Topic: Text is usually placed in to Paper SPACE

[Dent Cermak]

Open your buddy's drawnig, Set LARGE text. Type really nasty comments about the Boss all across the drawing. Set that text color to black. He won't see it until he plots the drawing. When he goes to plot, run and tell the boss, "You gotta see this plot!! This guy is a real artist!" When the Boss goes to look at it, go outside for a smoke. That way you won't ger hit by flying pieces.

[MP]

Ok then. (quietly stepping away from the computer ...)

[CADaver]

I keep all of our master drawings in a controlled environment, AND regardless of whether the field drawings are to scale or not, mine are and we frequently use them.

With a scale instead of the content dimensions?

We provide as many sets of plans as needed for the completion of the project,

All original plots?  When was the last time you calibrated your plotters?

Precisely, and regardless of the reasons the contractor decides to use a scale instead of add dimensions, if he does, so be it. It is his decision. So in your words,  I am simply finding a way to "annotate" the drawing for him, only this annotation is contained on a scale rule.

And as we've discussed, it's a method less accurate than using the content of the drawing.

Are you suggesting that plotting to scale is unreasonable?

no, unnecessary

I have use many drawings in the field for 25 years and I have yet to see ANY that was originally plotted to scale that I could not get a decent dimension from with a scale rule.

You can't get anything less than a full inch on 1/4"=1'-0" plans.  I don't know about your drawings, but we frequently use fractional dimensions to a 1/16".  And often these are critical for fit-up.

I am left wondering where this supposed expansion and contraction of paper is happening, is surely does not happen here in Florida, the humidity capital of the world!... and I have never experienced anything like that.

The plot bond we use picks up about a 1/4" over 36" from the plotter to the construction shack, but let's say it's 1/8" in 36".  Now lets say we have a 72' long building at 1/4"=1'-0", that should plot 18" long, but by your expansion number it's now 18.0625" long.  Scaling it says the building is 72'-3", considerably outside the 1/4" in 12' tolerance you've posted.  I rest my case.

So if I were to use a scale rule I would be what? crazy? out of my mind?

no, just inaccurate, see above.

I'd be willing to put a wager on that one but it would be a sucker bet. There are many things you evidently do not understand about architectural construction.

maybe not, but I do understand that scaling drawings produces inaccurate results, see above.

The only answer I can offer you is that plotting to scale is a tool that is both effective and simple,...

simple yes, effective? for what?  other than meeting a more stringent than necessary code, nothing.

[Keith™]

I keep all of our master drawings in a controlled environment, AND regardless of whether the field drawings are to scale or not, mine are and we frequently use them.

With a scale instead of the content dimensions?

Yes we use a scale, and it is quite accurate, particularly for our uses.

We provide as many sets of plans as needed for the completion of the project,

All original plots?  When was the last time you calibrated your plotters?

Yes ALL originals, and our plotter is checked for calibration monthly.

Precisely, and regardless of the reasons the contractor decides to use a scale instead of add dimensions, if he does, so be it. It is his decision. So in your words,  I am simply finding a way to "annotate" the drawing for him, only this annotation is contained on a scale rule.

And as we've discussed, it's a method less accurate than using the content of the drawing.

It does not matter how accurate the final plot is, if the contractor requires it to be plotted to scale, it is done, and since the contractor IS an extension of the client, if the contractor rejects plans that are not plotted to scale, then we have a real problem.

Are you suggesting that plotting to scale is unreasonable?

no, unnecessary

You should qualify that with "in my opinion", since it is indeed your opinion, and in the real world it does not count outside of your realm of influence.

I have use many drawings in the field for 25 years and I have yet to see ANY that was originally plotted to scale that I could not get a decent dimension from with a scale rule.

You can't get anything less than a full inch on 1/4"=1'-0" plans.  I don't know about your drawings, but we frequently use fractional dimensions to a 1/16".  And often these are critical for fit-up.

In Architectural construction, there are only a very few "critical" measurements, the main ones being, hallway width, and stairwell width. All others are subject to change depending upon the materials selected. For example, a window is called out as a 3050 i.e. 3'-0"x5'-0" the opening for that window will vary from 36 1/2"x60 1/2" to 39 1/2"x63 1/2" depending upon the manufacturer.

I am left wondering where this supposed expansion and contraction of paper is happening, is surely does not happen here in Florida, the humidity capital of the world!... and I have never experienced anything like that.

The plot bond we use picks up about a 1/4" over 36" from the plotter to the construction shack, but let's say it's 1/8" in 36".  Now lets say we have a 72' long building at 1/4"=1'-0", that should plot 18" long, but by your expansion number it's now 18.0625" long.  Scaling it says the building is 72'-3", considerably outside the 1/4" in 12' tolerance you've posted.  I rest my case.

Yes, but the dimension that states 72'-0" would be a clue, besides how many times are you going to get a drawing with absolutely no dimensions.

So if I were to use a scale rule I would be what? crazy? out of my mind?

no, just inaccurate, see above.

As far as accuracy is concerned, how accurate is the final product anyway, typically a building framing is the only thing that requires planned dimensions and everything else is measured from the final product, not from a piece of paper. If I scale a drawing and find a 4" wall, I utilize a 2x4 (1 1/2x3 1/2) and if I find a 6" wall I use a 2x6 (1 1/2x5 1/2) These stud sizes are also only typical, I have seen them vary in size from 3 3/8 to 3 3/4. Some things just don't need the nth degree. Construction just happens to need only basic dimensions. The rest is based on variations in available product and the general view of the plans.

I'd be willing to put a wager on that one but it would be a sucker bet. There are many things you evidently do not understand about architectural construction.

maybe not, but I do understand that scaling drawings produces inaccurate results, see above.

Who's to ay what is accurate. I'll bet the house you live is is not accurate according to the plans. How can it be, since such things as finish are not even considered on typical plans. Inside room dimensions are rounded to the nearest inch, how accurate is that? I suppose not very, but it works and it works well.

The only answer I can offer you is that plotting to scale is a tool that is both effective and simple,...

simple yes, effective? for what?  other than meeting a more stringent than necessary code, nothing.

It is a good thing you don't do architectural drawings....you would spend your profits replotting plans to a scale, or you would quickly adopt the obvious. Besides, if the client's agent requires them plotted to scale, who am I to argue. If he wants them drawn on a paper bag with a purple crayon, and he is willing to pay for it, then who am I to argue?

[CADaver]

Yes we use a scale, and it is quite accurate, particularly for our uses.

plus or minus 3" in 72'

It does not matter how accurate the final plot is,

Wait a minute, you're the promoting "to scale" plots, if they are not accurate, they are not "to scale"

if the contractor requires it to be plotted to scale, it is done, and since the contractor IS an extension of the client, if the contractor rejects plans that are not plotted to scale, then we have a real problem.

If such is required, then you ALWAYS have a problem, as we have proved here with your numbers they are outside the 1/4" in 12' tolerance.

You should qualify that with "in my opinion", since it is indeed your opinion, and in the real world it does not count outside of your realm of influence.

no, it's always unnecessary, even if required by someone who fails to understand the limitations of scaled drawings, it is unnecessary.

In Architectural construction, there are only a very few "critical" measurements, the main ones being, hallway width, and stairwell width. All others are subject to change depending upon the materials selected. For example, a window is called out as a 3050 i.e. 3'-0"x5'-0" the opening for that window will vary from 36 1/2"x60 1/2" to 39 1/2"x63 1/2" depending upon the manufacturer.

So you're not even DRAWING "to scale" to begin with.  How can you determine if it's plotted "to scale", if the original data is not "to scale"?

Yes, but the dimension that states 72'-0" would be a clue, besides how many times are you going to get a drawing with absolutely no dimensions.

You should get a drawing with ALL necessary dimensions for construction.  If there is a dimensions missing, that is required, the drawing is incomplete and in error.

As far as accuracy is concerned, how accurate is the final product anyway, typically a building framing is the only thing that requires planned dimensions and everything else is measured from the final product, not from a piece of paper. If I scale a drawing and find a 4" wall, I utilize a 2x4 (1 1/2x3 1/2) and if I find a 6" wall I use a 2x6 (1 1/2x5 1/2) These stud sizes are also only typical, I have seen them vary in size from 3 3/8 to 3 3/4. Some things just don't need the nth degree. Construction just happens to need only basic dimensions. The rest is based on variations in available product and the general view of the plans.

Again, you're not "to scale" to begin with, how can plotting a NOT TO SCALE drawing "to scale" be of any use??  How is the Florida code going to apply to a drawing that is not "to scale" to start??

Who's to ay what is accurate. I'll bet the house you live is is not accurate according to the plans. How can it be, since such things as finish are not even considered on typical plans. Inside room dimensions are rounded to the nearest inch, how accurate is that? I suppose not very, but it works and it works well.

Ahh, but the NECESSARY dimensions on the drawings (did 'em myself) accurately portray the model and the desired results.  Out-to-outs and wall centerlines are accurate, in the drawing, the contractor built it from 18x22 plots of 22x34 drawings, never needed a plastic stick.  I was the GC, and every necessary dimension was checked against the drawings and was within specified construction tolerances. Are you sure you wanna bet $200k on this??

It is a good thing you don't do architectural drawings....

But I do.

you would spend your profits replotting plans to a scale, or you would quickly adopt the obvious.

Not as yet, nor in the last 30 some odd years.

Besides, if the client's agent requires them plotted to scale, who am I to argue. If he wants them drawn on a paper bag with a purple crayon, and he is willing to pay for it, then who am I to argue?

Oh, when I plot, I click the little box that says 1/4" = 1'-0", I just understand that what comes off the plotter is NOT a "to scale" plot.  It's accidental if it is "to scale" and won't remain so long.

[Keith™]

CADaver, I fail to see why you continually insist that if your clients want it then it must be ok, while if anyone elses client wants it then it is unneccesary and hence wrong to do so. Perhaps you are the only one with smart clients...

Like you have said so many times .... IF THE CLIENT REQUIRES IT, THEN IT IS WHAT THE CLIENT GETS, NO QUESTIONS ASKED, but you perhaps put it a bit more eloquently, something rediculous about a crayon and paper bag if my memory serves me correctly. Plus you fail to acknowledge that it is required by law, at least for me ... I personally believe that there are many laws that are not justifiable, but if I don't follow them, the powers that be WILL feel justified to enact whatever conveyance is prescribed by law.

[CADaver]

CADaver, I fail to see why you continually insist that if your clients want it then it must be ok, while if anyone elses client wants it then it is unneccesary and hence wrong to do so. Perhaps you are the only one with smart clients...

Like you have said so many times .... IF THE CLIENT REQUIRES IT, THEN IT IS WHAT THE CLIENT GETS, NO QUESTIONS ASKED, but you perhaps put it a bit more eloquently, something rediculous about a crayon and paper bag if my memory serves me correctly. Plus you fail to acknowledge that it is required by law, at least for me ... I personally believe that there are many laws that are not justifiable, but if I don't follow them, the powers that be WILL feel justified to enact whatever conveyance is prescribed by law.

Two different topics, "required" and "necessary".  "Necessary" means it's needed to build whatever.  "required" may be either necessary or unnecessary.  The client may require that all text be on layer "peanutbutter", that is unnecessary, but it is required.  We will provide all text on layer "peanutbutter".

Scalable plots, however, are a whole nuther banana.  As we've shown here, it is impossible to provide such.  It's like asking surveyors to provide 8 decimal place accuracy.  It may be required, but it's unnecessary, and more to the point, impossible to achieve.  But if the client "requires" it, I will hit the little button in the dialog box that says 1/4"=1'-0", and pretend that I've accomplished something.

Then when the client calls next month and wants to know why, when he lays his lil' plastic stick on the photocopy of the plot, it says 72'3" but the dimensin says 72', I'll spend the next half hour explaining the limitations of plotters, copiers, scales, media, and the effect of temperture and humidity on each.  He'll mumble something about "why'd we bother", I'll remind him it was his requirement, tell him that 18"X24" are a load easier to handle.  He'll tell me that's what we'll do next time, but we won't, we'll just do this all over again with the guy that takes his place when he retires.

This is nothing new for me, been batting this topic around for over 30 years, long before CAD.  Scaling a print has always been a bad guess.

[dubb]

ok...there are so many posts to this topic
but i just wana say that i use model space 95% of the time. whenever i use  paper space i only use it with the objects that dont require me to scaleup. like titleblock and north arrow or general notes.in most of my work i xref title blocks into model space and i check my overall drawing scale by listing my title block to see what scale it is scaled up to, to determine what scale i used. as for my co-workers who decide to do whatever they want to do in cad., they put text everywhere..paper model., whatever they want to do..and when i ask them to put it in model and not paper., they turn their shoulders. For all that use paper space to do 20% to 30% of their drawing i would like to hear from you in this topic because paperspace makes autocad confusing to NOobs. i took like 3 to 4 hours one time, trying to explain the aspect of model and paperspace to some guy.

[dubb]

ok...there are so many posts to this topic
but i just wana say that i use model space 95% of the time. whenever i use  paper space i only use it with the objects that dont require me to scaleup. like titleblock and north arrow or general notes.in most of my work i xref title blocks into model space and i check my overall drawing scale by listing my title block to see what scale it is scaled up to, to determine what scale i used. as for my co-workers who decide to do whatever they want to do in cad., they put text everywhere..paper model., whatever they want to do..and when i ask them to put it in model and not paper., they turn their shoulders. For all that use paper space to do 20% to 30% of their drawing i would like to hear from you in this topic because paperspace makes autocad confusing to NOobs. i took like 3 to 4 hours one time, trying to explain the aspect of model and paperspace to some guy.

[rktect3j]

Well, As long as everyone else posted their opinion.

Text in PS is fine but we keep it limited to title blocks and general sheet notes regarding all the drawings that will be going onto that sheet.  Why refernece that type of stuff from MS?  It will just increase the size of the drawing.

[CADaver]

 Why refernece that type of stuff from MS?  It will just increase the size of the drawing.

?? increase the size?? how so?

[rktect3j]

 Why refernece that type of stuff from MS?  It will just increase the size of the drawing.

?? increase the size?? how so?

Maybe I am incorrect but I was always told that when you open a window (Mview) into model space it makes the drawings a bit larger and takes that much longer to open it.  Is this incorrect?  I got this from someone when I was working on r14 and I am no genius.  I might have mispoken.  If so, sorry.

[dubb]

maybe youre talking about regeneration process in a viewport....imagine you have a drawing with one big viewport versus a drawing with 30 viewports. autocad has to regenerall all views before. in that case you might want to turn off regenauto. try it on a drawing, each viewport is regenerated indivdually.

[CADaver]

 Why refernece that type of stuff from MS?  It will just increase the size of the drawing.

?? increase the size?? how so?

Maybe I am incorrect but I was always told that when you open a window (Mview) into model space it makes the drawings a bit larger and takes that much longer to open it.  Is this incorrect?  I got this from someone when I was working on r14 and I am no genius.  I might have mispoken.  If so, sorry.

There is a minute file size increase due to the viewport elements but considering file size averages of 3-10 MB you can't see it. Even in old 2D files the file size increase was negligible.  Try this test, start a new drawing from scratch,delete one of the layout tabs and save it as TEST.dwg.  The file size should be around 25KB.  Add a viewport with the MVIEW command and save again.  The file size will bump 1KB to 26KB.  Array the viewport 10 rowsX10 col for 100 viewports and save the file again.  File size will still be un 45KB, so 100 viewports will add about 20KILOBYTES to the file size.

[CADaver]

maybe youre talking about regeneration process in a viewport....imagine you have a drawing with one big viewport versus a drawing with 30 viewports. autocad has to regenerall all views before. in that case you might want to turn off regenauto. try it on a drawing, each viewport is regenerated indivdually.

But unless you're working with hardware from the last century, or extremely large models, regen times should not be a problem.  I'm running an old P4-2.4GHz and regen times on 5MB models are under 3 seconds.