2024 Technology Preview Program:
Master powerful new features and shape the latest BIM-enabled innovations
2015-10-12
10:33 PM
- last edited on
2023-05-24
08:46 AM
by
Rubia Torres
ArchiCAD 25 7000 USA - Windows 10 Pro 64x - Dell 7720 64 GB 2400MHz ECC - Xeon E3 1535M v6 4.20GHz - (2) 1TB M.2 PCIe Class 50 SSD's - 17.3" UHD IPS (3840x2160) - Nvidia Quadro P5000 16GB GDDR5 - Maxwell Studio/Render 5.2.1.49- Multilight 2 - Adobe Acrobat Pro - ArchiCAD 6 -25
2015-10-13 02:19 PM
2015-10-13 10:31 PM
ArchiCAD 25 7000 USA - Windows 10 Pro 64x - Dell 7720 64 GB 2400MHz ECC - Xeon E3 1535M v6 4.20GHz - (2) 1TB M.2 PCIe Class 50 SSD's - 17.3" UHD IPS (3840x2160) - Nvidia Quadro P5000 16GB GDDR5 - Maxwell Studio/Render 5.2.1.49- Multilight 2 - Adobe Acrobat Pro - ArchiCAD 6 -25
2015-10-13 10:43 PM
ArchiCAD 25 7000 USA - Windows 10 Pro 64x - Dell 7720 64 GB 2400MHz ECC - Xeon E3 1535M v6 4.20GHz - (2) 1TB M.2 PCIe Class 50 SSD's - 17.3" UHD IPS (3840x2160) - Nvidia Quadro P5000 16GB GDDR5 - Maxwell Studio/Render 5.2.1.49- Multilight 2 - Adobe Acrobat Pro - ArchiCAD 6 -25
2015-10-14 02:07 AM
2015-10-14 05:29 AM
2015-10-14 05:56 AM
4thorns wrote:I think there must be a precision limit since these numbers are stored in some kind of floating point format, but I don't know exactly what it is.
Hey Laslo. Is there a precision limit? If I draw a line 53.03295748671456" long will it be accurate? Just curious.
Doug
2015-10-14 09:57 PM
ArchiCAD 25 7000 USA - Windows 10 Pro 64x - Dell 7720 64 GB 2400MHz ECC - Xeon E3 1535M v6 4.20GHz - (2) 1TB M.2 PCIe Class 50 SSD's - 17.3" UHD IPS (3840x2160) - Nvidia Quadro P5000 16GB GDDR5 - Maxwell Studio/Render 5.2.1.49- Multilight 2 - Adobe Acrobat Pro - ArchiCAD 6 -25
2015-10-16 01:04 PM
Steve wrote:
What? That is not the case for me. If I type in .01" as the thickness for a skin, it will change to read 1/64" on its own - by default. This is because if you are using feet and inches 1/64" is the smallest fraction we can display.
The problem (bug) is that this default display showing a thickness of 1/64" isnotactually the thickness applied.
That is why the reference line setting that matches the cumulative thickness of the skins would not place the reference line in the correct location, whereas typing in 1/64" does.
That is not an opinion or viewpoint - that is an objective fact.
If this needs to be corrected or not is an opinion or point of view.
There is no reason to fix it if we know that is it possible that the display for skin thickness may not match the applied thickness of the skin. So if they don't want to fix it, there should be some kind of warning.
1/64" is the minimum skin thickness because any thickness less than that will generate anomalies, some of which are critical, all of which are bad.
In my opinion, leaving the 0" thickness option in this version was a mistake. It as no useful purpose and is dysfunctional. Any thing you might use a 0" thickness skin for can be done better in some other way.
See this video if you like: http://screencast.com/t/QKB7dRcv