Flat Inline Damper, Three-Way Component Mix-Up, Ss6

With Tool Settings options "Size" and "Shape" selected, the place Flat Inline Damper tool yields a three-way component mix-up between InlineDampersFlat, BranchTypeSplitterDamper, and RectDamperConnRnd when flying over the 3 different duct shapes (rectangular, round, oval) prior to actual placement.

This behavior was not present in Ss5, Ss4, Ss3, etc. Please restore this function to work the way it did in Ss5 and prior.

Thanks,

Jeff

Parents
  • Hi Jeff,

    I'm not seeing the same results, at least if I'm understanding the issue correctly...



  • Hi Steve,

    "...when flying over the 3 different duct shapes (rectangular, round, oval) prior to actual placement."

    You've got "Shape" selected in the Tool Settings palette. That means the damper will change on the fly without having to switch rect-round-oval in the Tasks menu.
    Try it again, but before you place the first one, fly over each of the duct shapes, back and forth.
    Then please compare behavior to Ss5.
    Thanks,
  • Here is the 3-D model of a round -Flat Inline damper from the program that I was able to place. As you can see the damper does place in the program, but if this is not an example of what you are seeing, please send along a AVI or a screen capture of the issue.

          

  • Here's a video of the Ss6 Flat Inline Damper fly-over malfunction.  It's also pretty well described in the discussion above.

    The three Catalog Types getting mixed up are listed in the beginning post.

    The first half of this video is an Ss5 demonstration that shows proper fly-over behavior with the Flat Inline Damper tool.  The second half is the Ss6 fly-over malfunction.

  • Hi Stan,
    I just wanted to clarify the note on that damper for rectangular duct; It's actually not the correct damper with incorrect placement. It's the wrong damper with correct placement. -It's a Splitter Damper, not a Flat Inline, that Ss6 generates via fly-over with the Flat Inline tool.
    Jeff
  • Hey Steve,

    I've logged the SR: 7000591779

    Not that this issue is a deal-breaker, but I've logged it with priority "critical", because it's a "backward enhancement".
    Would you please process this one with the same priority as 7000591816 and 7000591817 ? -All three are backward enhancements.

    Thanks,

    Jeff

  • Hi Jeff,
    Thanks for logging the SR. We'll check whether there's an existing defect for this, and if not, will create a new one and link it to that SR.



Reply Children
No Data