Duplication of letters for views, detail, sections datums etc 3

[Lorraine Q]

Hello everyone. Looking to see if anyone can settle an argument I am currently having with myself! I have been producing 2D drawings/3D models for close to 35 years now and saw the industry evolve rapidly...I started on the board!! I have extensive experience in AutoCAD, Catia, Inventor, Solidworks and the current package used is Creo. I started my career in Aerospace where the drafting standards were strict for obvious reasons but have carried some of these over to the different industries and companies over my career. When creating drawings, I will never use the same designation letter for different things, like I will never have a Detail A along with a Datum A or a Section A-A. Every view, section or datum will have its own unique letter. In my current role, I dont have access to any applicable ISO or ASME Standards to check if anything is called out to back my practice up. I am seeing a lot of drawings where I work currently with view, sections, details and datums all using the same letter and wondered if there was any standard out there that could back me up or am I just being awkward calling this out to the younger staff?

 

[ctopher]

I also started on the board, and do the same.
The past 20 years nobody learns proper drafting techniques or standards, they do drawings how whatever they think makes sense to them.
I come across more people these days doing drawings that are junk. I try teaching them, but they are unwilling to learn.
Management doesn't understand drawings, and don't care. They just want to see a drawing complete and released.
My suggestion is keep doing it the correct way, get copies of the ASME specs.

Chris, CSWP
SolidWorks
ctophers home

 

[SwinnyGG]

I always do the same. Although in my little fiefdom, it starts over on any new sheet. I assume this is the same, as unique letters for every single detail/datum/section/etc across an entire set would result in 'detail ZZBH' by the end.

Not sure that there is a specific standard requirement that dictates this approach.. but I will say, just because it's not in the standard doesn't mean it's not best practice.

 

[3DDave]

No such requirement in the standard(s). There are requirements that section and detail letters be unique across the drawing and that datum feature symbols be unique for each datum feature, but nothing about not using the same letters for both on a single drawing.

There's also no rule or requirement prohibiting making them unique.

 

[Brian Malone]

I don't know if a standard sets a rule but I recommend you consider choosing your battles. With CAD tools the default name algorithm is the quickest/efficient option without needing a manual override. Over the years I have let go of many 'tenets' of drawing style - CAD has driven this. I understand your preference for the order and control of the view and detail naming - I too started on a board out of college at an aerospace company. Some things become engrained! Many CAD packages can be customized but that has to be maintained thru any product updates. If the info presented is clear and concise, don't sweat the little things. The last few companies I have worked for all had ERP systems that used revisions 'I' and 'O' - major effort would have been required to override the use - accept that and move on. There are more important details to be concerned with.

 

[SwinnyGG]

Brian's point is a valid one.

In Solidworks world this change is very easy, it may be more difficult in other systems.

 

[CheckerHater]

https://files.engineering.com/getfi...-434b-464f-98f1-ecfe6c69f37d&file=Capture.PNG

"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert"
Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future

 

[ewh]

Board start here also... agree with not sweating the little stuff. One company I worked at near the beginning of my career had a practice of assigning datums in reverse (Z, Y, X instead of A, B, C) to avoid duplicating view/section letters. There should be a limit to dumbing down drawings for the least common denominator.

"Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively."
-Dalai Lama XIV

 

[Eric Gushiken]

I wouldn't go to that extreme. I think it's better to try and keep the detail or section view on the same page as the view from which it is being pulled from if possible. If there's not enough room, at least try to keep it close like on the next sheet rather than further on in sheet number. At one place there was a requirement to put the sheet number and zone where the detail view was pulled from. Sometimes unnecessary rules end up costing way more time (money) to adhere to and delay the release schedule which is almost always running behind already.