As above, I would really like the stacked dimensions to snap to at least one one other in order that they keep constant distances from each other and will be moved collectively. Is that this attainable? Its default in different cad software program. Makes the drawing massively neater and hurries up work time
1 Like
Rodog has a number of points with the identical device, so I suggest to maneuver the dialogue to this centralised thread. it’ll be straightforward since most of it’s in all probability linked
please chorus from debating right here, the place it’ll create duplicate and triplicates 
is triplicate even a phrase ? idk.
I’d additionally love this to occur.,
backside a part of my message.
horizontal snapping is straightforward due to inferences. vertical cohesion will be solved by grouping your dimensions. they’ll transfer as a unit.
This could all be automated and gained’t grouping dimensions make them disconnect from mannequin?
nope 
grouping them simply lets you handle them simply.
right here, a drawing, and groupes dimensions (I clicked one, all of them come)
after enhancing. nonetheless grouped
edit :
comply with up right here
What if you happen to transfer the group up or down with a view to have them in the appropriate place? Received’t that disconnect them?
What you probably did there was change the mannequin. However not all mannequin adjustments replace dimensions appropriately.
If you happen to group dimensions you must double click on edit the group and solely after are you able to edit dimensions. It’s cumbersome.
Edit: scribble in iPad is basically unhealthy.
1 Like
see the thread linked simply above your message. it bears the solutions you search, and it’ll keep away from repetition in a number of locations
We’re of the identical ideas. Grouping dims shouldn’t be workable. Then I’ve to double click on edit the group. One other step. one other decelerate.
Doesn’t assist anyway I simply examined grouping stacked dims and transferring them and so they detach from the mannequin simply the identical as in the event that they have been ungrouped.
Sorry for posting again there however I simply needed to attach with JQL’s remark and present shared sentiment.
2 Likes
Sorry however I believe your options don’t clear up the difficulty within the unique publish. Additionally, I believe replies to this thread ought to keep right here. It’s less complicated to deal with
nice.
yeah, as I discussed right here
stacking dimensions vertically is definitely a matter of clicking the right inferences factors on the mannequin. no shortcut, no technique to mix present dimensions.
stacking them horizontally is once more a matter of grabbing the inference of the neighbouring one. and from the examples offered by Rodog, they’re already doing it nice.
yeah, the stretch factor, grouped or not, will truly… stretch the dimension. And yeah, if you wish to transfer them with out stretching, it’ll disconnect from the mannequin.
That is the restrict of structure, a device attempting to be each autocad, indesign, illustrator and powerpoint. if you need your dimensions to maneuver and preserve their distance, you’ll should stretch them line by line. and yeah, it’s cumbersome, however once more, as many extra have mentioned on this discussion board, structure is tremendous restricted in comparison with different options.
That’s why the function request is helpful. To resolve a few of the points that also hinder us. I don’t perceive why your method of fixing these questions is first to level us to a special answer that doesn’t reply on to the query after which assuming that the limitation of Structure is one thing that we have now to just accept.
We settle for it, as a result of we use it, however on the similar time we make these function requests, hoping it is going to be improved.
Structure wants loads of love from the Sketchup group, far more than what it has been getting.
1 Like
