Notes and Details in Paper Space or Model Space??

[Anonymous]

Hi All,

I am in the middle of a debate with a CAD Manager at another office on one issue and would like your honest unbiased input.

Do you prefer to put your typical details, swale details, custom sections, etc, in paper space or model space? There is pros and cons to each, just wondering what you think is best.

Thank you.

[Mark_Castle]

Ideally, I draw the details to scale in model space and place notes, dimensions, etc. in paper space. I realize the dynamic annotations associated with Civil 3D are in model space, but I prefer to keep as much of that as I can in paper space.

[Kyle-Evans]

Model space for sure, now notes and text I put in paper space.

[mathewkol]

1. It would make absolutely no sense to me to place details in paper space.  Draw them to full scale in model space and then open up some viewports in paper space.
2. General notes I would place in paper space.
3. Labels and dimensions I would place in model space.

I and 2 you would probably not get much debate about.  3 on the other hand has been discussed in the AutoCAD forum ad nauseum.  For every 100 people you will find 50 that want labels and dims in paper space and 50 in model space.  I won't go into it any further since ther's is NO winning this argument.  You'll find a zillion posts at the AutoCAD forum.  Look them up, make a list of the arguments you see and make the decision yourselves.

[Anonymous]

Hi Matt, its been a long time!

Yeah, i've read many of the posts in the AutoCAD forum. And the reason, I post here is that I respect many of the people in this forum, and do not know many in the AutoCAD forum. This really is an AutoCAD discussion, but all Civil and Structural Engineers deal with this, and that is my field. 

To add a little bit to the story we have a library of several hundred typical details and sections that are re-used all the time, on nearly every job. Placing them in model space seems pretty ridiculous to me, and having 15 viewports to manage on a detail sheet is not the most efficient. Please tell me you can see my point?

[mathewkol]

Wow, Matt!  I didn't even clue in that it was you.

I can see your point fir sure.  If you have a whack of details that are to be placed on a single sheet, and they're just blocks, it shouldn't be a problem.  In fact, it will save some RAM as you won't have the many viewports that would require.

Personally, I still wouldn't do it that way as I use the Sheet Set Manager extensively with views and callout labels and such and it is very easy for me to ad those 15 details to a sheet.

[Sinc]

We basically do the same as Matt.  Although I will sometimes put general notes in modelspace if I'm working on a multi-page sheet set, and I want the same set of notes to appear on every page.  When that sort of thing comes up, I like to put the notes in modelspace, just in case I want to make an edit.  It's easier to make the change once in modelspace, as opposed to changing the notes in every paperspace layout.

[engr_mondo]

What's the final answer Matt?... I suggest to ask/post this also to Revit forum as current Revit workflow already answered this dilemma.

[Neilw_05]

One of the issues with putting dimensions and annotations in Paper space while the linework remains in Model space is you won't be able to see the paper space annotations when a detail is used or viewed in a reference, nor does it allow you to readily create a block for the detail that includes it's dimensions for use in other projects.

Another argument could be that when a designer creates a detail, he/she may need to access information from the model in model space while creating and annotating the detail. Having everything in model space makes this easier.

A third problem with the MS+PS approach is if the model space linework has to be moved for any reason, the paper space annotation does not remain synchronized. Likewise it is not practical to use the detail in multiple sheets since the annotation would have to be "cloned" which we want to avoid as much as possible.

Some of the options are:

1) Create each detail in a separate DWG and insert as blocks or references in paper space to the plan sheets.

2) Create or insert the details in model space and use viewports for the plan sheets

3) Create the details entirely in paper space

Each approach has it's plusses and minuses, but annotation scale eliminates most of the arguments for putting the linework in MS and annotation in paper space in my opinion. Also, you can't always draw at true scale when drafting details entirely in paper space.

[SkipBurns]

The way that I handle details is to draw each detail @ 1:1 in it's own drawing in model space.  Add the appropriate annotative text/dims for the scales that will be used.  Then I have a separate sheet drawing with just a title block and I XREF the details into paperspace @ the scale needed (i.e. 1/4"=1'-0").  This method makes it very easy to copy details between projects as all that is needed is to copy the dwg to a new folder and modify as needed.

[mathewkol]

I'm curious why you would post this in the Revit forum.  Revit is not at all AutoCAD based and had its own way of doing things.  Can you explain?

[jmayo-EE]

I can debate #1. 🙂

Take an undeground detention basin that needs general plan labels & a detail view with more specific labeling. No way I'm gonna' copy all this linework for a new detail. New labels on a new layer in MS, new viewport in PS.

For the OP, we use both. PS for most standard details & notes inserted as blocks. When custom site specific details come into play, many are drafted and labeled in MS with vports in PS.

[Anonymous]

I'm one that uses both, depending on what I'm trying to accomplish.

We use a bunch of city standard drawings, some custom details, and site plan dimensioning.

I usually put the std dwgs in MS and window them in PS and can get a nice 3x4 grid on one sheet.  The site plan I dimension in MS.  This gives me the overall layout planning wants, and then for construction details of curbs & Islands, I scale windows of the areas in PS (shutting off layers I don't need) and dimension in PS.  I can use the window by object or polygon and get areas I want to concentrate on.

Special details like structures, wiers, berms, walls, etc, get drawn & dimensioned in MS.

Reid

[NoahNJBowman]

Mark,

One should not dimension in paper space. One should ALWAYS dimension in model space. Take care.

[Joe-Bouza]

Interesting thread. I notice that no one has addressed the SSM work flow of dragging in a detail view and leveraging the numerated views for coordinated details for plan call outs.

By default SSM expects the details to be in MS, but as others have mentioned, many have libraries of typical details that are more suited for snapping to a grid in PS. AutoCAD being AutoCAD and SSM have accounted for this and SSM will also enumerate PS views to again leverage the organization of details to plans

So, IMHO it is both. Typical details can be snapped to PS and when conditions require a specific detail be drawn for the particular dimensions of a design, do the sensible thing and draw it in MS. save the view and drag it into the detail sheet.

[jmayo-EE]

Hmm how about a little more on this Joe. Are these AutoCAD views? Got a very general workflow?

[troma]

I'm not sure if you realize you've replied to a conversation that's five years old.

It's still a good discussion however.

Most of the time if I put dimentions in modelspace they're upside down. Even if I switch the text to read right-to-left it's still the wrong side of the line. So most of my dimentions go in paperspace.

Also, how would you suggest I create dimesions outisde of the viewport, like this:

At least two sides to every story!

[jmayo-EE]

The evil ucs command or the text angle option in the edit dimtext command.

[troma]

What's that edit dimtext command?
Is it the same as putting the rotation in the properties box?
I never got why an angle of zero is relative to the dim line, but any other angle is relative to the world (or I guess the UCS).

[jmayo-EE]

In the Annotation tab, see the attachment. When you click the command it asks for an angle. Don't type it. Select it. In the middle of the dim lin where the text breaks the dim line, snap to the first endpoint of the dim lin to the other in the direction you want the text. The on-screen selection makes this pretty easy. In my old example above If I had a rectangular underground basin at some odd angle to the plan sheets or north and I needed the detail labels I would save a UCS named basin-detail and set it current only when I label or perhaps hatch this detail. Then all text, dims and hatches are automtically drawn horizontal or vertical as they are created. I then set the ucs to world when done labeling.