Copying a hatch pattern in a DWG from another company

 I have a drawing from another company that has some hatch patterns in it, that I do not have in BricsCAD.  I need to modify the drawing, and need to use the same hatch pattern in some area of the drawing.  However, the copy properties feature does not work.  Also, when I use the HATCH command, the INHERIT PROPERTIES option does not successfully copy the hatch.  

And while the DWG has a number of things that look amateurish, such as exploding most of the blocks, the hatch patterns were not exploded.  The properties of the hatch pattern indicate that it is named "Net3"

Any suggestions about why the properties painter, and the inherit properties option do not work?

attached is a segment of the drawing, which illustrates the problem.

Thank you for any advice,
Joe

Comments

  • Here is the NET3 hatch pattern:

    *NET3, NETWORK PATTERN 0-60-120
    0, 0,0, 0,.125
    60, 0,0, 0,.125
    120, 0,0, 0,.125
  •  Thank you very much for that.  Though, I really though this was something that the "inherit properties" option should have been able to handle.  At least, when I read about AutoCAD features, this is how people describe how to do it. However, with BricsCAD, I have only used that option using existing hatch definitions already in my BricsCAD.

    -Joe
  • "inherit properties" is solely for matching properties such as Scale, Rotation, Hatch Origin, etc.
    Hatch patterns not in your .pat file require deliberate installation.
    If you run across something obscure, you may try a routine like HatchMaker.lsp
  •  If the hatch pattern name exists in your default.pat file, then both the "Inherit Properties" and the match properties functions will successfully copy a hatch pattern style from one hatch to another.  Apparently it does not know the actual information involved with a particular hatch, if it is not already in that .pat library.

    Thank you for the HatchMaker.lsp suggestion.  Though I don't need it now, I downloaded it and will likely use it in the future.

    -Joe
This discussion has been closed.