I was just wondering how many people were taught drafting up to ansi standards during their undergrad curriculum? For my undergrad, i had half a semester on autocad. I'm just wondering because my drawings were not up to par (mostly cosmetic). Do most people know this coming out of college?
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Mechanical drafting for Mechanical Engineering undergrad?
- Thread starter dumpsta
- Start date
JohnRBaker
Mechanical
For what it's worth, when I started engineering school back in 1965 the assumption was that you had learned drafting in high school (which I didn't). All we were taught my freshman year was something called 'Engineering Graphics' which just touched on orthographic projections, drawing isometric views, how to create perspective views using 2 or 3 vanishing points, and finding the true 3D length of a line from multiple 2D views (note that this was all being done on a drawing board using triangles and T-squares). But we never actually created anything which looked like a fully annotated, standardsp-based drawing. I learned that while working summers as a draftsman between my Freshman/Sophomore and Sophomore/Junior years. By the time I got to the summer between my Junior/Senior year, I was being given some basic engineering tasks which included working in the prototype lab setting up tests and correlating results. I guess by then they assumed I had learned enough to read a drawing and supervise those who might be assigned to you for doing detailing. Our office had a chief draftsman whose job that it was to make sure that the draftsman and detailers were actually following the office drafting standards (which being the American division of a British company was based on some combination of Whitworth and American standards).
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
UG/NX Museum:
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
Boy, oh boy, will this thread kick up a debate.
I'd guess few if any are taught drafting standards. In the 70's pretty much all curricula had a "drafting" or "graphical communication" course. We all had to purchase $100+ of drafting tools and spend time on the board. I remember wondering why I had to buy modelling clay, until I sculpted the clay into a prototype of a part we had to draw. This was done so in order to help me visualize the different views necessary to communicate that physical configuration on 2D paper. There was a little bit of effort to discuss standards, but it was mostly the mechanics of producing drawings.
Nowadays, most 3D CAD packages have automated the laborious task of providing views and dimensioning. I wonder however how many really know how to present sufficient views of parts. And to dimension and tolerance them to "standard practices". I know of one guy, and his "Industrial Management Degree" manager, who issue the most horrendous, embarrassing drawings to customers. I can imagine the customers saying "Whiskey Tango Frank?" when they see these official release drawings.
TygerDawg
Blue Technik LLC
Virtuoso Robotics Engineering
I'd guess few if any are taught drafting standards. In the 70's pretty much all curricula had a "drafting" or "graphical communication" course. We all had to purchase $100+ of drafting tools and spend time on the board. I remember wondering why I had to buy modelling clay, until I sculpted the clay into a prototype of a part we had to draw. This was done so in order to help me visualize the different views necessary to communicate that physical configuration on 2D paper. There was a little bit of effort to discuss standards, but it was mostly the mechanics of producing drawings.
Nowadays, most 3D CAD packages have automated the laborious task of providing views and dimensioning. I wonder however how many really know how to present sufficient views of parts. And to dimension and tolerance them to "standard practices". I know of one guy, and his "Industrial Management Degree" manager, who issue the most horrendous, embarrassing drawings to customers. I can imagine the customers saying "Whiskey Tango Frank?" when they see these official release drawings.
TygerDawg
Blue Technik LLC
Virtuoso Robotics Engineering
My experience was similar to John's. College had one quarter of engineering graphics, essential the same as mentioned before. This was in the early 90's. CAD classes were fairly new and I didn't get into one of those as they filled up quickly. On my co-op, I was taught drafting by an engineer that was a stickler for detail. I don't think I ever gave him a first or second draft that wasn't returned red-lined. After I graduated I started work as a machine design engineer with AutoCAD. They stuck me in an office with an AutoCAD book and I spent my first week going through tutorials. After two or three weeks I was pretty proficient with CAD, but my co-op gave me my drafting foundation.
So, short answer; No, I don't believe most engineers know this out of college.
So, short answer; No, I don't believe most engineers know this out of college.
Half the reason your drawings are not up to par is because you aren't taking the time to read them. Put yourself on the side of the person reading the drawing, and determine if there is enough information to make your part.
This applies to both content and presentation. If your drawing is cluttered or in disarray, it detracts from the effort f the reader to learn "the story of the part".
My education in drafting came primarily from the reading side. As a machinist, I made hundreds of parts from drawings that came from many different sources, with a full spectrum of drawing quality (weighted heavily on the "poor" end of the spectrum).
You don't get what you want. You get what you ask for.
This applies to both content and presentation. If your drawing is cluttered or in disarray, it detracts from the effort f the reader to learn "the story of the part".
My education in drafting came primarily from the reading side. As a machinist, I made hundreds of parts from drawings that came from many different sources, with a full spectrum of drawing quality (weighted heavily on the "poor" end of the spectrum).
You don't get what you want. You get what you ask for.
My experience was about a decade later but pretty much the same as John R Baker. Just taught the principles of projection, perspective, etc. in university. Absolutely nothing about detailing let alone standards. My first 2 jobs I used drawings, did not create them. Not until a few years into my 3rd job did I start designing things. That company had their own drawing standards and draftsmen so I just told them what I wanted. It wasn't until we got solid modeling software in the late 1980's that I started creating my own drawings. By that time I had enough on the job training to know what I was doing.
I think it's not that different today. We just hired an engineer straight out of university. He knows how to solid model but very little about creating drawings. We have a local technical college that has a curriculum much heavier in the practical aspects of drawing. I think the universities feel it's beneath the engineers to work on lowly drafting. Or maybe they think there isn't time in the curriculum to teach it. These days we only have one draftswomen and she only handles the routine production drawing changes. All the new design work drafting is handled by the design engineers. The quality varies.
----------------------------------------
The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.
I think it's not that different today. We just hired an engineer straight out of university. He knows how to solid model but very little about creating drawings. We have a local technical college that has a curriculum much heavier in the practical aspects of drawing. I think the universities feel it's beneath the engineers to work on lowly drafting. Or maybe they think there isn't time in the curriculum to teach it. These days we only have one draftswomen and she only handles the routine production drawing changes. All the new design work drafting is handled by the design engineers. The quality varies.
----------------------------------------
The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.
racookpe1978
Nuclear
D*mn.
Didn't know I was an old fogey. (Texas A&M, 1978, nulear engineering.) We had 2x semesters of manual drafting when I started in 1974 - required of every engineer, every disciple. It was all pencil though: no ink, no vellum. No 0.5 mm pencils either. You had to "roll" the pencil as you drew the line to wear the lead evenly at the point. in spring of 74, my physics teacher brought the first HP calculator into his classroom in the city. No money for me though - I had to use slide rules through my sophomore year (1975-76 school year.) My wife, chemical engineer, did the same drafting in her engineering design graphic classes in 1975, but she at least had a TI calculator (sines, cosines, logs, etc for the trig.) by that time.
And, of course, no AutoCAD or 3D CAD for anyone. For you youngsters, that was because PC's had not been invented yet. (Quit snickering.) H*ll, computer graphic SCREENS, MONITORS, or KEYBOARDS had not been installed yet. 80 character punchcards were the highest tech available to undergrads.
Am I "better" forhaving the drafting classes, rather than, perhaps, blindly handing off sketches to a draftsman in the CAD section that only he (or she) could change or produce or reproduce? Yes, but I've also been reading and interpreting drawings since 1974. And, on average, I have found 1-2 errors on every piece of paper I have handled since that time.
I have seen no improvement in the quality of drawings between 1940's and 50's - when everything was manually created, and often "artistically" interpreted when the item got too complex; and today's beautiful - but equally inaccurate - 3D rendered hidden line "CAD-perfect" modeled assemblies.
Didn't know I was an old fogey. (Texas A&M, 1978, nulear engineering.) We had 2x semesters of manual drafting when I started in 1974 - required of every engineer, every disciple. It was all pencil though: no ink, no vellum. No 0.5 mm pencils either. You had to "roll" the pencil as you drew the line to wear the lead evenly at the point. in spring of 74, my physics teacher brought the first HP calculator into his classroom in the city. No money for me though - I had to use slide rules through my sophomore year (1975-76 school year.) My wife, chemical engineer, did the same drafting in her engineering design graphic classes in 1975, but she at least had a TI calculator (sines, cosines, logs, etc for the trig.) by that time.
And, of course, no AutoCAD or 3D CAD for anyone. For you youngsters, that was because PC's had not been invented yet. (Quit snickering.) H*ll, computer graphic SCREENS, MONITORS, or KEYBOARDS had not been installed yet. 80 character punchcards were the highest tech available to undergrads.
Am I "better" forhaving the drafting classes, rather than, perhaps, blindly handing off sketches to a draftsman in the CAD section that only he (or she) could change or produce or reproduce? Yes, but I've also been reading and interpreting drawings since 1974. And, on average, I have found 1-2 errors on every piece of paper I have handled since that time.
I have seen no improvement in the quality of drawings between 1940's and 50's - when everything was manually created, and often "artistically" interpreted when the item got too complex; and today's beautiful - but equally inaccurate - 3D rendered hidden line "CAD-perfect" modeled assemblies.
A lot of people seem to think they know drafting because they were 'taught' it at university / college. A larger number of people assume that someone they just hired knows drafting for the same reason. Like most things I was taught at university, I spent all of about 6 hours being officially taught, then I was told where to find out how to do it properly, bought the books, got my company to buy the standards, spent time reading them.
I can't draw a straight line though, or a hole in isometric.
Designer of machine tools - user of modified screws
I can't draw a straight line though, or a hole in isometric.
Designer of machine tools - user of modified screws
I like Tick's point about actually creating parts from drawings. My co-op also offered a turn in the machine shop with milling machines, lathes, etc. Probably the best teacher for drawing. If you know how a part will be made, you'll better know how to detail it. You want the machinist, fabricator, or whoever doing as little math as possible. If you have access to the folks who will use your prints, talk to them about how they will build it and what THEY think is a good drawing.
dumpsta,
I took engineering graphics back in the '70s, and my experience was much the same as everyone else, above. The training was superficial. I was exposed to the concepts, let's say.
You are not really telling us what is wrong with your drawings. When you prepare drawings and issue them, you need to ask how good they are. When you listen to the feedback, you will have an opportunity to improve your work.
Standards aside, good drafting is like good writing. It is will organized. You try to think like the end user. Information on one detail of the part, scattered around three E[ ]sized pages of the drawing is equivalent to a run-on sentence.
Consistent fonts and well thought out line-work make you look professional, and they make your drawing more clear.
JHG
I took engineering graphics back in the '70s, and my experience was much the same as everyone else, above. The training was superficial. I was exposed to the concepts, let's say.
You are not really telling us what is wrong with your drawings. When you prepare drawings and issue them, you need to ask how good they are. When you listen to the feedback, you will have an opportunity to improve your work.
Standards aside, good drafting is like good writing. It is will organized. You try to think like the end user. Information on one detail of the part, scattered around three E[ ]sized pages of the drawing is equivalent to a run-on sentence.
Consistent fonts and well thought out line-work make you look professional, and they make your drawing more clear.
About 6 labs on 'Auto Sketch' or something like that, plush one homework assignment on 'limits & fits' and that was it.
Learnt drafting on my first job by having my drawings blead over by one of the senior design engineers. Then got really good my first few months of this job where we had a dedicated checker that I learned a lot from - so much I got to do his job for a year or two when he was let go.
From what I've seen rarely if ever is drafting covered in great (or perhaps even adequate) detail these days. They may get a reasonable amount of time learning a specific CAD program but not much on dimensioning, tolerancing, applicable drawing standards...
I Don't think I've met any new grads from the US that had any handle on GD&T and only one from Germany who had a vague clue. Of course, that also goes for a bunch of folks with more experience than me.
Given the increasing rarity of true drafters in many places, this is a bit of a gap.
Learnt drafting on my first job by having my drawings blead over by one of the senior design engineers. Then got really good my first few months of this job where we had a dedicated checker that I learned a lot from - so much I got to do his job for a year or two when he was let go.
From what I've seen rarely if ever is drafting covered in great (or perhaps even adequate) detail these days. They may get a reasonable amount of time learning a specific CAD program but not much on dimensioning, tolerancing, applicable drawing standards...
I Don't think I've met any new grads from the US that had any handle on GD&T and only one from Germany who had a vague clue. Of course, that also goes for a bunch of folks with more experience than me.
Given the increasing rarity of true drafters in many places, this is a bit of a gap.
Posting guidelines faq731-376 (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
Oh, and while keeping the end user in mind is critical, US mechanical drawing standards actually prioritize capturing the function of the part. That is defining what you'll accept as a 'good part' rather than showing how to make it etc.
Posting guidelines faq731-376 (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
I was fortunate in that my high school offered it as a core vocational area of study, of which I took advantage.
In the only college (board) drafting course that I took, the instructor told me that I didn't need to worry about a grade after seeing what I knew.
My work experience is where I actually learned how to draw to the standards, especially those onery checkers who just couldn't let a print go without some red on it. They were my real teachers.
As to thinking of today's drawings as "beautiful", I must disagree; even with minor mistakes and graphite smudging, I personally find much more integrity in a board drawing.
"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]
In the only college (board) drafting course that I took, the instructor told me that I didn't need to worry about a grade after seeing what I knew.
My work experience is where I actually learned how to draw to the standards, especially those onery checkers who just couldn't let a print go without some red on it. They were my real teachers.
As to thinking of today's drawings as "beautiful", I must disagree; even with minor mistakes and graphite smudging, I personally find much more integrity in a board drawing.
"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]
You better know how to do drafting and read drawings... after all, that is how we communicate what we want built. The design and calcs. are important, but our end product is construction documents, so the part or structure can be built. You better be able to sketch and add red lines to a first draft to show the drafter the missing details, dimensions, views, etc. You probably don’t have to be the best or most productive drafter in the office, but you better know a good and complete or incomplete drawing when you see one. Without a doubt this subject is not taught very well in college these days, and people no longer become engineers by spending years at the drafting board first. It is assumed that CAD will make up the difference, but it can’t do the thought process for you of laying out a good set of part details or plans, elevations and sections, etc. Always ask yourself, if I knew nothing about this part or structure, I must show everything they need to know to build it, no assumptions or guessing allowed, does this show everything they would need, what’s still missing? Look critically at the drawings you see, which are the good ones and why, which aren’t so good and why, and what would I do to improve them or complete them?
When I started studies in early nineties, we had two courses in freshman year- 'descriptive geometry' and 'technical drawing' which gave (I'd say sufficient) insight required to make drawings according to standards, while on sophomore year several courses like 'Machine elements' required producing usable technical drawings. (back then, no use of computers in those courses was allowed- when pencil drawings were 'accepted' one had to do them in either ink or combined pencil and ink technique), plus it gave introduction to GD&T. In some cases (mech. design orientation) there were courses on third year that required students to do fully dimensioned 'field' tech drawings/sketches of some equipment- by hand, with no aid of rulers and compasses, &c...
In the meanwhile, 'descriptive geometry' was done away with and 'technical drawing' was transmuted into 'computer assisted illustration' or something like that- result being such that I've heard several reports of graduates of 'new and improved' curriculum being unable not only to produce technical drawings but even unable to interpret (i.e. read or understand) them! Such is the way of progress. (I'm not saying I'm an expert in the field- but at least I was given the chance to learn the basics).
In the meanwhile, 'descriptive geometry' was done away with and 'technical drawing' was transmuted into 'computer assisted illustration' or something like that- result being such that I've heard several reports of graduates of 'new and improved' curriculum being unable not only to produce technical drawings but even unable to interpret (i.e. read or understand) them! Such is the way of progress. (I'm not saying I'm an expert in the field- but at least I was given the chance to learn the basics).
WolfHR (Mechanical)
Some years ago, I was working as a consultant at a certain southern university. I had a bunch of 3rd year aeronautical engineering students working with me, I quickly noticed that most of these guys were having a hard time reading drawings. The dean of the faculty had an office nearby, so I asked him how much time these students spent in drafting classes. His answer 3 weeks, when I pressed him on this, he said that was all the time in the course they could afford, and that the students were welcome to do more on their own time.
B.E.
The good engineer does not need to memorize every formula; he just needs to know where he can find them when he needs them. Old professor
Some years ago, I was working as a consultant at a certain southern university. I had a bunch of 3rd year aeronautical engineering students working with me, I quickly noticed that most of these guys were having a hard time reading drawings. The dean of the faculty had an office nearby, so I asked him how much time these students spent in drafting classes. His answer 3 weeks, when I pressed him on this, he said that was all the time in the course they could afford, and that the students were welcome to do more on their own time.
B.E.
The good engineer does not need to memorize every formula; he just needs to know where he can find them when he needs them. Old professor
SteveMartin
Mechanical
I went through college (late 90's) with no drafting courses, and one seven-week solid modelling course (on pro-E). I learned a fair bit about general drafting practices in an unusually good high school class. I never learned about standards-based drawings until my first job after college.
My drafting skills are decent, but could use improvement. Sadly, they're well above a lot of what I see from many other engineers.
I don't think I'll see one again, but I definitely miss having a full time checking department. That's who I really learned a lot of my drafting from.
My drafting skills are decent, but could use improvement. Sadly, they're well above a lot of what I see from many other engineers.
I don't think I'll see one again, but I definitely miss having a full time checking department. That's who I really learned a lot of my drafting from.
I think the reason this is being overlooked by universities is the fact that they think CAD in general is a sinch to learn. For most good engineers is really is a sinch to pick up. (compared to other things taught in the circulaum). However, there will always be most engineers that are not anal about detail and will inevitably create crappy drawings. Unless students are forced to spend more time on it, there will always be this deficiency.
I also agree with Tick. Knowing how it will be machined helps more than any text can.
![[peace]](/data/assets/smilies/peace.gif "[peace] [peace]")
Fe (IronX32)
I also agree with Tick. Knowing how it will be machined helps more than any text can.
Fe (IronX32)
This is strictly anecdotal,
I moved into a drawing office from the shop floor.
Having had 4 years of technical drawing in college and 8 years of using and reading drawings on the shop floor, I thought I knew it all.
Boy was I in for a surprise. I was paired up with a checker whose first words were, " you already know how to read a drawing, now we are going to teach you how to write one.", I was handed a copy of BS308 and told not to come up for air until I had learned it by heart.
I then got introduced to the joys of red pencil, and the eraser frame, and later the electric eraser. I also got told to use a lettering stencil for now, and to practice my lettering until the checker thought it was adequate for the office.
It took about 3 months for the sea of red pencil to drop to a few occasional splashes, and the office to let me dispense with the lettering stencil.
B.E.
The good engineer does not need to memorize every formula; he just needs to know where he can find them when he needs them. Old professor
I moved into a drawing office from the shop floor.
Having had 4 years of technical drawing in college and 8 years of using and reading drawings on the shop floor, I thought I knew it all.
Boy was I in for a surprise. I was paired up with a checker whose first words were, " you already know how to read a drawing, now we are going to teach you how to write one.", I was handed a copy of BS308 and told not to come up for air until I had learned it by heart.
I then got introduced to the joys of red pencil, and the eraser frame, and later the electric eraser. I also got told to use a lettering stencil for now, and to practice my lettering until the checker thought it was adequate for the office.
It took about 3 months for the sea of red pencil to drop to a few occasional splashes, and the office to let me dispense with the lettering stencil.
B.E.
The good engineer does not need to memorize every formula; he just needs to know where he can find them when he needs them. Old professor
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question