Should Engineers have access to CAD 1

[Ussuri]

We have an ongoing discussion in my office whether Engineers should have access to AutoCAD. There are two schools of thought.

No: As Engineers we should provide sketches to a draftsperson/technician and they should develop the drawing. The Engineer should then mark up checkprints, so never has any need to a drawing package. Working with CAD is not part of the Engineers Job

Yes: As Engineers we do drawing as part of the design process, visualisation, checking geometry, conceptualising etc. A person can do more accurate sketches with CAD, and a lot quicker as well. The sketch can then be taken an worked up into a full drawing. The art /skill of the draftsperson is taking the bones and scribbles from an Engineer and turning it in to a professional document.

I personally fall into the Yes category but I would be interested to hear other members opinions.

 

[JStephen]

The world has been changing forever. Consider than when they built some of those old cathedrals, they didn't have any way to copy a drawing, other than to copy another one. I'm sure some people were perturbed when means of reproduction of documents came along. On the other hand, a good bit of this thread has related to 3-D drawings, which simply weren't done at all prior to CAD of some kind. I'm confident that there will always be a requirement to communicate ideas that aren't easily put into words.

 

[MikeHalloran]

My personal experience with CAD says that you can make a usable drawing in about the same time you could do it on paper, but making a pretty drawing will take at least twice as long.





Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[ctopher]

I can make a quality/readable engineering CAD drawing in a fraction of the time I can on paper. Hand drafting is where I started also. Making a pretty drawing will take anyone at least twice as long.
Not attacking you Mike, thanks for your input.
But CAD is much quicker than paper, that's why it exist.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[wati]

A drafter is not an engineer

An engineer is not an drafter

But in my experience..I am a drafter and an engineer, but I always spent my worktime making design calculations,process simulation check PFD and P&ID,s etc. Although I am able to create and modify drawings comply client standards, we dont have time for that. Depending on project scope there are no manhours for engineers to do dwgs, but can be efficiently done by drafter who are specialized in cad. Such software program like CAD costs a lot for the company (most lease based). It must be used at any time because we pay for it. An engineer will not be used it frequently or may be not at all unless he or she is a designer and is an authorized user.

So... lets keep in mind to put your best man for the best job he is good and has the skill resulting in a best practising and profitable project.Anyway this is my opinion....

Regards,

wati

 

[Ashereng]

I am an engineer, and I currently use Visio to do my "sketches".

I have CAD experience also, although not recent (AutoCad 9).

If my company have floating licenses (non-dedicated), and one was available, I don't see why an engineer can't use it.

I am not saying that I should be producing finished drawings - there are way too many standards, templates, layers, etc. to get straight.

 

[MikeHalloran]

CAD is much quicker than paper, when you have a template, e.g. a similar or opposite handed drawing file that's otherwise similar to what you want to end up with, OR, when you can use _your_ CAD station, that you've set up for just the way you do things.

Mostly, I get to sit at other people's computers, and try to make something presentable using a CAD program that someone else has screwed ... er, customized, for just the way they do things. And even if I change nothing, as is usually the case, I get blamed the next time the damn thing crashes or the regular user blows a schedule. Or I get to 'just make a few changes' to a CAD file that came from a different universe.

I'd much rather pass hand sketches to a team of six or so designers, and let them work out the fiddly bits. Right now, I couldn't find six good designers, even if I had the budget for them. Those days are gone.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[ctopher]

Mike, even without templates, it is quicker... if used correctly and users trained right.

If companies would take the time and make all pc's and users standardized the same, and maintained such way, there would not be no such file corruption or crashes. If all users were taught the same way and management inforced it, there would be more proficiant CAD users. I did it and it works. Too many campanies or managers don't know or don't care and let there employees use CAD how it is and learn to deal with the problems day to day. It's the real world. IMO, those who don't believe it, don't understand the real concept of CAD. (can be a new thread)

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[IFRs]

When you sit doan at someone else's computer, log in as you if you can and you'll not screw up their setup at all.

 

[Ashereng]

I wasn't thinking of using someone else's station. I have my own station and software. It's the rotating license that I need to snag to do my sketches.

I also hate it when someone messes around with my settings on my machine, so I don't mess with theirs when I have to use someone else's station.

 

[ctopher]

Being the admin, I have logged numerous times on other pc's, never a problem. It's all in the settings of the user, the network and the pc.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[MikeHalloran]

Yeah, well, you know what you're doing. On a good day, I do too.

When I sat down to learn AutoCAD from a book, my boss rented a seat for me in an office in an unrelated business. In two weeks, they were asking me questions. Everybody there was self- taught, no book, no class, nothing. They were doing E size architectural drawings, big development plot plans and such, all in the default color on layer 0. They weren't even using osnaps.

Later I sat next to a guy who had given up on associative dimensions. He was real fast, and his drawings looked nice. I was assigned to take his 2D views and build 3D models out of them. I couldn't do it without starting over. He had been using 'near' as a running osnap for years. Every intersection missed by .003" or so.

More recently, I've come across a large collection of beautiful drawings, each comprising an exploded isometric and at least 3 orthographic views of moderately complex assemblies. In 2D. Out of scale. Every dimension overridden. Totally friggin useless.

I'd like to believe that some company, somewhere, has well trained users and a well managed network. I haven't found it yet.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[Beggar]

Oh, Mike, you're bringing back nightmares of my last job.

I inherited the work after the original guy had a heart attack. As I started moving through his files I found the same thing.

Overridden dimensions
Non-orthogonal lines
Non-intersecting corners
Non-trimmed corners with overridden dimensions going to the outside

In my view, a lot of the so-called problems with AutoCAD are in fact due to sloppy use.

--------------------
How much do YOU owe?

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

--------------------

 

[IFRs]

I would like to point out that poor CAD practices are not limited to just drafters. Although, I think engineers are less likely to "cheat" and tend to join lines, use associative dimensions, use multiple views in paper space instead of making copies of objects, etc. I think that because engineers are not on the drafting clock, they take the time to creat the objects correctly the first time. I know I do because it becomes a double-check on my calculations and assumptions.

In summary: Let Engineers Have CAD !!!

 

[queque]

As a Hydrologist, I use CAD occasionally when beginning a Hydrology Project.
Now, I plan to use it throughout the Sub Division Project. It is more complex but produces a complete solution faster.
It is difficult to explain to the very experienced CAD designer what the final product involves.
I just do not know how to convert PDF FILES to CAD files, DWG versus DXF etc.
I am sure I can figure that out later.

 

[wgchere]

For a while I worked at a place where I was told that overriding dimensions or disassociating them would result in a warning and then a firing. If I got a drawing to revise that was violated then I was to fix it. "Cool!" thought I, "Finally a place that respects the software!"

Well, every DWG I got was meddled with on some level! I spent a lot of time repairing the drawings. About 2 months after I started the supervisor called me into his office and said I was gone because i was way too slow and several of the engineers had complained that I didn't know Acad (they were, of course, the least respectful of standards and the "klugy-est" Acad users there).

Someone mentioned (disparagingly) "pretty drawings." Honestly, I have never heard the term used by anyone but engineers. This is because they think getting the proper line-weights and other standards of the graphic language isn't important. Often I have heard criticisms that where dimensions are placed doesn't matter as long as they are there on the dwg. Sorry, but this often is the difference between taking several hours to interpret a drawing or taking 20 minutes. The "art" of drafting is in knowing where to place or cluster dimensions for ease of reading and minimum searching, and in knowing how to not crowd the dimensions so they are legible. I have known some engineers who understood this, but most don't care to or can't. There is a school of thought out there that if you know how to use the Cad program, then you know how to draft! That is like saying if you know how to use a calculator you can engineer. Granted, that idea has a greater following on parametric modelers that have the ability to p[lace dimensions on a drawing automatically. /But it still requires a good bit of tweaking to get it to be legible. The best illustration of this was an consulting engineer I worked with who turned in a 6 page drawing of a part. When it was sent to the machine shop, you could hear the screams through two floors! I was asked to clean it up. I reduced the size to 3 pages And in the process found many features that were dimensioned several times and a few features that were not dimensioned at all. I found the same view on four separate pages, with different dimensions for different clusters of features. None of the views were labeled nor was there any logic to why they were on four pages! I asked him why he did this and he said there were too many dimensions to fit on one view, he put them on different pages so they wouldn’t get confusing, and there were no labels because it was obvious they were the same view (apparently not to the machine shop, since this was one of their questions). I was able to put all the dimensions on the same view and keep it clear and legible. BTW, he was an [excellent] design engineer, but needed to be kept away from the drawing side of SolidWorks.

 

[ctopher]

You were fired because engineers thought you were too slow, without warning?? Not a company I would work for.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[wgchere]

Well, "fired" is a loose term. I was a temp. And the supervisor had a b-movie German accent and the diposition and age to have been in the Hitler Youth. And that was suggested often, by many. I have had offers from them since then, and believe me, I don't give them much of my time.

 

[ctopher]

Good luck!


Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[Ashereng]

Engineer, draughter, cad operator, designer. All these terms!

When my dad worked in the 50's-80's, an engineer was also a draughtman/designer/pencil to paper person.

I remember him working over his draughting table in the living room of our house. He produced blue prints (back when they were blue and smelly), including the draughting, design, and engineering. He then also followed everything to the field, from ground breaking to completion. I remember visiting him at site with my mom. I also have the old kodak pictures of the site (it was really new back then, photographs).

An engineer needs to recognise his/hers own limitation when it comes to engineering. It is the same when it comes to cadding. If you have the skills, then go ahead. If you don't, recognise it and let someone qualified do that portion of the work.

 

[ohiocad]

Well, so many different items covered, finally thought I'd throw my two cents into the mix.

I work at a place with roughly the same number of engineering guys as there are drafters (technicians, is what they call us here, but it is what it is....)

A couple of the engineers are pretty adept at the Autocad, most overal are passable, able to open a drawing, modify a couple lines, and add a couple dimensions, a couple we wish could only open drawings read only. For engineers having access to cad, here at least, it depends on who you're talking about.

For the drafters, well, I wasn't involved in the hiring process, or the situation would be different. Being able to do things in Autocad isn't the same thing as being able to draft. It's like any other program on the computer, it's a tool, that you have to understand the theory behind it to use effectively.

This applies to the engineers, as well as to the drafters: When asked recently, I said "Hire people who know how to draft, even if they've never used Autocad. THEN teach them Autocad." It's easier to teach the program than the theory.

Ok, back to the engineering side: One of the engineers here runs autocad better, and drafts better than all but 2 of us. He does all his calcs and layout drawings in Autocad, correct layers, linetypes, etc.

Boils down to, yes, I think engineers should have access to cad, IF they follow standards, IF they can express what they want well enough that the drafters can clean it up and insert into the set of drawings. This would make our lives much simpler, and increase our productivity. It would also allow the engineers to take our drawings, and modify them as necessary to work structurally without needing to draw from scratch, increasing their productivity.

A couple big IF's in that, and I don't hold out a lot of hope, since we haven't yet managed that with the drafting staff.