Topic: CAN I DISABLE THE EXPLODE COMMAND??

[Keith™]

I agree that a properly trained person can be a valuable resource and would preclude the need to force compliance by code, however, I have been on both ends of this issue. Once with a company that had such tight controls that the drawing process was mundane and unimaginative, and once where it didn't matter what the drawing was like in the computer, just as long as the final product looked ok.

In the first instance, automation was a breeze because even the novice could draw correctly, however, in the latter, automation was a nightmare because nothing was consistant.

There must be a happy medium ... and if forcing folks to use one command over another is the means to an end, then I am not the one to say otherwise.

[deegeecees]

When I was acting as Cad Manager for a well known power company, it was in my best interest to programatcally guide the grunt drafters as much as possible, only because of the revolving door contract employee rate. The hiring process was very lax, and thus I had minimal experienced red-line picker uppers to work with. The mindset there was basically, learn AutoCad on your own time, and do what only needs to be done. Having all standards enforced through Lisp/VBA etc. was needed. 30-40 drafters with the ability to destroy a drawings integrity by exploding a block with attributes would have been a nightmare. Just another situation where that shoe fit all too well.

[Bob Wahr]

Deeg, in that case, I can see blocking the explosion of blocks with attributes and some standards enforcement though code.

We have a fairly comprehensive CAD Standard with reasonable documentation.  We are working on improving the documentation.  As long as the drawings are correct, done to standard, and done in a timely fashion, I don't care what commands they use to get there.  Then again, if I worked somewhere that had undefined commands, i could always use the menstrual version.

[deegeecees]

I've worked for some major companies, such as GMEMD (think locomotives), and have seen Cad Standard books as thick as encyclopedias (given their platform was Unigraphics), that were adhered to as much as humanly possible.

A million ways to skin a cat in AC, that's open architecture for ya!

[CADaver]

I use explode all the danged time.

It's just a tool.

So is ERASE, but erasing important stuff or the wrong stuff can be counter-productive, can it not?  But for us, there is never a need to explode anything, any time.  We build a lot of intelligence into a model that can get buggered up with an EXPLODE, not so much now.  Most have been trained and use the proper tools to get what they need, but every now and then we get some cad "expert" that doesn't need to use the tools we have in place to manage our spec-data-material-models.  Then he's confused when his iso bill won't fill in or his requisition codes won't export.

[CADaver]

As long as the drawings are correct, done to standard, and done in a timely fashion, I don't care what commands they use to get there. 

Around here, drawings have become only a small part of our deliverable and many of those are created automatically from the intelligence residing in the model.  In addition to the drawings we also produce cut bills, spec-driven material lists, material requisitions, purchase orders, delivery points, warehousing/stockpiling data, and schedules for all the above plus schedules for fabrication, erection and testing.  Throwing an odd EXPLODE command in the middle of all that can have unpleasant results.  But that's here.

[Bob Wahr]

I use explode all the danged time.

It's just a tool.

So is ERASE, but erasing important stuff or the wrong stuff can be counter-productive, can it not?  But for us, there is never a need to explode anything, any time.  We build a lot of intelligence into a model that can get buggered up with an EXPLODE, not so much now.  Most have been trained and use the proper tools to get what they need, but every now and then we get some cad "expert" that doesn't need to use the tools we have in place to manage our spec-data-material-models.  Then he's confused when his iso bill won't fill in or his requisition codes won't export.

And yet, erasing things that need to be erased works swell.  I never said that I advocate exploding everything in the drawing any more than erasing everything in the drawing, moving everything in the drawing, or any of a large number of other commands.  I still say that it's better to educate the users on the proper way to draft in your system.

As long as the drawings are correct, done to standard, and done in a timely fashion, I don't care what commands they use to get there. 

Around here, drawings have become only a small part of our deliverable and many of those are created automatically from the intelligence residing in the model.  In addition to the drawings we also produce cut bills, spec-driven material lists, material requisitions, purchase orders, delivery points, warehousing/stockpiling data, and schedules for all the above plus schedules for fabrication, erection and testing.  Throwing an odd EXPLODE command in the middle of all that can have unpleasant results.  But that's here.

By drawing, I mean electronic, not paper.  If an element with intelligence is exploded the the drawing is not correct.

[ronjonp]

(command "redefine" "explode" "superflatten")

[CADaver]

I still say that it's better to educate the users on the proper way to draft in your system.

Oh, so do I, however, we've run into some that just don't/won't/can't "get it", and we need to protect ourselves as much as practical from an errant user.  It is much better never to have an automobile accident, but I still wear a seatbelt.

By drawing, I mean electronic, not paper.  If an element with intelligence is exploded the the drawing is not correct.

Unfortunately we won't know until time to extract that intelligence because the "drawing" "looks" correct.  A lot of pipe can be placed in the mean time.

[Josh Nieman]

Then those "can't wont' don't" folks should be properly trained, properly reprimanded, or properly dealt with, if need be.

[CADaver]

Then those "can't wont' don't" folks should be properly trained, properly reprimanded, or properly dealt with, if need be.

No doubt, but major damage can be wrought between training and "You did WHAT!?!?!?"

[CAB]

How about redefining the Explode command so that it writes to a log file, the user name and the object exploded.
If it is a block then include the insert point in the log. The CAD manager could then run a Check routine that would look at all the log files and alert them if any blocks were exploded.
Then that CAD operator could be scheduled for more training. 

[ronjonp]

How about redefining the Explode command so that it writes to a log file, the user name and the object exploded.
If it is a block then include the insert point in the log. The CAD manager could then run a Check routine that would look at all the log files and alert them if any blocks were exploded.
Then that CAD operator could be scheduled for more training. 

Schneeky...I like it!

[KewlToyZ]

(command "redefine" "explode" "superflatten")

Code: [Select]

(command "redefine" "explode" "speak")
(DEFUN c:speak ()
  (setq speak (vlax-create-object "Sapi.SpVoice"))
  (vlax-invoke speak "Speak" "Would you like to clean out your desk now or shall I do it for you?" 0)
  (vlax-release-object speak)
  )


[deegeecees]

WOW! That IS kewl! I never looked into Sapi before, thanks!!!!