Topic: Fields in Title Block

[Drafter X]

I agree, I have not plotted from modelspace in many years.  I cringe when I see a titleblock in modelspace.

[Jeff H]

Every job I do titleblock is in modelspace then xref into paperspace for sheets

Also by doing this you set the titleblock drawing ANNOTATIVEDWG = 1 then you can just drag and drop into modelspace and change annotation scale to see what will fit inside titeblock at different scales.

[Pukenzz]

I knew this original question would trigger the push back and debate of model space vs paper space and I sincerely appreciate all input.  I'm working on compiling example drawing and my reason for using all model space but for now to get to the original question....

I do not want to use X-refs.

My title block will absolutely have static elements like company name, logo, address etc. If something needs to change on these it would be once in a blue moon. 

It will also have editable attributes that need changes per title block like revision date, page or sheet number, drawing product number, drawing product description, etc. 

Then it will also have info such as job number, job site address, etc.  So for these items that will pertain to the entire project I'm thinking fields.  Originally I was wanting to use the drawing property info as suggested by drafter X but struggling to find good info to understand how to do custom.

[mjfarrell]

your reluctance to use xrefs will add some complexity.


As another has said, and I used to do.

One title block drawing with all static information in the project folder - this gets XREF into all files

One title block IN the drawing with the FIELDS for the stuff that changes on each sheet
If you don't do this as an xref then you will wind up with two blocks sitting on top of each other

[Pukenzz]

Getting off subject but responding to the paper vs model discussion within this post.

Attached is a small sample.  I work for a store fixture, cabinetry type fabricator.  We are not doing architectural sets, civil sets, base plans, site plans, etc.  We are drawing cabinetry.  Many details are similar, not the same but similar from one unit to the next.  In the attached drawing I can create the left hand unit 100% then mirror it to create the right hand unit.  I can see and work with every single bit of the drawing all in paper space rather than having to click through what would be 4 model tabs to make any changes and viewing information.  If this was all in paper space I'd have 4 tabs to click through that just is not necessary.  I see where paper space works for many industries.  Just doesn't make sense in mine.

BTW these title blocks are a mess and that is what I'm working on fixing.

[rkmcswain]

I respectfully disagree.

I can see and work with every single bit of the drawing all in paper space...

I am presuming you meant to say Model Space, and you could still do that regardless if your title blocks were in separate layouts.

...rather than having to click through what would be 4 model tabs to make any changes and viewing information

I presume you meant to say Layout tabs, and you do have a bit of a point there if you are modifying a lot of data in the layout itself.

If this was all in paper space I'd have 4 tabs to click through...

Not that often, I would argue. Once your title block/border is inserted (presuming it's an xref or at least a block), then you could XOPEN or BEDIT to make changes there. Anything that changes on each sheet would generally be fields controlled by SSM. I don't find that I'm in layouts making edits that often.

How do you print those four "sheets" from MS? Wouldn't you have to print each one individually, picking a new print window each time?
Being able to print from SSM with a couple of clicks, whether it's 3 sheets or 300 sheets is the biggest advantage to me.

Just my 2¢

[ronjonp]

I'd use layout tabs just for the plotting.

[Pukenzz]

The places you corrected me on MS & PS you are correct.  I know the difference.  Just a brain fart.

To plot these somebody on here helped me years ago write a lisp that goes through and looks for TB's of a specific name.  Then it is able to search and find the perimeter of that TB and the plots it out.  It plots to fit rather than to scale but in the past I tweaked my TB's just ever so slightly so that when you plot them to fit they actually match the scale.

I created all this stuff at my old job.  Now I'm trying to recreate here at my new job.  So many many tweaks to go. 

https://www.theswamp.org/index.php?topic=20863.0

[ronjonp]

The places you corrected me on MS & PS you are correct.  I know the difference.  Just a brain fart.

To plot these somebody on here helped me years ago write a lisp that goes through and looks for TB's of a specific name.  Then it is able to search and find the perimeter of that TB and the plots it out.  It plots to fit rather than to scale but in the past I tweaked my TB's just ever so slightly so that when you plot them to fit they actually match the scale.

I created all this stuff at my old job.  Now I'm trying to recreate here at my new job.  So many many tweaks to go. 

https://www.theswamp.org/index.php?topic=20863.0

IMO .. You're making this harder than it should be. Use the tools given to you. I'd be glad to offer suggestions if you're up for it.

[ChrisCarlson]

I'm not going to read this entire thing as it sounds like a perfect task for the Sheet Set Manager within AutoCAD. You can either use the default fields (Project name, number, revision, etc) or create custom fields for anything you want. All the fields are accessible via fields. As far as MS/PS and all this standards talk, the requirements will be driven per company and are similar to armpits, everyone has them and most stink.

[mjfarrell]

IMO .. You're making this harder than it should be. Use the tools given to you. I'd be glad to offer suggestions if you're up for it.

I think so too, all this effort to reproduce what to many of us is the 'hard way' of doing this.

While it might be easier for this person because they are used to dealing with it.

In truth, the time spend learning the new tools and methods will offer a greater return on his investment.
And the added bonus, he will be able to set the 'new' system up anywhere, quickly, and explain it's use to other users as well.


In short, stop trying to reinvent what you had, because it wasn't as good as you think it was.

[Pukenzz]

I am open to suggestions even though many of my previous responses may indicate otherwise.

However, I think ChrisCarlson said it best and most appropriately though...As far as MS/PS and all this standards talk, the requirements will be driven per company and are similar to armpits, everyone has them and most stink.  You may all disagree with my way...  I'll listen to your's but would be interested in seeing a drawing sample of yours also as I feel all of our work related disciplines a are all over the place and what works for me may  make no sense for you and what works for you may make no sense for me.  So an understanding of how it is truly being used day to day may help.

Should we take it to a new post?

[mjfarrell]

I am open to suggestions even though many of my previous responses may indicate otherwise.

However, I think ChrisCarlson said it best and most appropriately though...As far as MS/PS and all this standards talk, the requirements will be driven per company and are similar to armpits, everyone has them and most stink.  You may all disagree with my way...  I'll listen to your's but would be interested in seeing a drawing sample of yours also as I feel all of our work related disciplines a are all over the place and what works for me may  make no sense for you and what works for you may make no sense for me.  So an understanding of how it is truly being used day to day may help.

Should we take it to a new post?

This is what I know...from years of experience

Modelspace for the model

Paperspace for printing

Sheet Set Manager to fill in title blocks and printing/publishing

Works in Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, Architectural, Cabinet/Millwright  and across continents.

Those that insist (resist) moving to this manner of printing all resort to working way harder to do it 'their' way than any does doing it this way.

Set the file up yourself....draw your model
save views
Go to layout tabs....restore those views in viewports...used NAMED PAGE SETUPS
notice that printing and plotting becomes a know factor, no need to preview, no need for LISP or other code, it just works
Then introduce sheet sets and fields to your titleblocks...your time is spend drawing the model
not managing titleblocks in modelspace.

Try it....one file get it right once and NEVER have to deal with it again.

[Pukenzz]

MJ...  where do you do your dimensions, notes, annotating, tags, etc?

[Pukenzz]

OK so little by little you have me coming around.  MS vs PS willing to entertain.  Tough to really communicate how one or the other does or does not work for me if we are not sitting in front of computers together comparing and contrasting.  But willing even though I'm still set on my crappy ways but letting go of some stuff. 

Xrefs...  not so sold on them yet.

Can you steer me towards using fields, specifically custom fields...  Is there a way that I can create a block that contains information that I can enter 1 time on "cover page" and change as needed and that information will automigaclly update the fields in other block all withing that same drawing and only that drawing?  I'm talking 1 cover page  / template block feeding other blocks.  I see how to do it using the drawing properties.  However the drawing properties are limited, if by nothing else that narrow columns that can not be made wider to show all the text.

On the attached example I want to edit the attribute field of "1024" on the white template and have that change push into the red corresponding fields of the red TB.  Is that a doable thing?