Hello:
Sionned wrote:I don't have to redo the math either. All I have to do is extract the information that is built into the drawing. The only difference with associative dimensions, it seems to me, is that when you change something the dimension, supposedly automatically, changes with it. But it is more trouble than it is worth to me, because I usually don't do dimensions until the rest is settled.
It is no trouble at all! To change an associative dim, you simply stretch the line(s) and the dim (at the same time) and that's it.
All I have to do to put the dims onto the drawing is to snap the 1st point, snap the second point, click to place the dim, (and if the number doesn't fit, I then have to click to place the number), click on Stringline if I want to continue the string -- and then click once more for each additional dim in the string. They all then get placed in a single line -- it couldn't be much easier.
To move the number, there is a Change/Text Position menu. If you need to change the size of the numbers, or the size of the tick marks (which I don't need to do because I always use Text Scale), then this can be done for all the dims on the drawing at once.
I'm pretty sure that using associative dims is easier than non -- I used to use non-associative, but once I realized what I was missing, I've never looked back! Same goes for associative hatch -- there is no comparison to non-associative, IMO.
If I need to change something after dimensioning is done, a simple stretch changes the drawing and the dims, all in one step. As I mentioned above, I use a rounding and have it set to a small tolerance, so that small drafting errors won't have any real affect, but if there is something that looks odd, a stretch or two fixes it, pronto.