TheSwamp
CAD Forums => CAD General => Topic started by: diarmuid on November 05, 2012, 11:52:50 AM
-
We are currently embarking on a project for a client. (This is a very large Bio-pharma project with multiple disciplines & 1200+ drawings.) They want us to use their CAD file numbering system. The nub of the problem is this: They treat all drawings as both drawings and xrefs. so each drawing is potentially an xref. So their ground floor plan is a drawing with a titleblock etc, but is also the master xref ground floor plan. Sheets are referencing sheets so to speak. This is further complicated by the fact that each discipline had a different breakdown on how drawings were numbered. Mechanical for instance numbered all layouts 2000 series drawings with arch numbered at 1000 series. So there is no synergy across the CAD files from a discipline point of view.
They also only permit one layout per CAD file.
-While in reality this is a possible way of conducting business, the normal "accepted standard" is to genrate a list of xrefs "ground floor plans" "site plans" etc etc. and to genrate a list of Sheet CAD Drawings.
-These sheet files only referencing the xrefs.
-The xrefs having similar numbers across the disciplines eg, all ist floor plans are 1000 series 2nd floor are 2000 and so on. Apples and oranges and all that.
-Xrefs are also are numbered such that they are readily identifiable versus Sheet CAD files. Xrefs numbered "<project No.>XR-0001.dwg" and sheet files "<project No.>DR-0001.dwg"
In theory the way they propose is "doable" it is very messy with sheet drawings referencing sheet drawings. our version is much more structured and neater. Does any one have any opinion on what I've just presented. Your input would help out a lot.
Regards
Diarmuid
-
At least they are using paperspace ... one of our recent roadway projects still had titleblocks scaled up in modelspace and xclip was used to make the view :ugly:.
Soooooooo 80's. :-D
-
We recently got done with a project that is very similar. We "double nested" the Titleblocks, so-to-speak. We had the Titleblock which was a global XREF, then discipline specific XREF's for the slight changes in annotating it. It wound up working nicely.
-
Attached is a set of visual images i created to show the folly of treating xrefs and sheet files as the same. the final image showing how it is normally set up in our firm. This is for large multi disciplined Pharma projects. I sucessully argued to a client (and a hugh client at that) of why we didnt follow their way.) They fully accepted this and are now paying us to re-align a set of files for them in their format. 6 months fwork for 2 guys, who were lookign at a lay of next week until next marh. There better be a few pints at the christmas party for this :lol:
Regards
Diarmuid
-
I've used both methods and niether is right or wrong.
It's all in what you are used to. If the files and sheets are named/numbered well enough it all works.
Given that if one opens a sheet and the xrefs come along when you open them, why would one even care
what was referenced into what?
And if you are working on a base file, and then open a sheet and the changes show up, same question who cares what is
a reference and what isn't?