Author Topic: text size arghhh!  (Read 11485 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

DinØsaur

  • Certified Bovine Scat Distributor...I lay it on THICK
  • Needs a day job
  • Posts: 5424
  • But I don't WANT a Day Job
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #15 on: May 07, 2009, 07:46:53 PM »
it would appear though that there is no standard size for thumbs either
Stephen R. Sherrill,
The DinØsaur
Civil 3D Specialist Emeritus

YAY ME !!!  I made it out alive !

Dent Cermak

  • Needs a day job
  • Posts: 6914
  • Clinton, Mississippi
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #16 on: June 14, 2009, 05:51:05 PM »
At one time there were standards. The 2/32 and 5/32 sizes were set by a tool called the Ames Lettering Guide. This was primarily for free hand lettering.
Then as jobs got more"automated" text size was tied to the print house's font sizes, ie, 4pt,6pt, 8pt,etc. Typewriters even were usually set to 10 pt or 12 pt type. Engineers adapted to this size syatem so the could use type-set notes on their drawings on strip film. The common sizes allowed them to type notes ans add them to drawings, have fancy type set or even match those sizes with the Leroy lettering system K&E came out with. A Leroy 60 guide was the same as 6pt type or 0.06" high. (That's where the Leroy sizes L60,L80, etc. in AutoCad come from.)
In the days of quality mapping there were manuals that listed the text size and type style for eevry piece of text on a map. As new people came into the field that wanted to "do their own thing" and could not understand the spcifications, the old standards disappeared.{ A prime example of this lack of pride in craftsmanship can be clearly seen in the current U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CADD Drafting Standards Manual and the previous TM's. Maps produced prior to 1989 were suitable for framing. Maps produced after that are suitable for people with lots of birds.}
If you are looking to me for answers, you really have problems. Carlson Survey 2016 w/ Embedded AutoCad

Tankman

  • Guest
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #17 on: July 09, 2009, 03:38:18 PM »
the Standard is...

There is No One Standard!

I use a standard size unless the print is very small.
Frequently adjust title block w/ text and dimension text to suit.

We don't need to squint to see the text dialog!

Crank

  • Swamp Rat
  • Posts: 1443
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #18 on: July 09, 2009, 04:18:55 PM »
the Standard is...

there is No One Standard!
In the metric world we already did have ISO-standards for text sizes when I started on the drawing board....

 Vault Professional 2018     /      Building Design Suite Ultimate 2017     /     AEC Collection 2018 + 2019 +2020

Willie

  • Swamp Rat
  • Posts: 955
  • Going nowhere slowly
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #19 on: July 09, 2009, 05:39:20 PM »
2.5mm = Dimensions, notes and text on drawings - if you realy have to, 2.0mm may be used.
4.0mm = Headings

Keep it straight and simple
Soli Deo Gloria | Qui Audet Adipiscitur
Windows 8  64-bit Enterprise | Civil 3D 2015 and 2016| ArcGIS 10.1
Yogi Berra : "I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous."

MickD

  • Gator
  • Posts: 3315
  • (x-in)->[process]->(y-out)
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #20 on: July 09, 2009, 11:05:18 PM »
2.5 for dim's and general notes
3.5 for minor headings/titles
5.0 for general titles
7.0 for major titles, usually the main plan on a general arrangemnet say. seldom used though
Forth is like the Tao: it is a Way, and is realized when followed.
Its fragility is its strength; its simplicity is its direction - Michael Ham

Lao Tzu: “To attain knowledge, add things
every day; to obtain wisdom, remove things every day.”

42

  • Bull Frog
  • Posts: 483
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #21 on: July 10, 2009, 07:24:23 AM »
2.5 for dim's and general notes
3.5 for minor headings/titles
5.0 for general titles
7.0 for major titles, usually the main plan on a general arrangemnet say. seldom used though
Ditto here
Alastair Mallett Autodesk Certified Professional
Technical Director
Hunters South Architects

chrisdarmanin

  • Guest
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #22 on: November 10, 2009, 06:38:32 AM »
i use 2 but i think i'm straining the workers' eyes too much ;D ;D ;D

hermanm

  • Bull Frog
  • Posts: 282
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #23 on: February 03, 2010, 09:30:03 PM »
We use 1/8" for basic text height for dimensions & annotations on steel shop & erection dwgs, which are typically Arch D (24x36).
For check prints, these are plotted reduced to Arch C (18x24), which makes text on check prints (2/3)(1/8") = 0.0833" , just slightly smaller than 3/32" - very easy to read text on check prints.

Typical scales for shop dwgs are:

1 1/2" = 1' (1:8 )
1" = 1' (1:12)
3/4" = 1' (1:16)
1/2" = 1' (1:24)

Typical scales for erection dwgs are:

1/2" = 1' (1:24)
1/4" = 1' (1:48)
3/16" = 1' (1:64)
1/8" = 1' (1:96)
etc.

So, it is easy to calculate the standard text height as an integer representing the inverse of the scale.
For example, the text height for 1" = 1' is 12 eighths, 12/8, or 1 1/2"

I never actually need to calculate the text height, because I wrote a LISP routine to calculate it for me many years ago, based on this scaling function:

Code: [Select]
;-------------------------------------------------------------------
;;--------------------- tktn_getscl--------------------------------------
;;      Purpose: calculate scale factor
;;      Uses:    nothing
;;      Returns: sf
;;-----------------------------------------------------------------
(defun tktn_getscl( )
  (cond ((= 1 (getvar "TILEMODE")) (getvar "DIMSCALE"));tiled space
        ((= 1 (getvar "CVPORT")) 1.0);in paper space
     ;; in a viewport
        (T
          (last (trans '(0 0 1.0) 3 2));calc scale factor
        )
  );cond
);end tktn_getscl


The basic text height is calculated as:

Code: [Select]
(* (tktn_getscl) (getvar "DIMTXT"))

and larger or smaller "standard" sizes are calculated from values in a user-defined list:

Code: [Select]
;;initialize NTEXTSCALES (global)
(setq NTEXTSCALES (list '(JUMBO .  2.0) '(BIG . 1.5) '(MEDIUM . 1.25) '(NORMAL . 1.0)
                        '(SMALL . 0.75) '(TINY . 0.5)))

NTEXT is available free at my website:

www.tktn.com







If you don't know where you are going, you might not get there.
  - L.P. Berra

Alan Cullen

  • Guest
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #24 on: February 04, 2010, 04:22:12 AM »
2.5 for dim's and general notes
3.5 for minor headings/titles
5.0 for general titles
7.0 for major titles, usually the main plan on a general arrangemnet say. seldom used though

And that, Mick, has been the Aussie standard for as long as I can remember

MickD

  • Gator
  • Posts: 3315
  • (x-in)->[process]->(y-out)
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #25 on: February 04, 2010, 04:42:07 AM »
true dat, BUT... we have been moving to 3.5 for dim text and notes as the client/s like to look at drgs at A3 size and a B1 is hard to read for some.

I'm not a real fan of this but I'm not paying the bills although for straight steel detailing (not general arrangements etc) I use 2.5 or 3mm as 3.5 is just oo big for tight or busy details.

Really though, 3 is fine and I don't care as long as every one uses the same standard. :)
Forth is like the Tao: it is a Way, and is realized when followed.
Its fragility is its strength; its simplicity is its direction - Michael Ham

Lao Tzu: “To attain knowledge, add things
every day; to obtain wisdom, remove things every day.”

Kerry

  • Mesozoic relic
  • Seagull
  • Posts: 11654
  • class keyThumper<T>:ILazy<T>
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #26 on: February 04, 2010, 04:50:21 AM »
2.5 for dim's and general notes
3.5 for minor headings/titles
5.0 for general titles
7.0 for major titles, usually the main plan on a general arrangemnet say. seldom used though

And that, Mick, has been the Aussie standard for as long as I can remember

Which is fine untill A0's are issued as A1's and B1'a as A1's and A1's ( or all) as A3's ... and the SteelShop foreman comes in and asks why you do such small text on HIS drawings.
on original drawings :
2.5 for reference notes
3.0 or 3.5 dimensions
5.0 titles
7.0 big stuff
... or be prepared to wear a hammer aroung the ears :)

Perfection is not optional.
Everything will work just as you expect it to, unless your expectations are incorrect.
Discipline: None at all.

--> Donate to theSwamp<--

MickD

  • Gator
  • Posts: 3315
  • (x-in)->[process]->(y-out)
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #27 on: February 04, 2010, 04:56:46 AM »
Quite often the steel shop foreman with give the fabby an A3 and have full size copies in the office which they can refer to if something isn't clear (you lose a lot of hidden line and edge details with reduced drgs). Nothing worse than a half burnt drg :)

With 3mm text this system works fine up to B1's then we would go 3.5 but we rarely if ever go larger than B1.
Forth is like the Tao: it is a Way, and is realized when followed.
Its fragility is its strength; its simplicity is its direction - Michael Ham

Lao Tzu: “To attain knowledge, add things
every day; to obtain wisdom, remove things every day.”

Alan Cullen

  • Guest
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #28 on: February 04, 2010, 08:42:36 AM »
Whatever happened to stock standard ISO sheets? Basically A1 and A3? If the fabricator has a problem with reading an A3, then someone should tell him that A3 is a pretty drawing only, not a fabrication/construction drawing. Construction drawings are A1, which they have all been issued.

If a contractor phones me and says he can't read the drawing, then I tell him to go and look at the contract drawings and stop wasting my time. I refuse to clutter up a drawing with oversized text.

And therein is my input into text size. I will not compromise my standards to suit a short sighted foreman who likes A3 just because they are handy.  :lmao: :lmao: :angel:

wwhittle

  • Guest
Re: text size arghhh!
« Reply #29 on: February 19, 2010, 06:02:33 AM »
Jeez. Inches everywhere. try mm.

1.5mm - xref text
1.8mm - most notes & text
2.5mm - headings
3.5mm - Bold headings.

Above follows the old iso pen sizes. Before CAD lol.

Not sure what the equivilant is in Inches.