AutoCAD Certification

[tc3dcad60731]

Maybe this is not the best place to list this but who knows. I read the opening "welcome" post and feel that this is geared towards embracing the new release and getting a movement going on this topic.

I read an article this past weekend in the new edition of AUGIWorld that was written by David Harrington. In the article he was talking about certification for AutoCAD. I have to say that I agree with him whole heartedly in his effort to get something started here. My ideas are 3 levels of certification just like he outlined in Basic, Advanced, & Master. The problem that I have is that I believe it should deviate slightly as follows.

1. Basic - Certification in the newest version of the program that everyone must take to be current and/or stay current. this should be a set fee but discounted or free for those that are "Master Certified". This test should prove that you know how to draw, print, create layers, modify, and other basic functions using the current version.

2. Advanced - Certification that carries over from each current release but if you want "advanced status" with the current version then retake the test for the current version. This shows that you can create a ctb file, templates, maybe set-up sheet manager templates, and other items that are more advanced. (Open for discussion)

3. Master - Certification that can only be achieved by taking the two lower tests first but does not have to be upgraded with each new version released. This test shows that you use and have used the program for years. That you know how to customize it to do what you need using lisp, vba, etc. We can set up dbconnect databases, drawing standards, and just about anything else that a cad manager does or a programmer. This is a certification that goes with you forever regardless of what version you tested on. It can even be stamped "AutoCAD Master Certification - Programmer" OR "CAD Manager". You will have to recertify as basic level at least every other release and these recertifications should be free or a minimal charge.



What does everyone else think??

[robert.1.hall72202]

Certification sounds like a decent idea, however, there are going to be really good designers that never get certified. I would not want to deny them jobs. Im guessing the biggest group would fall under advanced?

[jaberwok]

A good basic idea but bear in mind that there are some parts of the software that just don't get used in some areas of industry.
I have never used SSM and I don't expect to. It's not worth it if a "project" consists of no more than (say) 3 or 4 sheets.
I know many companies that have no desire to link acad to excel or any other dbase.

Could I choose maybe R14 to qualify? Or maybe v2.5?

Just my £0.02 worth.

[jaberwok]

BTW, I've voted "agree with revisions". I'd really like to vote "agree with reservations".

[Wanderer]

A good basic idea but bear in mind that there are some parts of the software that just don't get used in some areas of industry.
I have never used SSM and I don't expect to. It's not worth it if a "project" consists of no more than (say) 3 or 4 sheets.
I know many companies that have no desire to link acad to excel or any other dbase.

Could I choose maybe R14 to qualify? Or maybe v2.5?

Just my £0.02 worth.

yes, that is my thought about testing... I'd love to be certified, and am an a-1 drafter... in my field... LOL. but, I utilize completely different tools within acad than many... one might think that there should be a single basic acad certification... then more advanced certifications for certain things (either by discipline, or certain aspects of the program like customization??? I don't know)

this is where it could get complicated...

[robert.1.hall72202]

I already have an AutoCad certification that I received via attending a Vocational School
(long time ago). Any type of AutoCad course with over 500 hours of training should qualify as a certification. I had to demonstrate the ability to complete a class project in order to complete the course work.

[michael.12445]

I agree that inexperienced AutoCAD users can cause havoc and do some serious damage to CAD files. I disagree, however, that the answer to this lies 100% with training and certification. I think at least part of the problem lies with AutoCAD itself. There are far too many glitches and gotchas that just should not be there in an application this mature.

For example:

- Whenever one of our principals (or some project managers) wants a printout, he has to ask a "CAD operator" to make the print for him, because printing in AutoCAD is still such a black art. IMHO, this is ridiculous. While it's at least partially due to intellectual laziness on the part of the principal, I don't see why at least the basic functionality, maybe without all the subtleties of line weights, etc., can't be made as simple as printing from MS Word or Adobe Acrobat, both of which the principals do use to print documents.

- It takes extraordinary effort on the part of users to draw accurately on the right layers. There is no intelligence built in to OSNAPs, so it's very easy to get entities lined up to the endpoints of hatch patterns, etc., and there is no way to get AutoCAD to "prefer" snapping to points that would result in orthogonal geometry when ORTHO is on, etc. There is also no way to prevent users from creating any arbitrary layers they please, instead of having to pick layers from a predefined list.

- It also takes extraordinary effort to share drawings with other offices. You can't just send the DWG file itself - you have to go through some process like ETRANSMIT. While that command has been vastly improved since its introduction in 2002, I never could understand why tiny files like .shx shape files, linetypes, and hatch patterns couldn't just be embedded in the DWG file.

- The user interface needs to be redesigned so that it is simpler and the commands operate consistently. I'm not talking about prettier icons on the buttons, but issues like the fact that "Previous" is a valid option for selecting objects in some cases but not others. For example, I see no logical reason why you shouldn't be able to use "Previous" with the STRETCH command, but you can't. Additionally, if you use HATCH, for example, but you UNDO it if it doesn't give the intended results, you lose all the settings and have to go through picking the pattern, scale, angle, etc., all over again. The same is true if you enter the PLOT dialogs and then notice or remember you forgot to edit some small but critical information on the drawing - once you cancel the PLOT dialog, all settings are lost. There ought to be a way to UNDO or CANCEL these commands, yet save the settings.

- The DWG format allows for the creation of "foreign" objects by third party applications that result in weird "proxies" with sometimes unpredictable and unexpected behavior, which in extreme cases can cause AutoCAD to choke. There ought to be a way to open DWG files in "pure mode," in which all objects created by missing applications are ignored.

Again, I don't disagree that the very nature of vector information is probably inherently complex enough that some sort of training, experience, and, if necessary, certification will always be needed, but I do think AutoCAD itself could go a long way towards lowering the steep learning curve that currently confronts the novice. This being the "Skunk Works" forum, I thought this might be a good place to float these ideas.

Michael Evans
Togawa & Smith, Inc.