Still Working in 2008!!! HELP!!!!

[zack_goodz99669217]

Looking for some advice or reasoning, I belong to a Structural firm in Winnipeg, Canada and it seem no one use annotation for anything! Why is this so, our firm is pretty large for the area and works with multiple Architectural firms who also do not use annotation. This is all I have learned through school and is very difficult for me to show them the benefits and cost savings.

Any insight will be greatly appreciated

Thanks Zack

[cadtag]

well, i'm running 2014, and have pretty much zero use for annotative text or dimensions. I've yet to encounter a situation that can't be effectively addressed without it.

[jaberwok]

Looking for some advice or reasoning, I belong to a Structural firm in Winnipeg, Canada and it seem no one use annotation for anything! Why is this so, our firm is pretty large for the area and works with multiple Architectural firms who also do not use annotation. This is all I have learned through school and is very difficult for me to show them the benefits and cost savings.

Any insight will be greatly appreciated

Thanks Zack

If your clients don't use it, why would you?

[KCM]

Annotative scaling is draw once, use everywhere.
It saves time, reduces work and risk of error by allowing the same view (geometry, annotation and dimensions all) to be used within multiple vports and at different view scales.
No more copying text between different mtext boxes on different layers for each scale, making sure you haven't missed one when updating.
No more having to make sure you have the correct layers turned on/off for each viewport.
No more resorting to the horror that is transpatial dimensioning.

Setting up and arranging initial views is quicker and easier.
Subsequent modifications are quicker, easier and safer against errors.

Annotative scaling is also very intuitive once people have had some time to use it and is very quick to pick up, because it is just an extension of familiar concepts.


I suggest you prepare a demo, show it in action and let it speak for itself.

[zack_goodz99669217]

Thats exactly how I see it KCM, thanks. Still open to suggestions

CadTag what your thoughts, how do you go about saving time and multiple text styles?

Jaberwork, why does it matter if your client uses it or not? We never you their text or call offs

Thanks Guys

[cadtag]

Annotative is one way to accomplish the goal, but fundamentally is not a required way, nor necessarily the best way. IMO it was Autodesk's attempt to avoid solving their issues with transpatial associativity for annotation.

And in particular, I'll take exception to annotative dimensioning. In a set of plans, a given dimension needs to only appear once, and _should_ appear only once. On the sheet, and at the location it is most appropriate. Having the same thing dimensioned multiple places is simply poor drafting practice.

Especially give that the OP is talking about the 2008 version of the software..... one that came out 8 years ago and lacks many capabilities of the current version.

[jaberwok]

Thats exactly how I see it KCM, thanks. Still open to suggestions

CadTag what your thoughts, how do you go about saving time and multiple text styles?

Jaberwork, why does it matter if your client uses it or not? We never you their text or call offs

Thanks Guys

You made the point that your firm's clients do not use annotative annotation so I assume that file exchange with those clients is important so why would your firm introduce an unnecessary complication?
Further to cadtag's first point - when paperspace (layouts) was was introduced, adesk assumed that all annotation would, from then onward, be placed in paperspace - many, many users disagreed.
The annotative mechanism was introduced as an over-complicated work-around.
Again echoing cadtag - each dimension should appear only once; if repeated for user convenience it should be as a reference dimension only.

[KCM]

~ IMO it was Autodesk's attempt to avoid solving their issues with transpatial associativity for annotation.

~Further to cadtag's first point - when paperspace (layouts) was was introduced, adesk assumed that all annotation would, from then onward, be placed in paperspace - many, many users disagreed.

This ^^ Transpatial dimensioning is a nightmare.

I think that annotative scaling was introduced because people had rejected transpatial dimensioning.
I've only worked with one person who preferred transpatial. He'd always done it that way (came to CAD from drawing boards quite late in his career), but then he still didn't use XRef's in 2012, and re-wrote the CAD standard to explicitly ban the use of any new features introduced by ADesk. He wasn't going to learn anything new, and no one else was going to either. So I can empathise Zack.
Thinking about it, that may have been an influence on my determination to always remain up to date and push modernisation and training.

And in particular, I'll take exception to annotative dimensioning. In a set of plans, a given dimension needs to only appear once, and _should_ appear only once. On the sheet, and at the location it is most appropriate. Having the same thing dimensioned multiple places is simply poor drafting practice.

Yes, this is of course true, but I can think of exceptions. The conflict usually comes from wanting people to not have to refer to multiple drawings for the information they need and eliminate duplication. Such as having an overall site plan, with a minimal set of dimensions, then detail views of plots/buildings/machine shop layouts, etc, with more comprehensive dimensioning.
Using annotative scaling you can use the same xref, same dimensions and annotations even, reducing risk from duplication while providing the immediacy of access to information.

Especially give that the OP is talking about the 2008 version of the software..... one that came out 8 years ago and lacks many capabilities of the current version.

I think he meant that his employer is trapped in 2008, Annotative scaling coming out then and his companies practices haven't changed since.
Any employer should always be willing to listen to new ideas and approaches.

[cadtag]

Bear in mind that the contractor holding a stack of prints has no idea if the duplicate dimensions were generated as annotative, correct to the model, over-ridden manually, or what. If the same 'thing' is dimensioned on multiple sheets, then he has to verify that each one of those dimension numbers is the same. Whereas if there's only 1 dimension on the plans for every critical distance, it will only be one place he needs to look.

I'll disagree about the nightmare aspect of transdimensional dimensioning. Not perfect by any means, but generally works here.

>>Any employer should always be willing to listen to new ideas and approaches.
Listening is good, evaluating potential benefits to the organization is even better. Jumping full tilt into the latest developer fad/vendor wild hair because of hype -- not so much. Color me cynical, but there's been a lot of half baked ideas and processes thrown out in the software world, and only a few of them survived.

To the OP:

Generally speaking, dimensioning only happens on Sheet Files, and the model/design files are referenced in. Dimensions never go into the model files -- that would just be more cruft to deal with. I only need two dim styles, one when workin in Civil units of decimal feet, and a separate one when working in architectural feet-n-inches. Set DIMSCALE to 0, and either dimension in PaperSpace, or through the viewport into model space.

[rkmcswain]

Annotative scaling is draw once, use everywhere.
It saves time, reduces work and risk of error by allowing the same view (geometry, annotation and dimensions all) to be used within multiple vports and at different view scales.
No more copying text between different mtext boxes on different layers for each scale, making sure you haven't missed one when updating.
No more having to make sure you have the correct layers turned on/off for each viewport.
No more resorting to the horror that is transpatial dimensioning.

Setting up and arranging initial views is quicker and easier.
Subsequent modifications are quicker, easier and safer against errors.

Annotative scaling is also very intuitive once people have had some time to use it and is very quick to pick up, because it is just an extension of familiar concepts.


I suggest you prepare a demo, show it in action and let it speak for itself.

I would agree with all of that ^^^^^^^

The largest hurdle is getting everyone to understand HOW it is designed to work. Especially when you get into multiple scales and the sysvars ALLANNOVISIBLE & ANNOAUTOSCALE.