File Structure Standards

[Anonymous]

Hi everyone,

My company is in the process of revising our company standards and I wanted to find out how other civil engineering companies are structuring their files. There is some debate over the design going in the same file as the sheets. The way I see it you should have a base file which is xrefed to the sheet file(s). Also if you could let me know if you have run into problems doing it one way or the other.

Thanks in advance,


Michael Hall
CAD Manager
Frederick Ward Associates

[Anonymous]

What benefits do you get from having separate files
for sheet and drawing information?  Does it do anything more than using
Layouts? Do the benefits outweigh the detriments, namely scattered information
& dealing with XREF paths?

I weighed that information when deciding which way
we where going.  The conclusion I came up with is that using Base files
adds a level of separation, the XREF, that provides no benefit and makes the
files more cumbersome to work with.

XREF's are useful.  They definitely have their
application, but separating sheet information from drawing information isn't
it.
--
John Colby
Lauterbach & Associates

href="http://www.la-arch.com">www.la-arch.com

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"avhg1" <
href="mailto:twturbo@hotmail.com">twturbo@hotmail.com> wrote in message

href="news:f14df2b.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f14df2b.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

Hi
everyone,

My company is in the process of revising our company standards and I wanted
to find out how other civil engineering companies are structuring their files.
There is some debate over the design going in the same file as the sheets. The
way I see it you should have a base file which is xrefed to the sheet file(s).
Also if you could let me know if you have run into problems doing it one way
or the other.

Thanks in advance,

Michael Hall
CAD Manager
Frederick Ward
Associates

[Anonymous]

How large of a company do you work for? With civil engineering, multiple people work on the same set of drawings, while several designers may need to work in the base file. The base file is also used in about 3 or 4 different submission sets. Therefore there will be a collaboration limitation issue with all data in one file.

Also in the cycle of the project, there may be 2 or 3 design concepts. The base being xrefed to the sheets makes it easier to transition from concept/preliminary to construction. We do backups of the designs before major changes are made as well. It happens frequently that we go back to some part of an original layout from a backup. The xref makes it a bit easier to bring those parts back.

I really have a lot of reasons why I propose to do it this way, but need to have other opinions to present to the powers above.

Thanks

[Anonymous]

I guess I didn't emphasize that it was *my*
conclusion.  Really, the point I was trying to make was weigh both sides,
without the bias of the way you're used to doing things.  There are
benefits and detriments to both methods. With the introduction of multiple
layouts in one file, some of the benefits for using base plans became
moot.

face=Arial size=2>
size=2>
--
John Colby
Lauterbach
& Associates
www.la-arch.com

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"avhg1" <
href="mailto:twturbo@hotmail.com">twturbo@hotmail.com> wrote in message

href="news:f14df2b.1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f14df2b.1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

How
large of a company do you work for? With civil engineering, multiple people
work on the same set of drawings, while several designers may need to work in
the base file. The base file is also used in about 3 or 4 different submission
sets. Therefore there will be a collaboration limitation issue with all data
in one file.

Also in the cycle of the project, there may be 2 or 3 design concepts. The
base being xrefed to the sheets makes it easier to transition from
concept/preliminary to construction. We do backups of the designs before major
changes are made as well. It happens frequently that we go back to some part
of an original layout from a backup. The xref makes it a bit easier to bring
those parts back.

I really have a lot of reasons why I propose to do it this way, but need to
have other opinions to present to the powers above.

Thanks

[Anonymous]

We are a civil firm with 30 or so cad designers and 12 cad techs. Most
projects have 3-4 or more at time working one project.

Here is how we set up our large projects.....

- Facilities Site Design...Street/Utility/Drainage Type.....

- Existing Base (one file, split as needed for project size and workability
- xrefed)

- Proposed Improvements (one file, entities only, worked as model -
xrefed)

- Individual files with layouts for like discipline (text and notes
here in host using xrefs from above, Facilities type projects)

- Individual files one per sheet normally but will allow 3-4 layout
as projects dictates (text and notes here in host using xrefs from above,
Street/Utility/Drainage Type type projects), helps to allow multi-user
workability especially at crunch time.

-  Individual detail sheets (could use layouts here, but this
follows form from previous project setups currently in use), helps to allow
multi-user workability especially at crunch time.

Calibration and communication is the key as well as a CAD strategy set
up front. I find that each project we do has some specific circumstance
that will require special treatment. We employ a lead CAD tech to oversee
the project deal with coordination issues between both techs and designers
and keeping unneeded clutter off the network. Yes we zip and archive at
various milestones of the projects. Design concepts are done in the proposed
improvement files and some time have more than one. Once final design is
started previous concepts are deleted (the concept file is still kept for
back up info).

We do a similar setup with site structures.... structure base (xrefed)
used in mech., arch., plumping, hvac., etc.). Structural usually runs independent
but overlay xrefs the mech. base( which is first in the design process
here) to build off of. Because of our treatment plant type work we have
found that total xrefs here make the cad setup to complicated for all to
use efficiently. Communication is the key between all involved.

Ron Meicho

avhg1 wrote:

How large of a company do you work for? With civil
engineering, multiple people work on the same set of drawings, while several
designers may need to work in the base file. The base file is also used
in about 3 or 4 different submission sets. Therefore there will be a collaboration
limitation issue with all data in one file.

Also in the cycle of the project, there may be 2 or 3 design concepts.
The base being xrefed to the sheets makes it easier to transition from
concept/preliminary to construction. We do backups of the designs before
major changes are made as well. It happens frequently that we go back to
some part of an original layout from a backup. The xref makes it a bit
easier to bring those parts back.

I really have a lot of reasons why I propose to do it this way, but
need to have other opinions to present to the powers above.

Thanks

[Anonymous]

"avhg1" wrote
> There is some debate over the design going in the
> same file as the sheets. The way I see it you should
> have a base file which is xrefed to the sheet file(s).

We're not civil (in any sense of the word) but my firm typically works with a shared base
plan and separate sheet files. A large amount of the design information still goes into
the sheet files, with ideally only the common elements in the base. We also have a poorly
enforced policy of one dwg file per plotted sheet. Where this is useful is several years
later when someone needs a copy of sheet 9606A101. Instead of resorting to some sort of
rosetta stone, we simply open the dwg of the same name.

[Anonymous]

Until I can determine a better method, I still
subscribe to the old methods of having a 'base' (xref file) and then separate
DWG files for each sheet.  I haven't strayed into using one DWG file with
layouts for the sheets because this has been a coordination headache, especially
when needing multiple drafters to jump on a job so that it can go out the door
in an hour.  Heck, at this point, I don't even use layouts... of course, I
didn't originate the standards in the office I'm in, but it works... 'if it
ain't broke, don't fix it'.

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"avhg1" <
href="mailto:twturbo@hotmail.com">twturbo@hotmail.com> wrote in message

href="news:f14df2b.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f14df2b.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

Hi
everyone,

My company is in the process of revising our company standards and I wanted
to find out how other civil engineering companies are structuring their files.
There is some debate over the design going in the same file as the sheets. The
way I see it you should have a base file which is xrefed to the sheet file(s).
Also if you could let me know if you have run into problems doing it one way
or the other.

Thanks in advance,

Michael Hall
CAD Manager
Frederick Ward
Associates

[Anonymous]

The original of this message with attached file has been moved to
the Customer Files area
(news://discussion.autodesk.com/autodesk.autocad.customer-files
or http://discussion.autodesk.com/WebX?14@@.ee940b5). Please do
not post files into technical support groups. Zipping files is a
courtesy to those who download them.

See the newsgroup guidelines at
http://discussion.autodesk.com/webx?groundrules.
--
Anne Brown
Manager, Moderator
Autodesk Product Support discussion groups
Discussion Q&A: http://www.autodesk.com/discussion

===================
Subject:
Re: File Structure Standards
Date:
Thu, 13 Mar 2003 13:50:46 -0800
From:
"CONSTER"
Newsgroups:
pn.cadmanager


i work for a 6 yrs old civil eng. co. w/ about 20 or so
employees.
before i came to work for this company, they didnt have a
structure of
how to organize the projects. it was such a confusion to
find out where was
what and to top it off, they rarely used xrefs. u can
imagine having to update many files.

i came up with this concept about three yrs ago...and
altho it has a bunch of files...and alot of clicking,
it has worked very well for us. the client template is
renamed to the clients company name and a work
order no. is added. under project name, we assign if 001
for the client first job with us...and as the client
add projects...the 'project name' folder is added and is
renamed accordingly. a task # was added to the cad
folder to help drafter charge their time accordingly.

the site base dwg. is kept with line work, lot #., pad
elev., bearings and distances.
in the gr. base for example (we overlay the site
base)...we keep all text ONLY required for grading plans,
and the same concept is applied to the rest of the txt
only bases.
the site base folder has its own void and misc folder. as
the site base is updated with major design change,
a copy is placed under void file and dated.
the site base dwg. is xrefed into pretty much all the
plans sets under autocad engineering.
we try to use xref for just about anything....but when the
plan doesnt allow it we place annotation on the
sheets itself.

with this system...the drawing are easy to find, is
organized and we get dwg. out pretty fast.

hope this helps....altho there are a BUNCH of files. =}



File: PROJECT SETUP.jpg

[Anonymous]

The concept of separating design from "presentation" (the CD sheets)
has been widely understood to be versatile and withstand the test of
time.

While the inclusion of multiple layouts in a single file mean,
theoretically that you can have multiple sheets in one file - indeed,
with xrefs you can plot a whole job from one "sheet" file - I believe
there are huge benefits to having each full size sheet be its own
file.

It enables maximum flexibilty with jobs of any size; we can have 5
people actively working on design and have a principal plot out
something without bugging anyone's workflow.

With batch plotting, it's pretty trivial to get a set of plots for an
entire job. Tools are online or coming online that make it even
easier, so you don't actually have to have AutoCAD up and running.

On the flip side, having done lots of "design+plot sheet" type of
drawings, we quickly hit limitations in how flexible we worked,
because plotting demands always got in the way of pure production.
Combining this with complex layer management, and the drawing process
was simply unmanageable without a ton of enforcing programming or
customization.

That goes away with some simple xref-plot file management built into
the system.

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com





On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 07:58:20 -0800, avhg1 wrote:

>Hi everyone,

My company is in the process of revising our company standards and I wanted to find out how other civil engineering companies are structuring their files. There is some debate over the design going in the same file as the sheets. The way I see it you should have a base file which is xrefed to the sheet file(s). Also if you could let me know if you have run into problems doing it one way or the other.

Thanks in advance,

Michael Hall

>CAD Manager

>Frederick Ward Associates

[Anonymous]

agreed for medium to large jobs/firms

We use the one project sheets drawing with multiple layouts for most
projects and it works just great. Want to set the plot date etc for an plot
set - gatte and wham all sheets are set.

reduces the number of files.
--
Jamie Duncan

"Maybe the Hokey Pokey is REALLY what's it all about"
"Matt Stachoni" wrote in message
news:6sm37v46isp1kajufl0qb3b3envtt9p69q@4ax.com...
> The concept of separating design from "presentation" (the CD sheets)
> has been widely understood to be versatile and withstand the test of
> time.
>
> While the inclusion of multiple layouts in a single file mean,
> theoretically that you can have multiple sheets in one file - indeed,
> with xrefs you can plot a whole job from one "sheet" file - I believe
> there are huge benefits to having each full size sheet be its own
> file.
>
> It enables maximum flexibilty with jobs of any size; we can have 5
> people actively working on design and have a principal plot out
> something without bugging anyone's workflow.
>
> With batch plotting, it's pretty trivial to get a set of plots for an
> entire job. Tools are online or coming online that make it even
> easier, so you don't actually have to have AutoCAD up and running.
>
> On the flip side, having done lots of "design+plot sheet" type of
> drawings, we quickly hit limitations in how flexible we worked,
> because plotting demands always got in the way of pure production.
> Combining this with complex layer management, and the drawing process
> was simply unmanageable without a ton of enforcing programming or
> customization.
>
> That goes away with some simple xref-plot file management built into
> the system.
>
> Matt
> mstachoni@comcast.net
> mstachoni@bhhtait.com
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 07:58:20 -0800, avhg1 wrote:
>
> >Hi everyone,

My company is in the process of revising our company
standards and I wanted to find out how other civil engineering companies are
structuring their files. There is some debate over the design going in the
same file as the sheets. The way I see it you should have a base file which
is xrefed to the sheet file(s). Also if you could let me know if you have
run into problems doing it one way or the other.

Thanks in advance,

Michael Hall

> >CAD Manager

> >Frederick Ward Associates
>

[Anonymous]

IMHO, even on small jobs, say, a residential house project that can
easily be done by one person in a weekend, benefits from a separation
of the design and plot sheet. Keeping track of separate files is
really no big deal, and on small jobs you are talking about maybe 3
sheets.

The benefits are to the company as a whole, since all jobs are done in
a consistent manner no matter what the size. Thus there is no learning
curve from one job to the next, and the project team members are
easily interoperable.

So you trade one set of conveniences (working on one or two dwg files)
for another (no one has to figure out how to work on and plot your
project).

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com


On Fri, 14 Mar 2003 09:17:33 -0800, "Jamie Duncan"
wrote:

>agreed for medium to large jobs/firms
>
>We use the one project sheets drawing with multiple layouts for most
>projects and it works just great. Want to set the plot date etc for an plot
>set - gatte and wham all sheets are set.
>
>reduces the number of files.

[cprettyman]

Matt
Having recently changed from arelatively small firm, to a noticeably larger firm, I can see how strongly the issue of 1 plotted sheet = sheet file vs multiple layouts ties into workflow and staffing issues. In my previous, smaller firm, where we rarely had more than one person actively slogging away on a project at any given moment, the use of layouts for multiple plotted sheets was a great benefit. If I ever return to projects and project teams of that size, I would push the use of multiple layouts further. In this office, however, staffing needs are such that we use multiple layyouts for other reasons. However, one thing that I have found here, that was new to me, is a need to maintain multiple presentations of the same information. This may well be unique to this office, but we need to be able to plot any given sheet at full size, with a CD titleblock, or with a presentation board titleblock, or at 11x17, at any given moment. The use of multiple layouts as a means of managing multiple presentations of what is essentially the same sheet is aa growing practice.

[Anonymous]

Charles,

I should have clarified my position, that each "sheet" for a formal
set of CDs gets its own sheet, but inside that sheet file we may have
different presentations of that sheet. So you and I are on the same
page (so to speak).

Matt
mstachoni@comcast.net
mstachoni@bhhtait.com



On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:27:22 -0800, c.prettyman
wrote:

>Matt

>Having recently changed from arelatively small firm, to a noticeably larger firm, I can see how strongly the issue of 1 plotted sheet = sheet file vs multiple layouts ties into workflow and staffing issues. In my previous, smaller firm, where we rarely had more than one person actively slogging away on a project at any given moment, the use of layouts for multiple plotted sheets was a great benefit. If I ever return to projects and project teams of that size, I would push the use of multiple layouts further. In this office, however, staffing needs are such that we use multiple layyouts for other reasons. However, one thing that I have found here, that was new to me, is a need to maintain multiple presentations of the same information. This may well be unique to this office, but we need to be able to plot any given sheet at full size, with a CD titleblock, or with a presentation board titleblock, or at 11x17, at any given moment. The use of multiple layouts as a means of
>managing multiple presentations of what is essentially the same sheet is aa growing practice.