General Drawing Layout Standard Help: 1

[Lockdown]

I have a quick question:

I have a drawing with 3 views (Side/top/right) and an Isometric view.

What standard would I go to, to give guidance where to layout these views on a drawing?

I.E. ANSI Standard XX.XX.XX

 

[MadMango]

See faq1103-1039

ASME Y14.100

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of these Forums?

 

[Lockdown]

Could you help me further by pointing to the exact chapter/section. I'm having an issue and I can't find the information.

 

[PeterStock]

There is too much dependent on the part being draw to determine an answer from what you have given. Also there is much left to company standards, personal prefference etc. Your best bet is to find or ask for a good reference to use as a guide. (Just remember something we tell all the drafters here, the reference can be wrong.)

Peter Stockhausen
Senior Design Analyst (Checker)
Infotech Aerospace Services

http://www.infotechpr.net

 

[ewh]

You would be better served by ASME Y14.3M-1994 MULTIVIEW AND SECTIONAL VIEW DRAWINGS.
There is no pre-determined view layout in creating a good drawing. Start with the view with the greatest number of features visible. Project additional views from there, but only as many as needed to fully define the part.
Some simple parts may only require one view, or none for that matter (such as a sphere) if it can be easily described with words.
If you know that three views will be needed to define your part, the standard will explain what is required as far as layout.
This isn't homework, is it?

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[KENAT]

Some indusries have certain conventions, if this applies to your industry a collueage should know and hopefully point you to the relevant industry or company standard.

For instance back in my little part of aerospace in the UK, on the top level drawing the first view was always a side view with the nose to the left.

Most component drawings kept the same orientation, with only occasional exceptions, this helped checking fit etc on lay-outs.

While a bit less necessary with 3D CAD the idea of modelling & drawing everything in the same 'final assy orientation' has some benefit.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[Lockdown]

No this isn't homework, just a professional dispute. From my education I have been taught to put the Isometric drawing in the top right corner and then the orthogonal views on the left side of the paper.

My colleague says that putting the isometric view on the left is just fine. To me thats just looks bad and isn't very professional.

Check out the drawing I uploaded to demonstrate what I'm talking about.

 

[KENAT]

Who cares about precise placement of 'for information only' iso views?

Put it anwhere so long as it's out of the way of the main views, notes, parts list, title block, rev block...

A company standard on this might have some merit but this wouldn't be something I'd die in a ditch over.

If this is the biggest problem you have right now I'd love to swap;-)!

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[MadMango]

I think the only reason for thinking an isometric view looks good on the right is due to general notes usually being on the left.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of these Forums?

 

[drawoh]

Lockdown,

I am running SolidWorks here.

When I am ready to make my drawing, I look at the 3D_model and I work out what views are needed for a clear description of the part. I might need two. I might need five or six, plus some sections.

In nine years of SolidWorks, I have yet to use an actual isometric view. Often, I do not bother applying a 3D_view, because it provides no useful information. Every other time, there is specific information I want to show off, and I rotate the view so that the viewer can see this. This is what goes on the drawing. If there is another specific piece of information I need to show and I cannot get it into the 3D_view, I rotate the 3D_model again, and apply another one. Often, I rotate and orient 3D_views to fit in the space available. Put yourself in the place of your reader, and try to anticipate what will confuse them.

I try very hard to draw everything at 1:1 scale. I try to get everything on the smallest sheet possible.

Drafting is a language, not a set of procedures. You should be trying to communicate. Follow the projections. Apply dimensions and tolerances as per the standard. Add section views and details as per the standard. Make sure all the information the user requires is shown clearly.

JHG

 

[Lockdown]

Everybody I understand that drawings are just a tool to convey a message, but as before I'm under the principle of putting any isometric drawing on the right therefore all other applicable views go on the left. I was just wondering if there was any real merit or maybe a standard to this; since I was taught this for my 4 years of engineering.

 

[drawoh]

Lockdown,

In SolidWorks, if I put my isometric view on the right, I am going to get a specific isometric view. Perhaps I do not find that particular view useful. Perhaps that position is where the projection off my secondary view goes.

I do not see a need to place all my views in the same place on my drawings. My drawings are clear because I provide adequate space around my view, and I follow the projections shown by my projection symbol. Your standard breaks down if I need a right hand view and a left hand view. It breaks down if I don't need the right hand view.

JHG

 

[Lockdown]

drawoh:

Solidworks allows you to move Isometric drawings aka 3d views, independently of view orientations. I could place a left side iso in the top right corner if I wanted to.

 

[KENAT]

"since I was taught this for my 4 years of engineering."

Your school or your prof may have had that 'rule', but I'd say that's about as far as it goes.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[looslib]

I think the ISO view on the upper-right makes some sense as third-angle project with top-front-right viws forms an 'L' shape. This leaves the upper-right open for the other view.

However, I don't think any standard exisist that says it must go in the upper-right. And with europeans using first-angle projection, it would be a reverse 'L', so the upper left would be the ISO view location.


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

Ben Loosli

 

[dgallup]

I usually throw in a 1:1 scale iso view near the title block just to give a sense of the size of the part. Most of our parts tend to be very small with even smaller features. My default scale is 5:1 but lots of times they are drawn 10:1 with detail views at 50:1. So the iso view is a little bitty thing that I just put in a convenient spot. There is definitely no wrong or right place for it.

One thing that I am pedantic about is company title blocks. We follow ISO standards so ANSI may be different, I'm not sure. ISO 7200 requires the bottom right corner of the drawing WILL contain the drawing identification number. Just above or just to the left will be the drawing title and the name of the legal owner. Every company I have worked for, American and European, has followed this standard but I see many drawing formats, including the one posted above, that do not. If you want something to get me going about professional looking drawings, start with the title block.

Rant off.

 

[Lockdown]

KENAT (Mechanical)

"since I was taught this for my 4 years of engineering."

Your school or your prof may have had that 'rule', but I'd say that's about as far as it goes.

That could be very true, it was just standard for my professor to mark my drawings up if I put the iso in a different location. I just assumed this was an industry standard as most the "real world" drawings I saw were of this same format'ish.

 

[ewh]

Actually, the included iso views are not a requirement per any industry standard. While I have seen them included as a common practice, it depends on the company.
As MM posted, the most likely reason to place it on the right side is to allow for notes on the left side. If the company DRM specifies that notes shall be on the right, chances are that the iso (if one is specified) will be on the left.
I'm with drawoh on this subject; the object is to clearly define a part. Pre-specified required views are not necessary to accomplish this, and can add confusion to the drawing interpretation.
I also rarely use iso views, with the biggest exception being an exploded assembly. Even those will have detractors claiming that they aren't really necessary, but they do often simplify the assembly definition.

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[MechEng2005]

Where I work now, we put the BOM in the upper right, so it wouldn't work for us. (Also, we don't callout any standards on drawings either though, so it wouldn't matter if it was in the standard AND we don't put iso views since we are currently using 2d ACad)

At a previous employer, we put an iso in the upper right with overall material dimensions so that the person ordering material could page through a stack and see what material to have cut from stock or ordered.

-- MechEng2005

 

[fcsuper]

Thee is no statement in the standards about even requiring the inclusion of isometric views, let alone where it is placed. This is completely person preference.

Matt Lorono
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solidworks & http://twitter.com/fcsuper