3D LINE FOR PIPE

[jackshield]

I AM TRYING TO DRAW THE CETERLINE OF EXISTING PIPING IN 3D, INCLUDING THE RADII OF ELBOWS.

FILLET DOESNT WORK ON 3DPOLY LINES AND ARC IS NOT AN OPTION OF 3DPOLY.

MOST OF THE LINES EXIST IN 2D FORMAT, IS THERE A PEDIT SWITCH TO MAKE IT WORK ON 3 AXIS'?

[JDMather]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

..., because corp wrote it off as project based software, ....

---

I would be curious to hear their definition of this?

[jackshield]

yea, seeping bit by bit ...

since i am the only "drafter" sat this facility, i dont have much stroke for "better tools"

perhaps down the road ...

[jackshield]

because of the way electrical groups (for lack of better term) the drawings, as project sets, they seemed to think it would interfer with the archive process as a whole.  i've lost interest in any real, rational discussion with them.

when you question why they do something a certain way, and they respond "thats the way we have always done it", the conversation is over for me as i have just been notified who i am talking to ...

[JDMather]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

when you question why they do something a certain way, and they respond "thats the way we have always done it", .....

---

A battle I've been fighting my entire career.  An argument with only a historical defense, no defense in terms of current technology.  They would benefit from reading Seymour Papert's books.  His books could have been written yesterday - the problem hasn't changed in 30-yrs of computer technology.

[jackshield]

not just computing technology ...

if you have a method for doing something, you should have specific reasons for they way you do things and drafting is/or should be, very methodical

if your just holding the tail in front of you ...

drafting 101 is becoming a lost skill

[JDMather]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
drafting 101 is becoming a lost skill

---

How so?  Can you elaborate? 

[jackshield]

people are getting cad training but not drafting training.  i come across so many drawings that miss fundamentals.

not to mention the sloppy cad files ... unjoined corners, objects not to size, no grasp of layering, multiple drawings all laid out in model space, etc.

[JDMather]

Sounds like you are hiring people out of the wrong school.

These users should be suing the schools for mal-practice.

Would you accept poor quality from your medical doctor?

The person who fixes your car?

Even the person who cuts your hair most likely had to pass some sort of certification.

Most schools have an "advisory board" (name might vary) of some sort.
I recommend that industry users get involved adn demand accountability.

These software programs are professional programs that deserve (require?) a professional level of preparation.

I am  astonished how many posts there are here by users who indicate no training when questioned about their level of training.

[dgorsman]

Its not always poor training or skills.  A lot of plant drawings are several decades old, which were redrawn in CAD from hand-drawn originals and updated by small projects which don't have the budget to do anything but what they are being paid to work on.  Some have been migrated through multiple drafting packages.  While it would be nice to get everything in the drawing "fixed" and/or converted to 3D, that doesn't always happen in the real world.  We do the best we can with the resources available.

jackshield, its sounding like you need a mid-level plant design program like Plant3D or CADWorx, or if management is looking for something more holistic (in plant management terms) its time to start looking into investing in full-on programs like SmartPlant or PDMS.

[steve216586]

I hear ya Jack! I blame the lack of fundementals on the "Economics" of higher learning establishments. Meaning they have to place too much other cirriculum into their "Drafting/Design" programs to make them attractive to students. Is there a market for a "plain" Design/Draftsman? Not really if you look at the Want Ads. Everyone is looking for a specialty. I've seen ads which actually say, "No Civil draftsmen should apply." So how does a school or university attract students? By offering curriculum which covers as many of those specialties as possible for one price.

An engineer enrolled at a college or university, for example, typically only needs to earn 3 credit hours in a Drafting/Design course to satisfy graduation requirements. Yet we know all engineers now draft in the workplace. In that one semester they learn "piece meal" AutoCAD, not drafting. They are given textbook exercises to re-create and are placed in a position to "figure" it out by intuition. Typically the student is only instructed on the basics but the exercises are sometimes quite complicated. That is why we see so many "simple" questions being asked on these forums.

On the other hand, many "Tech" schools which are only 9 months to a year in duration, offer a "Drafting Certificate" yet advertise to the potential students that their course will provide a knowledge of all drafting disciplines as if it were a degree program. It is just not possible to "learn" Drafting Standards, AutoCAD, and Inventor, Piping, Structural, Mechanical, Electrical, Architectural and Civil drafting in nine months to a year. So they focus on what makes the student money when they hit the industry; everything except the Drafting Standards, AutoCAD and Inventor. They make him marketable to an employee by not just being a draftsman but a specialized draftsman. We all know they are not specialized at anything but the basics of numerous disciplines. One of those disciplines not being AutoCAD or Inventor. They place that onus on the poor employee who hires this student thinking they know how to join two lines using either of these two programs.

These schools learned in the late 80's they won't get students' $$$ for teaching common Drafting/Design standards. It is not sexy. It went away when board drafting went away. Board drafting by nature taught you text heights, line widths, scaling, etc. Besides, today's students want to tell their family and friends they know Architectural Drafting, Mechanical Drafting, etc, etc, etc. It makes them sound like they are Engineering Technician Specialists even before they get a job.

[jackshield]

I have suggested as such, corp has recently started a program for cad software, so i am hoping to see some improvement there.

i rework old drawings constantly, some become labor intensive, and sometimes is does require priortizing which ones are worth the work involved.

but i get brand new drawings with those type of problems.  promblems caused by drafters not using ortho or snaps, or typing in dims rather than fixing the entities.

autocad is a great TOOL if used as intended

[dgorsman]

Partially agree with you.  There are some horrible tech schools out there.  But there are some very good ones as well.  Several of our senior designers are on the advisory panel for the school I attended, and it has a reputation of producing technicians from two-year programs who can *do* things in their respective industry.  They may not be fully familiar with drawing standards as a CAD Manager but as those vary so much from company to company I'm not too concerned.  I'd rather have a piping designer that knows what flanges are and where ball valves are used over gate valves.  We'll break them in as what standards we are employing.

Edit: almost forgot - most engineers have no business touching AutoCAD drawings.  Let the technicians who know the software put in the information while the eingeers do the work they were trained for!

[jackshield]

dont get me wrong, as i would not blame it on the schools, moreover, just lazy drafters.

i was taught a basic set of tools, i made sure i learned, but i was tempered in a high volume design enviroment where the job itself made me learn to be more proficient

you can teach a man to fish but you cant put the fish on the line for them

of course, some of it may just be my **** compulsive tendencies ...

i dont do "ah, thats good enough" ... its either right or its not ... afterall, i put my name in the titleblock

[steve216586]

What I meant by the two examples I gave is that most users out there doing Drafting & Design work are:

1. Engineers who should be, presenting engineered solutions to customers, reviewing drawings, in the field determining a course of action for the next project or serving as PEs and working with approving authorities. Not sitting at a desk all day doing CAD work at $47/hr, when an engineering tech could do the work faster @ $30/hr. At fair market value you can't charge the client enough to rationalize the engineer doing that type of work. They are budget busters when they do CAD.

or

2.  CAD techs who have a certificate from a "lick 'em and stick 'em" trade school. Unless they attended an accredited school which offers, minimum of, an Associates of Technology degree, they require further AutoCAD AND drafting training. Let alone the normal "Company specific" training all new hires go through. Usually math or geometry training as well.

I try to hire techs with a background in our specific discipline. If I can't find that, then I look for any trade on the resume. I gobble those guys up. They know real world problems and have usually done or worked with Carpentry, Plumbing, Electrical etc. I find typically, they know the "ins" and "outs" already. Plus they are usually detail oriented, which I think is THE key to success in drafting.

[Anonymous]

We use experienced journeyman in our coordination department. Having someone who not only understands how the systems work but also years of experience installing them is by far better than using anyone that comes out of a program with no field experience. Using Fabrication CADmep the learning curve that takes someone from knowing little about CAD to being a productive coordinator is pretty short.