why annotation or hatch in layout?

[jorismaes]

I always place my annotation and hatch in Model.

Sometimes I hear from people they place dimensions in layout. I can't find out why somebody would do this. Who can give me good arguments for placing dimensions and/or hatch in layout?

Thanks!

[steven-g]

If you use layouts with different scales (for details etc) you don't want different sized text showing up in different viewports so if you dim in model space you have to start using various layers and in viewports freeze layers. For 3D models you can have dims and text at all sorts of angles and planes.

It can cause problems when you edit the model, some people say that dims move in paper space, but if they are properly associated it should be fine, and anyway dims are usually the last thing to be placed once the design is finalised.

[jorismaes]

"If you use layouts with different scales "

Isn't "annotative scaling" made for this?

"dims are usually the last thing to be placed once the design is finalised."

Maybe in a perfect world, but here the drawings comes back with remarks, so we need to rework things out.

Still not convinced about this workflow. 

[nestly2]

If you're familiar with Annotative scaling, then you're already using Autodesk's newest and most versitile method for annotating objects that are displayed at multiple scales.  If it works for you, then you're doing it right.

[steven-g]

I have never got on with annotative scaling, either a dim at different scales has to be placed at a completely different loction to look correct which makes the drawing difficult read with all those various scales visible, and if you are doing that, you have to have all scales visible to use the same dim at different scales and position it correctly. Or you have only the current scale visible and you don't know what is dimed or not, swapping annotative scales all the time is just as annoying.

[kasperwuyts]

My Autocad manual (Boeklagen; the foremost Dutch language guide) talks all about how dimensioning in paper space is perfect and amazing and how anyone who ever disagrees is either inexperienced or dumb, and that annotative scaling was only ever regrettably added because people were too green to use PS dimensioning properly. (that's the narrative between the lines)

I think that speaks volumes of how the writer of that book never actually has to produce lots of drawings against a deadline. I have to copy/modify drawings a lot. I use dimensions in dynamic blocks. Sure, if you're a tutor and you make one drawing from scratch to demonstrate dimension lines, PS is going to work great. But in a non-isolated environment where things get reused and modified, not so much.

So my opinion: stick to model space, except maybe for simple shop drawings.

[jorismaes]

Thanks Kasper.

I think the same about that, I also know the books from CADcollege.

Boeklagen is far from an amateur, but after 13 years of AutoCAD experience I am neither. Because we (Boeklagen and me) have a total different opinion I asked this question to hear about other opinions. 

[CAD_Craig]

For the folks who do your dimensioning and hatching in model space, are you mostly dealing with 2D drawings? I can see the argument going either way in a 2D environment but when you are dealing with 3D and using the same model in multiple views, in my experience having everything except for the model itself in paper space is the way to go.

[dgorsman]

Indeed.  Dimensions, text, and hatches are inherently 2D objects which makes them difficult to work with in a 3D model.  You have to set the working plane, set clipping planes, consider if multiple viewports are being used.  Or, you just work in paper space and place it over the viewport with everything in the same plane.  Associative dimensioning kinda-sorta works, better if everything is in the viewport, but as noted above designs change.  But we also incorporate revision control and work processes so that dimensioning is one of the *last* things placed on drawings, after the model content has been locked down.

Of course, also as noted above: if its working for you its the right way.  Unless there are procedures established by your employer or client, in which case *those* are the right way to go.

[V08J11]

Generally, when you annotate in Layout Space (that is put text, dimensions, and symbols), the Model Space information remains pure. 

Think of Model Space information as pure "buildable" geometry, and the Paper Space information as the information that you use to "build" the geometry.   

Also, if you XRef your "buildable" geometry drawing into the annotative drawing, then your XRef drawing can only contain "buildable" layers (A-WALL, etc.) which will not be contamminated by Annotation Layers (A-ANNO-TEXT, etc.), and vice versa.  

Also, when you place dimensions in Model Space, the dimension locations will not always work across differerent drawings, and therefore you will end up needing to have different dimension layers for different drawings?  I suspect this happens, though I have never really annotated in model space for information that needs to be plotted.