Well Duh moments
Well Duh moments
now and then I run into a client who provides me with dimensional information using metric units. My habit has been to use the convert function in the desktop calculator and then draw in PowerCADD using imperial units. So last night I had one of those well duhhhh moments.
Say the guy has a table that is 643cm long
Just enter it as 643" and divide by 2.54 in the edit box
not too embarrassed to share, but embarrassed nonetheless
Say the guy has a table that is 643cm long
Just enter it as 643" and divide by 2.54 in the edit box
not too embarrassed to share, but embarrassed nonetheless
Re: Well Duh moments
Another option also exists: Let Pcadd do the math...Say the guy has a table that is 643cm long
Just enter it as 643" and divide by 2.54 in the edit box
by typing 643cm in the edit box (length field if that's the case) and press ENTER and PCadd will handle the math / unit conversion
Example:
1. with the drawing scale set to an inch or foot based units
2, draw a line
3. with line selected press TAB
4. In edit window tab into LENGTH field
5. type 643cm (no spaces) or 6430mm, or any metric variation thereof
6. Press enter
The result should be a line that's 253.1496" long
Same holds true for a drawing scale that's set to metric units  entering the math as inches (x " ) or feet (x ' ) in the edit dialog will do the mathematical conversion in the other direction.
That works at my end in PCD9 9.1.11 (build TA30) OS X 10.14.6 (build 18G8022)
That feature has been the case since PowerDraw 3 days [EDIT: or possibly even earlier]. However, If that doesn't work then something is amuck or at conflict with PCD9x
Generally PCadd/Draw will do math & mathematical equations in dialog boxes and in the edit window. Some examples are noted Page230231 (Math in Dialog Boxes) and various other parts of the Pcadd manual [Edit: if memory serves  there's a detailed outline of the math in dialog feature set in the PowerCADD folder > Documentation > PowerCADD tutorial.PDF file that illustrates the concept of math in dialog boxes in detail  originally written by Cdn distributor Lloyd Evoy  modified for PCadd 6 manual by myself]
Hope that helps
Huc
Re: Well Duh moments
exactly. that's what I'm doing.
at some point the nudge window lost the ability to do math inside itself, sadly.
at some point the nudge window lost the ability to do math inside itself, sadly.
Re: Well Duh moments
Another option might be to set the drawing scale to metric, draw the plan, then select all/cut/set the drawing scale to imperial/paste special at scale. Lots of ways to skin a cat. I do wish I could let the nudge box do math, though.
 Alfred Scott
 Posts: 264
 Joined: Wed May 29, 2019 8:47 pm
 Location: Richmond, VA
 Contact:
Re: Well Duh moments
I think Brian Huculak has the right approach.
Remember you can have different scales on layers.
Alfred
Remember you can have different scales on layers.
Alfred
Re: Well Duh moments
As a related sidebar  it's worth considering the level of precision in the calculation
Using the example numbers noted originally for consistency
• Entering 635/2.54 in the length field forces the calculation accuracy to two decimal points. Certainly more than accurate for general AEC purposes. I'm sure the worker wading in the mud building concrete forms doesn't get that close.
• Entering 635cm (with drawing units set to feet & inches) and letting PCadd do the math (as opposed to forcing the accuracy based on a value of 2.54 noted above) allows the calculation to use the full native accuracy of PowerCADD. I forget the number of decimal points that is/was. I vaguely recall 8 decimal points but that was from a passing discussion with Bill Stanley (r.i.p. Bill) and Lloyd likely 2 decades ago.

Ran into metric and imperial dual dimensioning requirements when Canada was first making the conversion to the metric system for construction drawing. It was easy to fall down the rabbit hole of accuracy in those days but I always found it faster and easier to do the final rounding using the # of decimals in the Dimension tool setting. That gave me the most flexibility and sense of calm when doing details, or partial enlargements of plans, etc..
The difference in accuracy is very likely not a big deal for most construction but could come into play in some instances. Example: I recall training a surveyor (mid 1990's) responsible for checking existing installations, and performing equipment leveling operations in new installations of high speed printing and paper production presses. He was required to maintain drawings, calculations, and installations to the thousandths of an inch. One other instance *might* also be related to taking data in/out of PCadd via DWG (or DXF)  what I liked to think of as round tripping a file. Again, the degree of accuracy is all relative to required end use and drawing/design work flow.
Still, I believe the fastest, and most accurate approach, is to let PCadd do the unit conversion calculation in the dialog box by typing the desired unit and/or algebraic equation, allowing its internal accuracy do the work. Fortunately I've been able to leave the need of such concerns in the past...the brain cells containing the accuracy details have likely been damaged for quite some time from fine wine and spirits in ±8 years of retirement at altitude LOL
Using the example numbers noted originally for consistency
• Entering 635/2.54 in the length field forces the calculation accuracy to two decimal points. Certainly more than accurate for general AEC purposes. I'm sure the worker wading in the mud building concrete forms doesn't get that close.
• Entering 635cm (with drawing units set to feet & inches) and letting PCadd do the math (as opposed to forcing the accuracy based on a value of 2.54 noted above) allows the calculation to use the full native accuracy of PowerCADD. I forget the number of decimal points that is/was. I vaguely recall 8 decimal points but that was from a passing discussion with Bill Stanley (r.i.p. Bill) and Lloyd likely 2 decades ago.

Ran into metric and imperial dual dimensioning requirements when Canada was first making the conversion to the metric system for construction drawing. It was easy to fall down the rabbit hole of accuracy in those days but I always found it faster and easier to do the final rounding using the # of decimals in the Dimension tool setting. That gave me the most flexibility and sense of calm when doing details, or partial enlargements of plans, etc..
The difference in accuracy is very likely not a big deal for most construction but could come into play in some instances. Example: I recall training a surveyor (mid 1990's) responsible for checking existing installations, and performing equipment leveling operations in new installations of high speed printing and paper production presses. He was required to maintain drawings, calculations, and installations to the thousandths of an inch. One other instance *might* also be related to taking data in/out of PCadd via DWG (or DXF)  what I liked to think of as round tripping a file. Again, the degree of accuracy is all relative to required end use and drawing/design work flow.
Still, I believe the fastest, and most accurate approach, is to let PCadd do the unit conversion calculation in the dialog box by typing the desired unit and/or algebraic equation, allowing its internal accuracy do the work. Fortunately I've been able to leave the need of such concerns in the past...the brain cells containing the accuracy details have likely been damaged for quite some time from fine wine and spirits in ±8 years of retirement at altitude LOL
Re: Well Duh moments
to assess your suggestion I changed my display to X.XXXXXXXXXXXX units (12 places)
I placed a rectangle 653" wide and then used the edit field to divide by 2.54
The rectangle became 257.086614173228" wide.
Then I place a rectangle and in the edit field I entered 653cm.
Then I checked the width of the second rectangle.
257.086614173228"
I placed a rectangle 653" wide and then used the edit field to divide by 2.54
The rectangle became 257.086614173228" wide.
Then I place a rectangle and in the edit field I entered 653cm.
Then I checked the width of the second rectangle.
257.086614173228"
Re: Well Duh moments
It makes me laugh when I see people using decimal inches.
Re: Well Duh moments
my question is which is funnier, decimal inches or decimal feet? Is a decimal yard three times as funny as a decimal foot?: What about decimal miles?:
seriously: decimal Acres? a tenth of an acre is 4356 square feet;. how many square meters is that? or furlongs.
seriously: decimal Acres? a tenth of an acre is 4356 square feet;. how many square meters is that? or furlongs.
 Attachments

 15740bananaforscale.jpg (57.68 KiB) Viewed 4864 times
Re: Well Duh moments
What cracks me up is when I receive a floor plan for a brand new building and the overall dimensions are to some small fraction like 64’0 3/64”, like that’s going to happen.