PDA

View Full Version : From AutoCAD to Arch2008 Standards



mpednault
2008-02-19, 05:03 PM
I've finally convinced my architecture firm to upgrade to Architecture 2008 from AutoCAD 2002 and utilize the AEC objects amung other great features of the program. Some of the users have used ADT3.3 lightly and understand the benefits of using AEC's. Before we upgraded I was revamping the CAD Standards here in the office for ACAD 2002, now that we've upgraded I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around the amount of changes/adaptations I need to make to the Standards to be used in Arch2008... We will start using AEC's and scheduling, for which I (nor anyone else) have not fully learned yet. Since Arch2008 works default with AIA layer standards we've decided it would be easier to just adopt them and change the pen thicknesses (printed line weights) to our liking.

My question is, what changes/adaptaions did you make to your AutoCAD Standards when upgrading to Arch2008 from a non-AEC based release?

I was thinking of just using the OOTB program and apply our own dimension/text styles/title blocks...

david_peterson
2008-02-19, 07:31 PM
You can spend all kinds of time trying to upgrade these to ACA type standards or the other way around. When it comes to colors and such, I'd say stay with the OOTB stuff. There's a logic to how it all goes together. You also may want to think abou switching to .stb pens. At least that's what I did. You can then add addl pens (call them what you like, I went the "blue, red, white..... if you follow that, when you import the older details that you have done, you can easily switch them to something other than default. The better way to do this would be to dive in to layer keys. This way you can like an existing layer to a new style based pens.
Take the time and set this stuff up. It may take you a while to get through it all, you and your staff will be much more williing to play with the new toy.

burchd
2008-02-19, 07:34 PM
May i ask a naive question?

What does OOBT Stand for? Is that some how related to Tri Service Plotting?

mpednault
2008-02-19, 07:51 PM
OOTB = Out Of The Box
In laymens terms = Retail exactly as it comes, non-molested version, no customization...
And thanks David, I'm going to look into layer keys and see what that's all about. I feel like I'm back in high school when I was learning AutoCAD. ACA is a new beast to me... I don't know if I feel good, bad or indifferent about it! :-)

burchd
2008-02-20, 06:45 AM
So, looking closely at OOTB pen settings, at both Architecture and MEP 2008, i find that The CTB seems to follow, loosely TriService Plotting standards, and the STB for AIA Standards follows these guidelines in that the names Thin Med etc matches the thicknesses defined.

I have not found that any combination of these and default layerkeys results in a drawing which any of us would actually plot and send proudly to a client.

Any comments on this observation?

H-Angus
2008-02-20, 10:40 AM
I've finally convinced my architecture firm to upgrade to Architecture 2008 from AutoCAD 2002 and utilize the AEC objects amung other great features of the program. Some of the users have used ADT3.3 lightly and understand the benefits of using AEC's. Before we upgraded I was revamping the CAD Standards here in the office for ACAD 2002, now that we've upgraded I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around the amount of changes/adaptations I need to make to the Standards to be used in Arch2008... We will start using AEC's and scheduling, for which I (nor anyone else) have not fully learned yet. Since Arch2008 works default with AIA layer standards we've decided it would be easier to just adopt them and change the pen thicknesses (printed line weights) to our liking.

My question is, what changes/adaptaions did you make to your AutoCAD Standards when upgrading to Arch2008 from a non-AEC based release?

I was thinking of just using the OOTB program and apply our own dimension/text styles/title blocks...

Autodesk produced a UK content guide which has been extremely handy for us when creating/revising standards, I don't know if there is a US version (I haven't seen one) if not you may want to take a look this UK guide (http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/ps/dl/item?siteID=123112&id=9492064&linkID=9240658) just to see the types of things to include in a standard.

mpednault
2008-02-20, 03:49 PM
That guide is exactly what I'm after, but for the US............ I did a brief search at Autodesk but came out empty handed. If anyone finds the US version, pleasepleasplease post it!!!

H-Angus
2008-02-20, 04:10 PM
That guide is exactly what I'm after, but for the US............ I did a brief search at Autodesk but came out empty handed. If anyone finds the US version, pleasepleasplease post it!!!

I'm pretty sure there isn't a US version :(

mpednault
2008-02-20, 04:25 PM
Well thanks for posting it anyhow, it will come in very handy!

burchd
2008-02-21, 01:51 AM
wow... this is great.....

Any idea why there isnt a US version? Are they assuming its all national CAD standards or something?

H-Angus
2008-02-21, 09:30 AM
wow... this is great.....

Any idea why there isnt a US version? Are they assuming its all national CAD standards or something?

I believe that may be the case, there isn't a National UK CAD Standard, just a bunch of UK and European Standards not specifically related to a particular program, so I guess Autodesk needed to set out there approach for the UK ACA users.

mpednault
2008-02-21, 04:08 PM
Interesting thought. I bet they can't/won't create a US version due to the National CAD Standard costing $410 for a single downloadable license. If they made a US version of this guide, no one would really need to purchase the US NCADS...

Misteracad
2008-02-25, 01:28 PM
Actually, after perusing the UK document a little, I don't really see it as a NCS replacement. First of all, the document specifically calls out the NCS and advises the user to use this guide as a supplement to the NCS, or if you do choose to use it as a standalone, at least refer to it before creating content to be used in the US. Secondly, the National CAD Standard is merely a guide for setting up general CAD standards within ones company, dwgs, etc., whereas this document seems to be more of a guide on how to setup and create CONTENT...big difference! Granted, there is some supplied Layer and Layer Key names, but that doesn't mean you have to use that part of the guide even if you do take advantage of some of the other approaches mentioned therein! Personally Autodesk, I'd love to see a US version of this, but the UK version will suffice for me. We don't necessarily use AutoCAD Architecture (or ADT), but I can see where the concepts and direction supplied could be a very helpful guide with our AutoCAD MEP (or ABS) intiatives. Every little bit helps ;)