(2) HOLES INSTEAD OF 2 x HOLES? 1

[CMcF]

Is it possible to change the way hole call outs represent multiple holes? We have traditionally represented the quantity of holes by using parentheseses (brackets).
It does not seam to be part of the calloutformat.

 

[looslib]

Because it doesn't follow the ASME Y14.5 standard for multiple location callouts.


"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli
CAD/CAM System Analyst
Ingersoll-Rand

 

[ctopher]

Ben is correct.
FYI: The correct standard is, for example.... 2X Ø.125

 

[CMcF]

Thanks,
My company works to a Ford/ISO/MIUAYG hybrid standard. I hope to convince people to go with SWX on this one.

 

[SnowCrash]

Converting a department to an external standard is terrible. We have two designers here and the other guy's reaction to finding out the ANSI spec does not meet his SOP is , "Well that's stupid; I'm not gonna do it that way."
--
Crashj

 

[JNR]

What does it say on your drawing formats and general note about drafting standards compliance? If it says you comply with ASME Y14.5 (note it is no longer ANSI) then you had better be doing so. You might point that out. (And I bet you don't do military work there do you, 'cos DOD would not be pleased.) Also you might point out that while I think it is stupid the you can't kill laywers at will, it still happens to be the standard that our society has agreed on............. so I comply.

I was - and he did. So at least I didn't get coal.....

 

[CMcF]

Thanks for your input,
I am all for external standards. We use ISO (simple and logical). Did you know that SWX's fastest growing market is now India! Does any one know what the preferred standard is there?

 

[rocheey]

>>Did you know that SWX's fastest growing market is now India!

Yes, but Im beginning to think the the market is for *employees*, and not users. :/

 

[toolmantwo]

Back to the first question; we do not use (2)"brackets" for the quanity of holes. This is most due to the fact we want to follow Y14.5 standard. We use 2X Dia .200 [with the symbol for diameter, not Dia]. I think the Y14.5 standard was updated in 1998? Best to check for yourself. We use ( ) "brackets" for all reference information and do not want to mix the meanings. Reference information is used when the rule puts the dimension in the correct place, the the infromation shows again in another view or another sheet of the same drawing.

I have found some people like to use the written word for quanity on drawing of metal stamping dies. Example "Four X .255 Dia X .75 deep"
I have seen machinists make scrap by reading the note wrong in the case of 2X .200 Dia and bore a 2 inch hole not the .200 Dia hole. It might help the brain if we would use seven X .500 Dia to aid the machinist. I feel the word is better if you have the room.

CMcF If you use reference information how do you currently represent this in your application?
Thanks and Happy New year

 

[SBaugh]

IMHO

I personally think that anyone that has to read drawings and those that make drawings should be educated on both. You can't read a drawing if you never made one, and you can't make one if you never read one. So learn how to read them and make them. Also learn the ANSI Standard or whatever standard you are using. This will pay for itself in the long run because you won't be scrapping material all the time. Plus the man/woman reading the drawing will know what the drawing is implying and won't have to call the Engineer, Drafter, or Designer to find an answer. Also they won't guess or assume they know the answer.

What kills everyone in this line of work is the fact that not everyone is informed about drawings, standards, etc... If a person can't read a drawing, then that person is going to cost the company money. You get a lot of these people then the company is going to really start losing money. Then they (the company) gets tired of losing money and packs up and moves to another country.

If a company has a standard and it deviates from the ANSI standard then that's, that companies prerogative, but no matter what. Every one in the company should be aware of the standard and how to process the drawings when one is given to them.

If your company wants to use the word "seven" instead of the number 7. Then you should make a rule and clear it with the entire company and never deviate from it. That’s what ISO 9000 (and up) helps do. The purpose of standards is to help all of us in this field read each other’s work. Most companies have their own way of manipulating the standard so people can’t follow their work. That’s fine just as long as those companies follow their own standard and any new person that enters the company follow it too.

I would rather see most to all companies us the standard of their choice to it fulliest extent, but that doesn't happen very often.

I’m big on standardization because I have seen it from both sides and a company without it will tumble and fight to manage all their drawings. Standardize them and you won’t have to fight the ongoing up hill battle of standardization.

I might have missed the point here, but I had to express my opinion on this.

Thanks... Best Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP

http://www.3dvisiontech.com

http://www.scottjbaugh.com

faq731-376

 

[JNR]

The whole point of standards is that anyone can produce a document and anyone else can integpret it exactly as it was intended. That means for example if the vendor screws up they have to eat the cost. Whereas if there is ambiguity or in the document or it does not comply to accepted commercial standards you eat the cost. Ask a lawyer ;-) ..... yes they do have their uses occasionally.

I was - and he did. So at least I didn't get coal.....

 

[automationbabe]

One company I worked at had numerous drawings that were grandfather in, and it was international as well. Instead of updating every single drawing to current standard (unless it absolutely had to), we interpreted the drawings per the standard noted on the drawing for its given time.

Not abiding by a standard that is stated on the drawing is a BIG no no...and a lawyer will tell you that ;-)

If you know your colleague is not abiding by the standard, mention it to legal...they'll make 'em take notice

Best people to know at work are legal and payroll :-D

 

[CMcF]

Gosh,
thanks chaps. I am glad I am an ISO man, I have never had to get lawyers involved. I think that is because ISO is simple and logical.

Can SXW generate the word "seven" instead of the number 7?
I prefer "tools not rules".

 

[SBaugh]

Not to my knowledge there isn't. If ISO Standard doesn't do it on it's own, then you can't force it. That code is written in the Core of SW.

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP

http://www.3dvisiontech.com

http://www.scottjbaugh.com

faq731-376

 

[CMcF]

Thans Scott,
I did not think it would (I was being facetious). Please accept my appologies, and accept my thanks for your contributions to this forum.

Colin.

 

[toolmantwo]

CMcF
I am not familiar with Solidworks at all. Can you add a note to any dimension? We use AutoCAD 2002 now, and it is not all that great. We try to keep all dimensions associative. We also have a few seats of ProEngineering and I do not get the time to work with the software and only had “School of hard Knocks” training and only read some of the manuals to date.

Just as FYI we allow an inside our company drafting standard for products and another refined standard for tooling drawings. The tooling standard does not violate the product standard and will be tailored to the party, or company. It this method we can use X,Y coordinates to keep the drawing less cluttered for tooling. We need to update our standard soon to keep it “official “.

AutomationBabe
Great input. Yes I would add do not argue with accounting that may also work with payroll. I found one error on pricing in our product catalog where the customer was only billed 10% of the true cost, yet when the customer returned the product for credit 1,000% credit dollars were given. I brought this to the attention of the head accountant and this was not received as good news. Yes, people will want to shoot the messenger in real life. If you have any time I would like to know more of what is used in international drawings.

 

[CMcF]

Toolmantwo,
Yes you can. In a very simple manor, whilst keeping your dims associative. SW2004 now has hole charts(XY coords), which are sooo quick and easy to use. You can also include associative dimension values in text notes.
I hate payroll, that's why I am a contractor.

 

[bobsheets]

Am I missing something? I don't get the quantity of holes when using holecallout or insert model items in a slddrw. We modified calloutformat.txt to include a line "(x) holes" because our industry always uses ().

 

[CMcF]

Bobsheets,
It depends how you put your holes in. If you put multiple points in your sketch, then the quantity of holes will be part of the callout. I don't think it works if you mirror or pattern points within the sketch. It also works for all patterned holes, except sketch patterns.

 

[bobsheets]

Then we must have something turned off. We use hole wizard for all fasteners on a part level and we have never gotten quantities. I'll contact our VAR.

Thanks