HELP-MODEL/PAPER SPACE TEXT BATTLE 1

[BSE05]

Recently myself and 2 other engineers joined a new company, we are structural, mechancal and electrical engineers in the building design field.

The architectural cad group at this company does all their dimensioning and text in paper space. We have never seen this and do not want to change doing text in model space. However, we do text for specs and standard details in paper space.

As designers we like to work this way. We are told we are old fashioned!

Who is right here? Can we have a split standard in-house?

 

[smcadman]

Search this forum for thread555-132809 "Paper Space/Model Space help"

Flores

 

[IFRs]

Paper space is the place for all text, dimensions, etc - everything that is not a part of the "model" - the building you are drawing. The only reasons for text in model space are old drawings, no time to fix things, a drawing totally screwed up, an old version of AutoCAD or a customer specification. My opinoin only.

 

[LHA]

I disagree wholeheartedly with IFRs on this one. In site/civil, you put everything except notes and not-to-scale details in Model, then place notes and details where they fit relative to the Viewports in Paper. If you have to-scale details - which are almost unheard of in civil - they should go in Model and have viewport. That way, north arrows, matchlines and dimensions are real time where they are in the real world. That way, the surveyor - whose dtm points are the basis of your existing conditions basemap - can reload all proposed things in realtime back into the data collector and do the construction stakeout...no need for "oops, I forgot to rotate the north arrow on that one", or "oops, forgot to make my dimscale 1:12 on that one", or "well, the building wasn't square to the title block, so I just rotated the basemap a little, and forgot to tell anyone", etc.

This is a battle I have been fighting for 10 years. You (and the rest of us) are likely to be fighting it for at least another 10. Count your lucky stars...at my current job and my previous one, CADD was/is done in two different softwares - ACAD and Terramodel there, ACAD and Microstation here. That exacerbates the battle you've described, and countless others.

Terramodel has Plan, Sheet and Profile views. These are kinda-sorta-but-not-really like Model and Paper space. Microstation has none of the above...everyone just slaps down a title block, then rotates, trims, extends and scales things it until it looks like a drawing. Wait until you try to work on a file created in either one of those softwares...my condolensces ahead of time.

Remember: The Chinese ideogram for “crisis” is comprised of the characters for “danger” and “opportunity.”
-Steve

 

[zdas04]

I'm with LHA. I recently got a drawing of a site with all the text in paper space. They also drew some details in paper space. I need to zoom in to show a pump location in a tank berm and all of the reference text was missing. When I added it to model space, the original paper-space layout was messed up. When I set up a new paper-space layout I could add my stuff, but the words from the origial site layout were missing.

The only solution I found was to move the text and dimensions to model space and then add my details. What a pain.

David

 

[smcadman]

It seems that old habits are hard to break; if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Typically, it is an old "company standard" where you put ALL of your geometry, dimensions, and text on model space and whoever was in charge never bothered going back to school to learn how to properly use layouts.

Layouts have been out for over 5 years in ACAD, and if someone is just now stumbling on them, You will need great help if you ever have to leave that company for another job.

It may take some getting used to, but you should hang in there and not be afraid to learn new things. In 1998, a fellow CAD person told me "you better learn 3D, because in 2004 it is projected that 60% of the CAD industry will be using 3D". It didn't reach that high of course, but I was way ahead of the game.

What does that have to do with anything? I have seen some fellow employees come and go because a boss basically stated "If you can't do it, we'll get someone else here who can".

Flores

 

[BSE05]

Just to clarify my earlier post, I do use layouts and paper space. All sheet borders, standard details, standard notes, specs. are done in paper space, with the model in a viewport. What I refered to is the text and dimensions associated with the model done in model space. I appreciate your responses they are helpful wether you agree or not.

 

[SUNDEMON]

I work doing casework, and tend to mix dimensioning in paper space and model space. Generally, we dimension elevations and plans in model space. Often we have to "stretch" a drawing in revision, and it's convenient to have the dimensioning go along with it. It seems that, if those dimensions were in paper space, we'd have to adjust them separately. Also, with 3D models, we often put "3D" dimensions on the actual object in model space, or we might lay text labeling on a surface so that the isometric positioning of the text helps clarify the view. We could dimension 3D veiws in paper space, but we'd have to obliquely skew all the dimensions and notes for the same look. But I put all other notes and text leaders in paper space.
When I dimension in paper space, it's usually for a close-up detail, it's definitely better to keep the model space drawing simpler.
So I guess it really depends on what you're doing. However, for those that exclusively dimension in paper space, I'd like to hear some good methods, such as ways to more easily link the paper space dimensions to the objects in the viewport, etc.

sundemon

 

[xgrigorix]

At the very least dimensions should be in model space, so that when you do a revision the dims change w/ the model. That way you don't end up doing the same revision 2x (1 in model & 1 in paper).

 

[CDH]

I think it really depends on the situation, but I tend to keep dimensions and notes with the model. I have to do enough changing of the geometry that it becomes a real pain when you move something, then have to switch to paperspace to make sure the dimension updated. Also, if you are using AEC dimensions in ADT, it's not even possible to put them in paperspace, as they are linked directly to the geometry in model space.

There certainly are times when it works great to put dimension and notes in paperspace, but I wouldn't go as far as saying it's the only way to do it. I'm sure I could come up with just as many arguments to say model space is the only way (which is not at all what I'm saying!)

I think you should be able to do it how you feel most comfortable. If they still insist, you could use the express tools command changespace (chspace) to convert all of your notes and dimensions over to paper space when you are finished.

 

[IFRs]

For later versions of AutoCAD, dimensions in paper space automatically update when the model is changed. Prior to this being true, paper space was a complete waste of time in my humblest of opinions.

 

[CDH]

Yeah, it sometimes does that, but it doesn't always work in my experience. Half the time when I put a dimension in paperspace, I get the actual paper dimension (1 1/2" for example) instead of what it should be. So I fix that, then I move something, and the dimension doesn't move. Gotta fix that.

All I'm saying is it can be a good technique, but you need to be comfortable with it, and know what to expect from it.