Author Topic: axonometric (Read 4236 times)

Mike Hall · « **on:** November 02, 2009, 04:16:43 PM »

Is there a way to set up a 30/60 axonometric drawing for printing? 1:1, Perspective = off. I am guessing use SE or SW iso orientation and somehow adjust the grid?

thanks!!
Michael Hall

Henry Hubich · « **Reply #1 on:** November 02, 2009, 05:50:59 PM »

Please refresh my whatchamacallit, Mike: How is a 30/60 axonometric different from an isometric? And is this a 2D drawing or a 3D model? Or are you asking how to set up a view and a Viewport to display a 3D model as a 2D axonometric? Or ...?

Henry H

Mike Hall · « **Reply #2 on:** November 03, 2009, 05:26:03 AM »

Henry... I sent you the drawing via email with explanations. If anyone else is following and interested, axonometric (my understanding) is sort of like isometric except the axes' is 30/60 degrees with a vertical axis. See attached example of an axo box.

I do not think I am going to be able to do this in TC. Even with perspective turned off (of course) as soon as I rotate the 3D object in 3D space the lines will obviously visually scale. For a correct axo drawing, the dimesions have to remain constant along the axes'.

AE · « **Reply #3 on:** November 03, 2009, 09:42:07 AM »

If I perceive your need, can you not choose Isometric as a Grid option, and work in an isometric view and create the final graphical output you are considering? I thought this turned off the perspective as such.

Steve The Kiwi · « **Reply #4 on:** November 03, 2009, 10:02:23 AM »

Henry, your are correct. Axonometric includes Isometric, Trimetric and dimetric views. I also looked here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axonometric_projection

Mike if you are wanting to print an isometric view, can you not set a viewport in paperspace? Adjust grid? Why use the grid, it only adds to more confusion in the drawing space in my book.

Mike Hall · « **Reply #5 on:** November 03, 2009, 11:32:27 AM »

isometric = both axes' are equal (30º/30º) or (45º/45º). This is axonometric with 30º and 60º axes' and of course the vertical. Tis something for school, so I have to get busy on it - hand drawing I suppose. From what little I have learned about this issue, I am guessing this is not something for any CAD which may be an element of the assignment purpose. Thanks! Now back to work.

Steve The Kiwi · « **Reply #6 on:** November 03, 2009, 11:38:36 AM »

Mike, trimetric and dimetric are available as standard views in SolidWorks. Both very handy.

John R · « **Reply #7 on:** November 03, 2009, 12:16:01 PM »

re: How is a 30/60 axonometric different from an isometric?

I think this image in the Wikipedia might help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Architectural_drawing_001.png

Mike Hall · « **Reply #8 on:** November 03, 2009, 02:27:14 PM »

Quote from: Steve The Kiwi on November 03, 2009, 11:38:36 AM

Mike, trimetric and dimetric are available as standard views in SolidWorks. Both very handy.

Since this is only a school project, I think I will pass on SolidWorks, but that is good to know. Further, it appears that all large architectural offices in the SE USA (at least) are moving to REVIT.

thanks everyone.

Henry Hubich · « **Reply #9 on:** November 03, 2009, 05:49:44 PM »

I gather, then, that this would be a 30/60 axonometric ...?

Henry H

Mike Hall · « **Reply #10 on:** November 03, 2009, 06:08:46 PM »

Henry.....The 30/60 qualifies, but I suppose the computer generated drawing would not.

To complete my project with only a partial cheat, I drew the model using TC as strictly a 2D drawing instrument, printed the drawing at 1:1, and traced over it with pencil on sketch paper. It looks good! One more to go before 11:00 am tomorrow!

jhren · « **Reply #11 on:** November 07, 2009, 04:58:35 PM »

Mike,

The view you are wanting to generate is not a true 3D view...

Say you draw a cube and rotate it 30° clockwise, viewing from above. The front side is now at 30° with respect to the X axis, while the right side is 60° (the corner of the cube is 90°, so when you add them up they total 180°).

Now, if you rotate the cube about the X axis, such that you can see the verticals of the cube, the appearance of the front bottom edge to the X axis becomes less than 30°, while the right bottom edge appears as less than 60°. If you continue to rotate in this manner a full 90°, those bottom edges will appear to be 0°.

Mike Hall · « **Reply #12 on:** November 07, 2009, 06:21:10 PM »

jhren... I have no idea what you are talking about. The axonometric drawing was dictated by the instructor in class. I "was" merely trying to find a quick way to draw and print the axo drawing (as specified by instructor) so that I could trace it in pencil (pencil drawing was also dictated). But..... thanks for the advice

For those who may be following this thread, I finally used TC strictly as a 2D drawing instrument and drew my model in the prescribed axo view. I find that to be much quicker than drawing the same thing with pencil and paper. I printed that drawing 1:1 on 18x24 paper, taped that to the drawing board, trace paper taped over the top, and traced my drawing. All done, turned in, and smiles all around.

Don · « **Reply #13 on:** November 07, 2009, 06:36:44 PM »

[quote
For those who may be following this thread, I finally used TC strictly as a 2D drawing instrument and drew my model in the prescribed axo view. I find that to be much quicker than drawing the same thing with pencil and paper. I printed that drawing 1:1 on 18x24 paper, taped that to the drawing board, trace paper taped over the top, and traced my drawing. All done, turned in, and smiles all around. [/quote]

I've been following this thread with interest, would you care to post your drawing.

Don

Mike Hall · « **Reply #14 on:** November 07, 2009, 07:05:01 PM »

I am not sure if I can do that. It might be against the rules of the class/school. When the semester is over in December, "I think" I can post my work in an online portfolio of the school's domain, and send others the link. Regardless, the drawing is nothing special. It does not resemble a building or any object we are all used to seeing. It is more of a spatial study for the "young", inexperienced adults in the class. For an old fart like me that has been drawing for over 32 years, it is more of a waste of time, however, necessary for the BA/MA in Architecture. Personally I see no reason, in this day and age, to draw an axonometric of anything. I am sure this exercise is meant to teach those young ones something. What? I have no clue! Maybe to get them aquainted with 3 axes?? My best guess.

Henry Hubich · « **Reply #15 on:** November 07, 2009, 07:51:37 PM »

Quote from: jhren on November 07, 2009, 04:58:35 PM

Mike,

The view you are wanting to generate is not a true 3D view...

Say you draw a cube and rotate it 30° clockwise, viewing from above. The front side is now at 30° with respect to the X axis, while the right side is 60° (the corner of the cube is 90°, so when you add them up they total 180°).

Now, if you rotate the cube about the X axis, such that you can see the verticals of the cube, the appearance of the front bottom edge to the X axis becomes less than 30°, while the right bottom edge appears as less than 60°. If you continue to rotate in this manner a full 90°, those bottom edges will appear to be 0°.

Joe, I do believe you're right about that.

Henry H

murray dickinson · « **Reply #16 on:** November 08, 2009, 07:15:45 AM »

It mightn't be a standard view format in TC, but I've been having a look at a program called freeCAD, which does it. A sourceforge project, FreeCAD is very much a work in progress, but it does have one or two useful features. Doesn't work anything like TC, so I felt like Alice through the looking glass for a while.

jhren · « **Reply #17 on:** November 08, 2009, 08:02:14 AM »

The view of your objects appears to be isometric.

murray dickinson · « **Reply #18 on:** November 08, 2009, 12:15:43 PM »

Yes, Joe. The definition includes isometric and trinometric versions of axonometric (axometric?), freeCAD does the iso version and swinging the object 30 degrees gives the view accepted through these posts. Too late, too lazy, I was posting. Bran nue dae.

Henry Hubich · « **Reply #19 on:** November 08, 2009, 01:28:00 PM »

Quote from: murray dickinson on November 08, 2009, 12:15:43 PM

Yes, Joe. The definition includes isometric and trinometric versions of axonometric (axometric?), freeCAD does the iso version and swinging the object 30 degrees gives the view accepted through these posts. Too late, too lazy, I was posting. Bran nue dae.

That's still not a 30/60/90 view, though, Murray.

Henry H

murray dickinson · « **Reply #20 on:** November 08, 2009, 01:58:20 PM »

I must be really jaded, Henry. What am I missing?

Henry Hubich · « **Reply #21 on:** November 08, 2009, 07:26:19 PM »

Quote from: murray dickinson on November 08, 2009, 01:58:20 PM

What am I missing?

Angles aren't 30 deg and 60 deg. I think Joe Hren is correct in stating that's an impossible condition (except in the degenerated case wherein the vertical axis of the part is normal to the viewing plane).

Henry H

jhren · « **Reply #22 on:** November 09, 2009, 10:34:23 PM »

Quote from: Henry Hubich on November 08, 2009, 07:26:19 PM

...an impossible condition...

Not impossible, Henry... just not a true 3D view. It can be made by skewing the object (perhaps what you meant by the degenerated case)...

Mike Hall · « **Reply #23 on:** November 10, 2009, 04:31:38 AM »

Quote from: jhren on November 09, 2009, 10:34:23 PM

Quote from: Henry Hubich on November 08, 2009, 07:26:19 PM
...an impossible condition...
Not impossible, Henry... just not a true 3D view. It can be made by skewing the object (perhaps what you meant by the degenerated case)...

I am risking being seen as belaboring the subject, but just one more post should do it. See Jhren's "top" view. Assign dimensions to the 'physical' object of 2"w x 9"d x 8" h. If you create this object in TC as a 3D object (box) with those dimensions, set a camera view to mimick Jhrens's top view (above post), print it, and then lay a ruler on the print. It will no longer dimension 2 x 9 x 8. A true axonometric drawing by hand would have those dimensions. Bad explanation, but I hope you get it. The only way to do this axo drawing in TC is to use TC as a 2D drawing instrument and assign lengths and angles to all lines. I think the confusion is the word 3D. It isn't 3D. It is an axonometric drawing.

jhren · « **Reply #24 on:** November 10, 2009, 09:30:01 AM »

Quote from: Mike Hall on November 10, 2009, 04:31:38 AM

... The only way to do this axo drawing in TC is to use TC as a 2D drawing instrument and assign lengths and angles to all lines. ...

Well, not the only way, as the depiction in my last post demonstrate. If you take into consideration ONLY the easiest method, then yes, drawing with 2D tools is the only way.

News:

Author Topic: axonometric (Read 4236 times)