Please comment on a memo sent round, highlighting company CAD standards

[Ogre]

We are using AutoCAD LT2000....

While I do not know too much about LT, I know you can use DEISEL and scripts to customize (what a beating )...If they are not into upgrading, then I know that ARX is out of the picture...

If he does not want to change, let him know what features are in LT 2000 that will help productivity...If that does not work, sit down with stopwatch and a drawing and stick to the standards...Then do the same using the features that you know will be faster...Look at the times then take it to him and y'all's boss...If the IT guy does not want to save the company money I guarantee that he will be out...

You can also download the newest version of LT and take it for a 30 day test run...Do some sample drawings and time them...Use the new features as much as you can...Take advantage of the Sheet Set Managet and especially Publish (that has saved us quite a few man hours)...Robert Green has some great info on how to show how to present ROI on new investments... http://management.cadalyst.com/cadma....jsp?id=319282 ...

[Comach]

Gareth, I would agree with all the above replies. I would not agree with most of the proposed standards outlined by your IT guy.

This problem is not uncommon, sometimes these guys see the evolution of Cad control as an extension of their own domain. It really is a specialist skill in its own right and understanding the implementation of a workable common sense cad standard requires thorough knowledge of Cad.

There are plenty postings on Cad Standards on the AUGI forums which you could use to support your position.

As Julie mentioned it may worthwhile trying to collaborate with this guy and perhaps adopt some political meandering - you know the type of thing suggest new initiatives in such a way as to make it seem like it was his suggestion! Talk to a politician they do it all the time.

The other way is to look at the cost impact of a workable cad standard v the IT proposal. Management will always understand the figures at the bottom of the page particularly if you can show a productivity gain and cost saving.

Finally you can ask the IT chap to produce a letter of attorney to support his position to define cad standards.

[julie_tirone]

Not sure what it is with some Management and their reluctance to embrace CAD. It’s like they feel they have given us an expensive toy (could be because we have so much fun with it!) and we should be satisfied with that. They don’t want to get involved with something they don’t or want to understand and I’m sure your IT guy probably feels the same way-it’s not his main focus and is more of a pain in the @ss than he would like.
But to involve him in a way that makes use of his expertise, benefits the CAD production and saves the company money would be a win-win scenario.
Maybe take him out for a pint (or THREE) and say you think you may have started out on the wrong foot but with the best of intentions. That having experienced a different way of utilizing CAD you’d like the company to be able to benefit from the knowledge you bring and to build on the foundation already in place with his collaboration. If he’s interested and seems enthusiastic about trying something new, then it could be a go and if he’s not then you can’t keep floggin’ a dead horse. Worth a shot though.

Cheers

[daniel.dennin]

I would assume that the outlawing of Mtext has something to do with viewers used in other areas; we have seen this problem with older versions of viewers. I cannot unserstand why anyone would want to go through the trouble of creating arrows via polylines unless they are large indicator arrows, the size of the arrow on leaders is not defined by text size.

Some of these items seem to be leftovers from earlier versions of AutoCAD and various viewers, which may be the only experience your IT guy has with CAD. It may be time to try and address these issues. I would be careful, since he was kind enough to open the memo with "Hey the New Guy thinks we have a problem..." seems like a danger sign.

[bob.kalsi66006]

Sounds like he needs to stick with IT.... He's creating more work for you, not helping...

My thoughts exactly....some companies have their IT Dept. do all the CAD standards but these guys sometimes having got a 'ING clue about how CAD actually works. All they know is how to install it and obtain extyra licenses and in my opinion that's what they should stick to.

[jaberwok]

All they know is how to install it and obtain extyra licenses and in my opinion that's what they should stick to.

I've met some who weren't that capable.

[sschwartz85916]

This is SOOOO basic cad. All you need to do is to know how to draw a line and to draft. Is that what they are going for??
But, you really need to literally prove to them for a long period of time that you CAN work with those standards first. Then, figure out WHY they need it so basic. (and I mean BASIC). Then, in what way can you modify/adjust the standards and prove its benefits over a period of time.

And Good Luck with THAT!

[H.Hunter]

I know exactly where this is all coming from. We kinda have had the problem. We had standards, but they weren't updated in years and then all the sudden we go from R14 to 2002, changed network topology and did other things and all the sudden our standards are no good. So we're back at square 1 more-or-less.

I will say one thing: Someone that does not work with CAD on a daily basis shoudl not be writing CAD Standards.

The other thing is that standards need to be kept up-to-date with technology. The CUI is one great example of those things. It's changed and anything related in standards needs to be modified.

[jaberwok]

I know exactly where this is all coming from. We kinda have had the problem. We had standards, but they weren't updated in years and then all the sudden we go from R14 to 2002, changed network topology and did other things and all the sudden our standards are no good. So we're back at square 1 more-or-less.

I will say one thing: Someone that does not work with CAD on a daily basis shoudl not be writing CAD Standards.

The other thing is that standards need to be kept up-to-date with technology. The CUI is one great example of those things. It's changed and anything related in standards needs to be modified.

Why would CAD standards refer to the CUI?
They are about producing drawings and should be broadly applicable to any CAD software and any release.

£0.02

[H.Hunter]

Why would CAD standards refer to the CUI?
They are about producing drawings and should be broadly applicable to any CAD software and any release.

£0.02

It was an example...sheesh. So for a better example: the options/configuration settings need to be updated as things are changed and added (e.g. Templates, ToolPalettes, etc).

That a better one?

Although it also depends how indepth your standards are. Granted, maybe the CUI was a bad example, but some standards could encapsulate more than others'.