hi808nv702
Computer
In the SW drawings, I want to show clouds around any revisions that I make. Is there such a thing and what wher is it located?. In autocad there I used "revcloud". The e-drawings also show clouds.
Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
-
Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
revision cloud 10
- Thread starter hi808nv702
- Start date
- Status
jlcochran1
Mechanical
Scott,
There is a problem in your signature with your 3dvisiontech link. Vision is misspelled.
There is a problem in your signature with your 3dvisiontech link. Vision is misspelled.
Thanks I got it 
Scott Baugh, CSWP![[pc2]](/data/assets/smilies/pc2.gif "[pc2] [pc2]")
3DVision Technologies
faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users
Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies
faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users
Scott,
I have to agree with your statement regarding Autocad and the use of ANSI standards. However the one justification that I can offer regarding the use of triangles/revisions is that the companies that I worked for had all of their machined and sheet metal parts fabricated out of house. Since the vendors never saw a copy of the ECO it made it easier for them to see the changes from revision to revision.
I have to agree with your statement regarding Autocad and the use of ANSI standards. However the one justification that I can offer regarding the use of triangles/revisions is that the companies that I worked for had all of their machined and sheet metal parts fabricated out of house. Since the vendors never saw a copy of the ECO it made it easier for them to see the changes from revision to revision.
I think a lot of places do, do that. Do you remove the old triangles before putting the new ones on? If you didn't the drawing would be so full of triangles what would be the point?
A way around this would be to have a cover sheet with a decent Rev. table the lists the change. Plus if you have seen the SW Sheet format's you might have noticed the quadrants on the drawing, (like 1A)... like a map. You can list the quadrant with a detailed description of the change on the cover sheet. Then I think most people would see it.
This would help aleveate the need for Triangles.
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies
faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users
A way around this would be to have a cover sheet with a decent Rev. table the lists the change. Plus if you have seen the SW Sheet format's you might have noticed the quadrants on the drawing, (like 1A)... like a map. You can list the quadrant with a detailed description of the change on the cover sheet. Then I think most people would see it.
This would help aleveate the need for Triangles.
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies
faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users
Yes we did remove old triangles. And when the ECO was written it did reference the Zone on the drawing in which the change appeared. I now work in a medical company that must maintain Design History Records. I have yet to do an ECO, just finishing the design for a Hyper-Spectral Cancer Imaging System. Here is what this place does, prototype and pre-production released drawings carry letter revisions. When the product is released and FDA approved the drawings switch to numbers for rev control. This is the first time I have ever encountered that. I can't wait to see what other surprizes are in store regarding ECO's
-
1
- #27
I know this thread is a bit old... but...
We found a cloud in Microsoft Word - of all places. It's an AUTO SHAPE. I insert it into a Word doc - reformat it & remove the fill color. Then COPY/PASTE it into my SolidWorks drawing. Then I can re-size it as I need & it plots pretty too. I compromize & only cloud my dimension text & general large areas. It's an acceptable work-around for us.
Hope it works for you too.
![[idea]](/data/assets/smilies/idea.gif "[idea] [idea]")
We found a cloud in Microsoft Word - of all places. It's an AUTO SHAPE. I insert it into a Word doc - reformat it & remove the fill color. Then COPY/PASTE it into my SolidWorks drawing. Then I can re-size it as I need & it plots pretty too. I compromize & only cloud my dimension text & general large areas. It's an acceptable work-around for us.
Hope it works for you too.
-
1
- #28
SolidsMaster
Mechanical
A long read, but it fits for the way this thread is going...
Death of a Draftsman
By Leon Surprenant
(Watch for this article in your June 2000 issue of ProE the Magazine and August issue of Solid Solutions.)
"draftsman (drafts'men) n., pl. 1 a person who draws plans of structures or machinery." .... "3 an artist skillful in drawing." Websters New World Dictionary. Third College Edition.
I can remember slowly drawing my pencil across the sheet of paper. Twisting the point to keep it sharp and applying just the right amount of pressure to achieve that perfect line weight. Taking the time to plan my document, long before any lead touched the paper. Putting as much thought and care into how the document would be laid out as I would in the actual drawing of the document. That sense of personal pride when I completed the job. Unique, distinctive, identifiably my own.
Studying the mechanics of drafting, I also learned to visualize the 2D as 3D, and vise-versa. Using, but not relying, on the tools of the trade to create that complete and technically accurate drawing to communicate engineering data. After 4 years in a vocational high school, then two at a technical college, I continued to draw professionally for the next 5 years using a pencil and a drawing board.
Then it happened, something that would forever revolutionized how professionals in my field would do their work. The CAD workstation enters the scene. Computer Aided Design and Drafting suddenly allowed the Draftsman to make unlimited modifications to a document without any degradation in the quality of the drawing. Changes were easier and faster to make. Geometry, notes, symbols, and just about anything could be easily copied from one drawing to another. Eliminating many of the redundant tasks that Draftsmen use to have to perform, when drawing with a pencil. The CAD Workstation was truly a powerful tool.
As with everything, software and hardware would evolve over the years. Designing and drafting in 2D would lead to 3D. Then 3D designing would be replaced with designing in solids. Soon, dumb 2D geometry would become parametric in nature. This allowed views on a drawing to be created with the simple click of a button. The tool was learning to do more and more. And as a direct result, more and more CAD users were beginning to become dependent on the tool. The roll of the Draftsperson was being redefined. And there would be no stopping it. No turning back.
Today's graduates grew up as part of generation X. Computer savvy and software proficient, they spend endless hours on their computers. Learning the latest software and tickling the plastic keyboard with such speed, all you can see is blur when you watch their hands as they type. They know the software inside and out.
But the software is only a tool. As with a pencil, the resulting documentation is only as good as the craftsman wielding it. The tool is only a means to an end. It, itself is not the goal. The documentation is what we ultimately strive to achieve. Today's graduates are whiz kids on the computer, but do they know how to create, read and understand technical drawings? Some are very good, but as a whole, I'm not so sure.
Spending very little, if any time using a pencil, these new "computer only" Draftsman don't seem to completely understand view generation. Nor do they seem to take the appropriate amount of time to plan their documents. Instead, more emphasis is put on getting something drawn quickly, then right. Because we can now change drawings without leaving eraser marks or tears, it seems to of become OK to be sloppy about how drawings are put together. Today's graduates aren't being trained to be Draftsmen. Instead, a more accurate title would seem to be, CAD Operators. Operators who, without the tool to do much of the drawing for them, would be lost.
My fear is if your not able to create the drawing on your own, then how can you be expected to produce a drawing, that others can interpret and understand, with a computer? The answer is, you can't.
Now before you start thinking I'm anti-CAD, let me say for the record I'm not. To the contrary, my opinion is quite the opposite. I feel extremely privileged to have been in the business during the time that I have. I have been lucky enough to have been trained in the discipline of drawing with pencil. To have done so for over 10 years. And then to experience the introduction and evolution of the CAD system, while still young enough to embrace and run with it. I have experienced and prospered in both worlds.
Today's CAD system are powerful and easy to use. The Draftsman can do so much more, more quickly then ever before. It is truly a very exciting time. I look back at where I started and where we are today, and I can't help myself but to dream of the future. Holographic projections and real time modification during CDR. It is indeed an incredible and exhilarating experience being a part of the engineering community today.
But what about that Draftsman of days gone by? That technical professional, who could craft the abstract into the concrete with little more then a piece of paper and some graphite. What will become of him? Who really knows? Maybe he will evolve. Retaining those essential skill necessary to create a complete and accurate engineering package, while putting down the pencil and picking up the mouse. Or, maybe he will just disappear and be replaced by CAD Operators who impress management with tools that look cool, but who couldn't make a drawing to save their lives. Or maybe something in between.
These days, I may be sporting the title of Mechanical Designer and wielding parametric solids model designs, but I'm in no way like the graduates of today. If I'm ever approached and referenced to as a "CAD Operator", I know exactly how I'd respond. With pride, standing up straight, I'll look them in the eyes and say, "I'm sorry, but your mistaken. I'm no CAD Operator, - I am a Draftsman."
February 26, 2000
Death of a Draftsman
By Leon Surprenant
(Watch for this article in your June 2000 issue of ProE the Magazine and August issue of Solid Solutions.)
"draftsman (drafts'men) n., pl. 1 a person who draws plans of structures or machinery." .... "3 an artist skillful in drawing." Websters New World Dictionary. Third College Edition.
I can remember slowly drawing my pencil across the sheet of paper. Twisting the point to keep it sharp and applying just the right amount of pressure to achieve that perfect line weight. Taking the time to plan my document, long before any lead touched the paper. Putting as much thought and care into how the document would be laid out as I would in the actual drawing of the document. That sense of personal pride when I completed the job. Unique, distinctive, identifiably my own.
Studying the mechanics of drafting, I also learned to visualize the 2D as 3D, and vise-versa. Using, but not relying, on the tools of the trade to create that complete and technically accurate drawing to communicate engineering data. After 4 years in a vocational high school, then two at a technical college, I continued to draw professionally for the next 5 years using a pencil and a drawing board.
Then it happened, something that would forever revolutionized how professionals in my field would do their work. The CAD workstation enters the scene. Computer Aided Design and Drafting suddenly allowed the Draftsman to make unlimited modifications to a document without any degradation in the quality of the drawing. Changes were easier and faster to make. Geometry, notes, symbols, and just about anything could be easily copied from one drawing to another. Eliminating many of the redundant tasks that Draftsmen use to have to perform, when drawing with a pencil. The CAD Workstation was truly a powerful tool.
As with everything, software and hardware would evolve over the years. Designing and drafting in 2D would lead to 3D. Then 3D designing would be replaced with designing in solids. Soon, dumb 2D geometry would become parametric in nature. This allowed views on a drawing to be created with the simple click of a button. The tool was learning to do more and more. And as a direct result, more and more CAD users were beginning to become dependent on the tool. The roll of the Draftsperson was being redefined. And there would be no stopping it. No turning back.
Today's graduates grew up as part of generation X. Computer savvy and software proficient, they spend endless hours on their computers. Learning the latest software and tickling the plastic keyboard with such speed, all you can see is blur when you watch their hands as they type. They know the software inside and out.
But the software is only a tool. As with a pencil, the resulting documentation is only as good as the craftsman wielding it. The tool is only a means to an end. It, itself is not the goal. The documentation is what we ultimately strive to achieve. Today's graduates are whiz kids on the computer, but do they know how to create, read and understand technical drawings? Some are very good, but as a whole, I'm not so sure.
Spending very little, if any time using a pencil, these new "computer only" Draftsman don't seem to completely understand view generation. Nor do they seem to take the appropriate amount of time to plan their documents. Instead, more emphasis is put on getting something drawn quickly, then right. Because we can now change drawings without leaving eraser marks or tears, it seems to of become OK to be sloppy about how drawings are put together. Today's graduates aren't being trained to be Draftsmen. Instead, a more accurate title would seem to be, CAD Operators. Operators who, without the tool to do much of the drawing for them, would be lost.
My fear is if your not able to create the drawing on your own, then how can you be expected to produce a drawing, that others can interpret and understand, with a computer? The answer is, you can't.
Now before you start thinking I'm anti-CAD, let me say for the record I'm not. To the contrary, my opinion is quite the opposite. I feel extremely privileged to have been in the business during the time that I have. I have been lucky enough to have been trained in the discipline of drawing with pencil. To have done so for over 10 years. And then to experience the introduction and evolution of the CAD system, while still young enough to embrace and run with it. I have experienced and prospered in both worlds.
Today's CAD system are powerful and easy to use. The Draftsman can do so much more, more quickly then ever before. It is truly a very exciting time. I look back at where I started and where we are today, and I can't help myself but to dream of the future. Holographic projections and real time modification during CDR. It is indeed an incredible and exhilarating experience being a part of the engineering community today.
But what about that Draftsman of days gone by? That technical professional, who could craft the abstract into the concrete with little more then a piece of paper and some graphite. What will become of him? Who really knows? Maybe he will evolve. Retaining those essential skill necessary to create a complete and accurate engineering package, while putting down the pencil and picking up the mouse. Or, maybe he will just disappear and be replaced by CAD Operators who impress management with tools that look cool, but who couldn't make a drawing to save their lives. Or maybe something in between.
These days, I may be sporting the title of Mechanical Designer and wielding parametric solids model designs, but I'm in no way like the graduates of today. If I'm ever approached and referenced to as a "CAD Operator", I know exactly how I'd respond. With pride, standing up straight, I'll look them in the eyes and say, "I'm sorry, but your mistaken. I'm no CAD Operator, - I am a Draftsman."
February 26, 2000
very interesting. I will pass on.
thanks
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP1.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site
thanks
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP1.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site
-
1
- #30
Very interesting thread. I guess I don't understand why some of you think that a standard is an absolute. Standards are meant to be guidelines or a foundation to build your industries standards upon. Not an absolute!! The fact is that there is no one standard that can address all the industries that use it. And companies that do try to be so stringent need to take an enema and wake up. Loosen up fellas, there is no need to flame someone for asking a question. Help them if you can. But don't flame them for trying to improve their companies position. And as far as SolidWorks goes, well it has alot of work to do in their drawing package. AutoCad had it right. The program allows us the freedom to modify standards to best suit our needs. What has given AutoCad a bad name in that regard is when some knucklehead don't know what he's doing. The basic standards are taught while in school, at least at the school I attended.
As far as standards go, I believe that by using a particular standard as a foundation and building upon it or modifing that standard to fit you industry is a completely acceptable practice.
The Cad managers job is to increase productivity in the drafting dept. Do your companies really care what drafting standards are being met? Probably not, their only concern is to be as efficient as possible and everyone doing it the same way and taking our designs and putting them on paper so that our production workers understand what it is and how to build the design. If that means modifing a standard then so be it. Get your heads out of the sand fellas. Think outside the box. Take your enema and relax. See the big picture and help your companies be profitable.
Just my 2 cents.
As far as standards go, I believe that by using a particular standard as a foundation and building upon it or modifing that standard to fit you industry is a completely acceptable practice.
The Cad managers job is to increase productivity in the drafting dept. Do your companies really care what drafting standards are being met? Probably not, their only concern is to be as efficient as possible and everyone doing it the same way and taking our designs and putting them on paper so that our production workers understand what it is and how to build the design. If that means modifing a standard then so be it. Get your heads out of the sand fellas. Think outside the box. Take your enema and relax. See the big picture and help your companies be profitable.
Just my 2 cents.
Describe efficient. You can be just as efficient whether you follow the standards or not. We decided 10 years ago to follow the standards as close as possible. Our company has since grown and more profitable because of less errors. Managers don't care about the stds, just getting the work done. I train everyone here once a month on staying consistant with SolidWorks AND drafting standards. We have become very efficient. If I did not do this, everyone would be efficient in there own way, not the company in a whole.
Getting the project done and out the door as quick as possible, on time, is not efficient. Are you involved in or see the products returned and see what the problems were with the product?
IMO, what has been given ACAD a bad name is not stay up with new technologies. It started off cheap, was illegally copied throughout companies, then became std CAD because everyone knew it and was using it.
Being just a fastcad operator doesn't tell me you are efficient and make a company profitable... you are just a fast cad operator.
just my .02.
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP1.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site
Getting the project done and out the door as quick as possible, on time, is not efficient. Are you involved in or see the products returned and see what the problems were with the product?
IMO, what has been given ACAD a bad name is not stay up with new technologies. It started off cheap, was illegally copied throughout companies, then became std CAD because everyone knew it and was using it.
Being just a fastcad operator doesn't tell me you are efficient and make a company profitable... you are just a fast cad operator.
just my .02.
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP1.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site
Chris,
You made some valid points in your statement. All I was trying to do was point out that following a particular std. wasn't and shouldn't be an absolute. And for someone to ask a simple question that was outside of a std. shouldn't be flammed for doing so.
To answer your question "Describe efficient" Efficient-The acting or producing effectively with a minimum of waste, expense, or unnecessary effort. Exhibiting a high ratio of output to input.
If you would of completely read my statement you would of seen that I am not against std's. The important thing here was to have your designer/drafters doing it the same way everytime weather it's an ANSI std or your own std. this will make your design dept. more "Efficient".
To answer your other question. I am involved in and see the product returns. In fact I am involved with almost every aspect of our product that you can imagine. Design, production, C/O's, Q.C., shipping, customer service, construction, scheduling etc....
You made some valid points in your statement. All I was trying to do was point out that following a particular std. wasn't and shouldn't be an absolute. And for someone to ask a simple question that was outside of a std. shouldn't be flammed for doing so.
To answer your question "Describe efficient" Efficient-The acting or producing effectively with a minimum of waste, expense, or unnecessary effort. Exhibiting a high ratio of output to input.
If you would of completely read my statement you would of seen that I am not against std's. The important thing here was to have your designer/drafters doing it the same way everytime weather it's an ANSI std or your own std. this will make your design dept. more "Efficient".
To answer your other question. I am involved in and see the product returns. In fact I am involved with almost every aspect of our product that you can imagine. Design, production, C/O's, Q.C., shipping, customer service, construction, scheduling etc....
thanks for clarifying.![[cheers]](/data/assets/smilies/cheers.gif "[cheers] [cheers]")
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP1.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP1.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Helpful tip
- Locked
- Question