Managing layers from different blocks with solview/soldraw

[Szeker]

Hi Everyone,

As you can see, there are many comment around using SOLVIEW, SOLDRAW, dimensioning in paperspace, etc. I think, reading all these kind of messages can make more or less clear, how to make nice documentation for a single element. I have no problem with that.

But, what's the best way of managing several components together?

I'm working on a machine, which consists of several different parts. I created full size 3d solid models in model space for each components in separate drawing file, because I'd like to make detailed documentation for each parts on paperspace. But I also want to use the 3D model of these elements (as a block or x-ref) to build more complex 3D model of machine parts, based on individual components. Finally, I want to build up the whole 3D modell of the machine using a kind of hierarchycal structure of the one-by-one created parts.

The problem with this approach is the huge amount of layers in complex drawings, containing several modules or x-refs. If the documentation of individual components were made using SOLVIEW and SOLDRAW commands, then they have at least three new layers for every view created by SOLVIEW. I don't need those DIM,VIS,HID layers when I want to use the component model itself as a brick (block or xref) in a higher hierarchical level. I also dont need the lines and haches in model space created by soldraw.

So it would be nice to leave the paperspace layers out from a component when it is used as a building block.

My opinion is that CAD isn't only for drawing and making nice paper result on the end, but more to build a virtual modell of a machine or whatever. And that is the point where I see some conflict between the model and the paperspace.

I want to create a component, which define itself, which contains all the necessary information for manufacturing, but which still can be used as a "real" component in other drawings also. That's why we use CAD systems I hope...

So I want to use both the model and paperspace, and not just making a modell than being happy what a nice blueprint I have.

Can anyone give me ideas, how can it be solved? How you arrange your hierarchycal designs, blocks, paperspace objects for not let the system making a big jungle of layers and mass of unnecessary things in our drawings?

Thanks, if anyone helps.

 

[Szeker]

Hi Everyone,

Perhaps, my question was too long and not so clear...

I simply tried to ask how others arrange their drawings and components into a system which can be used as a component library, for building more complex designs.

I'd like to work on that way, but I don't like the huge number of layers created by SOLVIEW and SOLDRAW when I insert a previously created and documented (-> SOLVIEW,SOLDRAW...) drawing as a block or xref into a new design.

Is there anyone who works on that way?
Can anyone give me ideas, how a good system should be set up with component libraries?

If yes, please share it with us!

Thanks,

Szeker.

 

[DSRT]

If you have the express tools, check out the layer options. For example you can use the layer merge to merge your layers into a selected layer. You can also use the layer delete to delete layers you do not use.

 

[MikeHalloran]

I'm not sure that AutoCAD is the best solution for a true hierarchical design. I've tried it on a small scale on a few occasions, and usually ran out of computer before layer management became a big challenge. When a redraw takes a couple of minutes, you have run out of computer. Bigger faster computers just delay the onset of the problem.

I design custom tubular parts for boats, and I can do a better job if I can get the CAD files for the boat. Files with XREFs drive me crazy, because nobody remembers to send all of the xref'd files that I might need.

But if I got all the XREFs, maybe that would drive me crazy too, because of granularity of complexity. E.g., if I'm trying to route a big pipe around a genset, I don't need to know what's inside the genset's sound enclosure. I may want to see where the latches and hinges are, and how wide the doors swing, but I don't need or want to deal with every fastener in the box, or every detail of the engine and generator that are inside the box; mostly I want to deal with it as a box.

Which is to say, maybe I don't even want a true hierarchically structured design. When I'm looking at the big picture, I don't want atomic levels of detail. I'm leaning more toward using copyclip to transfer the 3D models as blocks into higher level drawings, and maybe taking the opportunity to simplify the blocks along the way. If you need more detail of some lower level component, you can redefine the block that represents it in the higher level drawing. That's kind of an old hack in ACAD, but it does work.

It does present some challenges to your discipline and organization, i.e., keeping track of what detailed blocks and what simplified blocks correspond to each other, and keeping the blocks and the details in synch with each other.

Maybe there's a tool that can help you with that, I don't know. I've never worked with fancy add-ons. I've worked at several places that had Mechanical Desktop, but I've never worked with anyone who knew how to drive it, the help files don't, and sometimes it gets in the way of using the bare- bones product.

I'd counsel you to be very reluctant to merge or delete layers. Sometimes the only way you can make sense of what's going on in a complicated assembly like a boat is to turn particular layers on and off selectively, e.g., turning off the hull but leaving the frames and some of the bulkheads visible, or doing interference checks with the hydraulic, compressed air, refrigerant, cooling water, gray water, black water, potable water, lube oil, waste oil, fuel, and oily water pipes one set at a time, not to mention ventilation ducts and cable trays, and the structure to support all of them...





Mike Halloran
NOT speaking for
DeAngelo Marine Exhaust Inc.
Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA

 

[Szeker]

Thanks for the comments!
I will consider them.

Szeker.