Note 9 Dimensions

[Luciana]

Theinteresting thing was that when I put them there, they disappeared on the drawing. To make sure I wasn't going nuts, I cut them out of the notes and the reappeared. I when back and forth several times to make sure I wasn't seeing things.

Creo will only allow any dimension to be displayed one time in a drawing (all sheets). You can either create a second dimension (drawing dim or reference dim) or you can create a parameter in the model set to the value of this dimension. Parameters can be displayed as many times as you want.

We use this to make a table of important dimensions with one column showing what the dimension should be (just as ordinary text) and the column beside it showing a direct reference to the dimension itself. Looking at the two columns you can see if they match - if they don't there is a problem somewhere.

My whole office is drawing dimensions and notes in design layer and when they get Viewported at different scales onto sheet layers the witness lines are at many different sizes. It is also hard to standardise the font size as well.

A good general rule for dims and notes is this: If the dims / notes show up on more than one sheet, then they belong in a design layer (and may require a class to control their visibility). If they show up on only one sheet (as in e.g. a detail view), then they belong in the Viewport annotations, which are instance-specific to the viewport.

If you need to communicate a dimension, then it should be communicated in the right place. If it's a setting-out dimension then it should be on the GAs or on a dedicated setting-out drawing. If it's a detail dimension it should be on the relevant detail drawing.

My approach of almost never having them on a design layer seems to run contrary to various VW tutorials though. I don't know if that's because my dimensioning philosophy is not a widespread one, or if it's because the designers of VW don't understand enough about how architectural drawings are put together in real life practice.

I'd add that sometimes I will draw dimensions temporarily in the design layer as a design aid for myself. Once I get to a certain point, I will cut/paste those dimensions into the annotation of the proper viewport.

ThreeDot, that is true, if you want to dimension in an isometric view. You will need to use planar graphics and dimension on the cardinal planes. But anything projected onto the sheet plane can be dimensioned, of course, 2D or 3D.

Yes, but isometric dimensions have to be managed on the design layer. Which means users still have to manage the classes, views, scale, and other clutter that goes along with design layer annotations. Similarly, dimensions are not associative in the annotation layer, elevation markers must remain on the design layer, etc. I would love simplify my workflow and move all annotations to viewports, but the current toolset doesn't allow for that.

It i nice to have all the dimensions in the viewport annotation space however I find as I'm dimensioning a floor layout that I often have to tweak the layout slightly. If I was dimensioning in the annotation space I would have to flick back and forth between design layer and the annotation layer repeatedly. For this reason I place my main layout dimensions on a class in the design layer. That class is only visible in the layout plans.

Also - inevitably there are revisions and walls can move. If the dimensions are right there with the walls (rather than in an annotations space) then it is much less likely that updating of the dimensions will with the wall changes will not get overlooked (especially if the are associated with the walls).

The concept of making changes and not keeping track of all the viewports that are affected is like cooking dinner and leaving the pots and pans for someone else to clean up after you. The technique of drawing, doing annotaion and page layout in the design space is the old school technique that was required prior to the introduction of sheets and viewports into drawing applications. the old school method often had the technician redrawing information multiple times; once for each level of detail required. Building plans often did not jive with room plans which did not jive with envelope details because when ever one was changed the others would not get updated "for efficiency and speed reasons". Moving annotation and dimensioning to the viewport annotation results in fewer instances of unreadable blobs of text that were not intended for 1:100 drawings and cut-off witness lines not intended for the detail views and giant sized grid bubbles, etc. all related to differences in scale between the design space and the layout sheet or viewport's scale.

When developing a drawing in the design environment the notes and references I place there are not usually intended for the construction drawings. They are site measures, design constraints, source references (CCNs SIs details, email instructions etc.) These annotations are grouped into their own classes and are rarely turned on in the viewports.

If you are using viewports and switching things around on the fly you are still going to need to go through all the relevant viewports and realign them, so there really is no excuse for forgetting to realign the annotation and dimensions too when you move the crop.

There is no one true way of doing these things but some methods just make it more difficult for the junior drafters to keep your drawings error free after you adjust them. After all that is what office standards are really about.

Yes - an implementation of a global dimensioning philosophy and workflow so that it is effective, efficient and elegant seems a long way off - but we have hints of the existing functionality, tools and commands that could be bundled, tumbled, expanded and refashioned to deliver a worthy 21st century solution.

Wow. Some really insightful responses to what really is not a subject matter to take lightly. We dimension and annotate everyday so we really need to get a system that works efficiently with our individual workflows. Think the most important thing from the replies i gathered is how to create a dimensioning system which is mostly likely to reduce errors. That probably is the crux. Thanks all!

In addition to dimensioning, I think you'll find with the introduction of the Data Tag tool that TAGS, wall tags, room names, door tags, window tags, etc, etc. should be placed in the Annotation space of the viewport.

A bundle of 1,000 Bank of Japan notes currently issued is about ten centimeters thick (about 0.1 millimeter thick per note) and weighs about one kilogram (about one gram per note). The sizes, thickness and weight of banknotes do not differ according to denomination but may vary slightly depending on conditions such as humidity.

I used to use Pro-e in a former life and was able to insert driven dimensions from the model sketch into my dimension notes in the drawing; l am referring specifically to a hole array pcd note in this case. If l know the dxx value for the driven dimension from the model sketch why can l not just insert it into the hole note (referring to the underlined italic below ) al Pro-e style? I tried doing it below but alas no joy: can anyone advise?

So what then should be the next port of call: a request for hole PCD information/parameters to be added to the Hole and Thread dimension creation Feature Note so we don't need to add it by other means as Cadmanto explained earlier?

Thanks for the suggestion Cadmanto but as you can see from the dimensions above the 46.00 PCD, the hole and countersink sizes already reflect the "xxx,0" visual as the dimensioning parameters have already been set to that representation.

Once the appropriate parameter has been selected, edit the number of decimal places to display (if necessary) and select the Add Parameter tool icon to place the parameter into the text field ."

A green seal to the right of the portrait represents the U.S. Department of the Treasury. The design of the seal was changed to incorporate an English inscription and appears on all Federal Reserve notes of the 1969 series year or later.

By 1862, the Demand Notes incorporate fine-line engraving, intricate geometric lathe work patterns, a U.S. Department of the Treasury seal, and engraved signatures to aid in counterfeit deterrence. To this day, U.S. currency continues to add features to deter counterfeiting.

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing begins engraving and printing the faces and seals of U.S. banknotes. Before this, U.S. banknotes were produced by private banknote companies and then sent to the Bureau of Engraving and Printing for sealing, trimming, and cutting.

Legislation mandates that all banknotes and other securities containing portraits include the name of the individual below the portrait. This is why you see names below the portraits on banknotes to this day.

Because United States notes no longer served any function not already adequately met by Federal Reserve notes, their issuance was discontinued and, beginning in 1971, no new United States notes were placed into circulation.

When working in a SOLIDWORKS and using the command INSERT > ANNOTATIONS > NOTE, you have the ability to add 1 or more dimensions to this note text. This dimension text will then appear as part of the note, and any changes you make to the original dimension will automatically update the note, as the 2 will be linked together.

3a8082e126