I Hate Drawings!!! 12

[Bester2]

I need to rant. Why do we have drawings in the 3-D world? I am so tired of arguing about the line thickness/ the font size/ the angle of the leader line or all of the other BS that goes along with creating drawings. Then you issue a fabrication to someone and they inevitably call me back asking how does this thing go together. Then I send a packaged assembly to them and there is no more questions. All they needed in the first place was the model with the associated material. Weld callouts can be called out as annotations, for that matter they should just be physically modeled. And when it comes to assembly, the model is the easiest way to show how things come together. Today you can even create video clips that can be animated with notes to show how things come together. I worked for a company once where I heard that an entire division was designed paperless. In order to do this they made all of their suppliers run the same CAD package. This allowed them to created annotations in the models along with associated views to make the parts. Do places like this really exist? If so dose anyone else see this becoming this way in the future. Dose anyone else agree with me that drawings are a waste of time? Does anyone think that their mechanical task is better served in a two dimensional world? Am I doomed to suffer in a world of arbitrary existence??

One extremely frustrated engineer that is probably looking for a new career!!!


SW 2007 SP 5.0

 

[TheTick]

Maybe your drawings lack content and/or clarity.

 

[MadMango]

It's taken ~20yrs for 2D CAD to displace drafting boards (not 100%). It's taken ~10yrs for 3D CAD to displace 2D CAD (not 100%). I think it will take longer than ~15yrs for 3D models to displace 2D drawings (not 100%).

It always comes back to QA/QC, "What do I inspect to?"

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

Have you read faq731-376 to make the be

 

[ewh]

Yes, places like that DO exist, but are few. Most still augment the models with paper for one reason or another. Check out ASME Y14.41-2003.

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[moltenmetal]

Sorry, but my machinist doesn't have a CAD station beside the lathe, and my welders don't have a CAD station next to their welders. They need drawings, thanks. On paper. Preferably with dimensions. Hopefully with some tolerance information too.

Depending on the modelling software, cranking a few dimensioned views isn't all that tough.

What it sounds like you're dealing with is someone trying to enforce drafting standards on you, the engineer, rather than help you by doing the drafting for you once the design work is done. I hear you on that one. Learn to separate the valuable stuff in that criticism (ie. how to dimension so the person building the thing won't have to get out a calculator), from the nit-picky appearance- or preference-related stuff. Not to disrespect the skill that a real, trained draftsman has in creating a drawing that is accurate, legible and understandable at a glance- that's a dying art.

 

[KENAT]

This has been discussed at length before.

There is still a place for drawings, although some places are strongly 3D/MBD/14.41 etc. Even a lot of these though still have partial drawings or issues they haven't fully resolved.

For places that can't force suppliers to have a suitably compatible 3D Cad system/format they're still pretty much needed.

There's also configuration control issues that are slightly different from the 2D world with associated IT issues.

Most of the petty format issues can be established once and enforced by the CAD system settings at a firm, though there's always some room for debate if you really want to.

One of the issues I have with MBD is that for the most part when you come to use it you have to do some level of interrogation of the model, (be it panning, zooming in, opening prepared 'views', going into sketches, selecting a part to find its PN... and this all assumes you're in native or annotated generic format) on a good drawing it's all just laid out for you. Sure you can throw the model straight into the CMM program but what about worrying about tolerances etc.

On assy models, a lot of things (like adhesives, paint, individual wires etc.) get left out for good reason and only annotated on the drawing (or some variation there on). Many of these it is possible to include in the model somehow but in most cases you still have the interogation issue.

MadMango makes a real good point about inspection.

The drawing is prepared based on function first, support to inpsection second (though this should closely match function most of the time) and for ease of manufacture an important third. (That'll probably upset someone but so be it.)

Also a lot of what you see as "other BS" is to do with clarity and avoiding ambiguity. After all a drawing is a legal document if push comes to shove, it defines what you'll accept.

I find a lot of the most vocal people about this kind of thing at my place are the ones who can't/wont do it right/well and don't understand the whole concept of product documentation (be it MBD or drawings) properly. There have been several rants lately about lack of good drawings etc so I suspect I'm not the only one that feels this way.

You could always go into an area of Engineering where you don't do your own drawings, I've heard they still exist.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[KENAT]

"What it sounds like you're dealing with is someone trying to enforce drafting standards on you, the engineer, rather than help you by doing the drafting for you once the design work is done."

Hmm, am I an idiot engineer for sucking it up and learning how to do it relatively properly rather than waiting for someone else to do it for me? I know there are plenty who don't see drafting as integral to engineering so maybe I am the dumb a$$.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[moltenmetal]

Nope KENAT- you're one of the good ones who learned it right!

I just didn't go to school as an engineer to spend substantial fractions of my time as a draftsman. I believe in the division of labour. I'll get coffee for customers, or sweep the floor when it's dirty, or get out the tools and tear something down when it isn't working, but you won't catch me spending hours neatening up drawings, or re-formatting Word documents etc. Everybody's got to draw their own line in the sand SOMEWHERE!

 

[ajack1]

Most of our work is for the automotive industry, tooling and special purpose machinery and the paperless work place has been around for a good few years now, or if not totally paperless very minimal.

Of our current customer base I would say about 65% work paperless and that is growing all the time, those that do not take it on board fall by the wayside as simple as that.

Much of this is driven by the complexity of the modelling, you simple could not dimension many parts even if you wanted to, there is a great debate on the drawings standards site about how you dimension five holes, how on earth do you dimension something like a bonnet inner with over 25,000 surfaces on it? Why would you even bother to try when you can machine and inspect directly to a model?

This does not however take away things being done “right” line weights and arrowheads are replaced by the accuracy and controls on the model.

Hardly any companies that work in our sector are growing that still work predominantly with drawings and many have gone bust, once someone in the industry starts doing it and getting it right (which does take time and effort) they are at a huge advantage, I see this spilling over into other sectors sooner rather than later.

 

[vc66]

I had a whole counter rant written up, but figured it wasn't worth it, and it'd probably get red-flagged anyway, so I'll just say this.

If you don't like to draft parts, you can go into the automotive industry. A lot of those companies use very little paper, simply because of the complexity of the parts.

V

 

[KENAT]

I just figure(d) if part of my job description is doing drafting I either learn to do it properly or find another position.

I get tired of people just complaining about it and doing a half a$$ed job of it.

MBD has advantages but as ajack points out

"This does not however take away things being done "right" line weights and arrowheads are replaced by the accuracy and controls on the model."

my perception is that the people that are lazy/poor at 2D will often/usually be poor at this in 3D.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[ewh]

... or aerospace.
MBD is coming along. With the right software and hardware, you can design, check, release, machine and inspect off the the same model. The only annotation really needed in the model has to do with toleranceing, and that can be imbedded into the model to be passed on in downstream applications.
The biggest obstacle to all of this is of course $$$. That was also the biggest obstacle to CAD just a few years back.

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[aardvarkdw]

Like ajack1 said, even if you get into a paperless environment that doesn't mean that it is going to get easier or simpler to correctly document a part. It just means that you as the engineer need to spend more time building intelligence into the model and providing the extra tolerancing and dimensional information to the model that would normally be included in the print.

Line weights, font size, et al, are just ways of communicating effectively. My advice would be to learn to do it right or hire a trained draftsman to do the work for you. Would you give instructions in Japanese to a French speaking individual and expect them to understand all of the nuances of what you are saying. No, you would either find someone to translate or you would learn to speak their language. The same goes for engineering documentation, it is a language and you either need to learn to speak it properly or find someone that is willing to "translate" what you have into something intelligible. (shameless plug for all us draftsmen out there.)

David

 

[vc66]

I figured engineers would take pride in their drawings. I find, however, that some not only don't like to do drafting, but are terrible at it. Maybe that's why they don't like it?

V

 

[ewh]

Well put, David.

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[hendersdc]

I figure who better to make the drawings then the engineer that designed it. They know which dimensions are critical and which can slide a little, not just from an individual part standpoint but for assembly as well.

 

[csd72]

Bester2,

You may be from one of those few branches where your cad drawings can be manufactured straight from the cad file, but for most of us we are dictated by the lowest common denominator - the tradesman that has to interpret our drawings and build it.

It is also easy for us engineers to forget that we had to learn how to read drawings and that there are many people out there who do not understand 2D drawings let alone 3D. I have had this problem with intelligent people too such as lawyers.

I do feel your pain though, I do know from experience that some 3D things are very hard to represent in 2D.

 

[aardvarkdw]

Hendersdc,

I would agree IF the engineer that designed the part/assembly knew how to communicate that information. Don't get me wrong, I know many engineers that are great at putting their intentions on paper/into the model, but I also know/work with many that couldn't accurately detail a piece of 1/4dia. bar-stock.

David

 

[GregLocock]

Hendersdc

Written from the perspective of a previous job, not my current one.

Well, to be honest my draftie knew a hell of a lot of stuff that I don't, and vice versa. So while I was happy to noodle away at the solid model until it (a) packaged (b) was strong enough and light enough and (c) looked right, there was still an awful lot left to do to the model before a machine shop could pick it up and use it. That's where the draftie came in, so I would throw my model over the wall and he turned it into a productionisable part that didn't kill the machinist.

I agree it might be slightly more efficient overall in man hours if I had done the whole thing, but my chargeout rate was > $150 ph, his was 70.


Cheers

Greg Locock

SIGlease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[cranky108]

I see your point, and rant if you need to.
Some of us do work with 2D drawings for a reason. And if a reasonable substitute for paper were available we would use it.

At some point we must explain our drawings to someone.