups and need supervision, or do they have some magical pixie dust I would become religiously addicted to had I not been so hard headed all these years?
OPINIONS SOLICITED.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The primary advantage of XREFs is that they automatically update themselves, and can keep the host file size down.
The disadvantages to working with them all alone, on a small file are numerous and, without seeing these brackets, I would bet it wouldn't be advantageous. Some of the brackets are probably mirror mages of each other, and so you only have to draw a few at a few angles.
You could also draw side view of the bracket, insert them with the UCS rotated around the Y axis, then explode them and flatten them. Don't I make it sound easy?
--


MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I take that back. You could insert the block with the X scale factor adjusted to give you the right look and just leave them, or explode and trim them as you like.
--


MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Michael Bulatovich wrote:

explode and flatten is what I was trying to avoid. my flatten routine fails on arcs. and editing them gets tedious.
thanks for the opinion of xrefs. hard to appreciate what I have not worked with.
the bastardized 2d / 3d is working pretty well. if I insert a back, right and left elevation at 90 to the plan view, I can put each BLOCK INSERT in an otherwise blank layer and control visability by freezing the layer.
my wife took one look at my screen and almost hit me. I told her to leave if she was going to be that way......
these clients are hard to work for. I know they will demand many changes quickly. so I invest more than I normally would up front and hope to hatch less often.
thanks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Are using the one that moves everything and then moves it back? PS see my other reply about differentially scaled blocks..
--


MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.