How did you learn Autocad?
Roland Tan
I just change to a new CAD software.
3 steps
1) take a course
2) practise
3) more practise
it really work!
Matt Holtz
I Went through a book called "Applying Autocad - A Step By Step Approach" I have
the Version 13 book around here somewhere, but right now I can only manage to find
the R12 book. The R12 book was written by Terry T. Wohlers and was published by
Glencoe (ISBN: 0-02-677130-6)
Hope this helps,
Matt
Bob Stahl
I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
low-rise building and site plans or 2) design roadways, earthwork &
subdivisions. (I am a civil engineer in San Francisco; do not plan to use it
full-time as a drafter or developer; do not have an employer who is willing to
pay for classes; & concerned about cost.) I am aware that there are a number of
colleges (UC Extension, SFSU, etc.) and private outfits that offer courses in
the SF area for up to $500 to $800 per course/level. I have a student copy of
Autocad.
- Any general recommendations?
- Can you learn at home using an "Autocad for Blithering Idiots" book?
- Is a certified program/instructor important? Should it cost $1000's?
- How many courses/levels are necessary to gain working expertise?
- What about learning the basics, then taking an advanced course?
- Is there an FAQ somewhere that covers this?
- Did your employer pay for classes, or did you? How much in total?
TIA
-------------------------
Bob Stahl
San Francisco, California
bobs...@sirius.com
Christoph Candido
"Bob Stahl" <bobs...@sirius.com> wrote:
>I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
>know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
>low-rise building and site plans or 2) design roadways, earthwork &
>subdivisions.
I think learning by doing is the best way.
And buy some good books ...Rusty Gesner, it's your chance :)
Chris
--
*********************************************
Christoph Candido
E-Mail: h854...@edv1.boku.ac.at
University of Agricultural Sciences
Vienna, Austria
*********************************************
Gary S. Colecchio
On 5 May 1997 15:34:48 GMT, "Bob Stahl" <bobs...@sirius.com> wrote:
>I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
>know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
>low-rise building and site plans or 2) design roadways, earthwork &
>subdivisions. (I am a civil engineer in San Francisco; do not plan to use it
>full-time as a drafter or developer; do not have an employer who is willing to
>pay for classes; & concerned about cost.) I am aware that there are a number of
>colleges (UC Extension, SFSU, etc.) and private outfits that offer courses in
>the SF area for up to $500 to $800 per course/level. I have a student copy of
>Autocad.
>
>- Any general recommendations?
>- Can you learn at home using an "Autocad for Blithering Idiots" book?
>- Is a certified program/instructor important? Should it cost $1000's?
>- How many courses/levels are necessary to gain working expertise?
>- What about learning the basics, then taking an advanced course?
>- Is there an FAQ somewhere that covers this?
>- Did your employer pay for classes, or did you? How much in total?
>
>TIA
>-------------------------
>Bob Stahl
>San Francisco, California
>bobs...@sirius.com
>
Read the magazines. Buy the program. Do the tutorials. Push the
buttons. Read more magazines.
Gary Colecchio
Design Engineer
City of Deerfield Beach , Florida
Darren J. Young
[This followup was posted to comp.cad.autocad and a copy was sent to the
cited author.]
In article <01bc5969$76066520$0eec...@bobstahl.sirius.com>,
bobs...@sirius.com says...
> I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
> know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
> low-rise building and site plans or 2) design roadways, earthwork &
> subdivisions. (I am a civil engineer in San Francisco; do not plan to use it
> full-time as a drafter or developer; do not have an employer who is willing to
> pay for classes; & concerned about cost.) I am aware that there are a number of
> colleges (UC Extension, SFSU, etc.) and private outfits that offer courses in
> the SF area for up to $500 to $800 per course/level. I have a student copy of
> Autocad.
Bob,
If you have a good computer aptitude then you would most certainly be
able to learn on your own with any good third part book. Rusty Gresner
who posts here has authored many good AutoCAD books (I didn't realize
until yesterday when I had to look something up but I even have a few).
Another recommendation is any "Mastering AutoCAD" series by George Omura.
If you're light on the computer skills, I'd suggest a local community
college. Also, check for local AutoCAD users groups in the area. When
we had one in our area it was what got me into the nitty gritty of
AutoCAD some years ago.
You shouldn't have a problem at all. Most of the learning one needs to
do you already have if your an engineer. (the discipline specific
things). After all, AutoCAD is just and electronic pencil.
Either way, make sure you check out your local user group. It's your
best source for free information as well as recommendations for other
sources local to you.
Sincerely,
--
Y-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Darren J. Young | Minnesota CADWorks, Inc. |
| dyo...@mcwi.com | P.O. Box 7293 |
| 76341...@compuserve.com | St. Cloud, Minnesota 56302-7293 |
| http://www.mcwi.com | Phone: 1-320-654-9053 |
| CAD/CAM/CNC - Drafting Design Customization Training Programming |
0,0-----------------------------------------------------------------X
Email addresses not to be sold or used for unsolicited advertisements
Brian Allardice
In article <01bc5969$76066520$0eec...@bobstahl.sirius.com>, "Bob Stahl" <bobs...@sirius.com> says:
>
>
>I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
>know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
>low-rise building and site plans or 2) design roadways, earthwork &
>subdivisions. (I am a civil engineer in San Francisco; do not plan to use it
>full-time as a drafter or developer; do not have an employer who is willing to
>pay for classes; & concerned about cost.) I am aware that there are a number of
>colleges (UC Extension, SFSU, etc.) and private outfits that offer courses in
>the SF area for up to $500 to $800 per course/level. I have a student copy of
>Autocad.
>
>- Any general recommendations?
Before you start, know how to draft low rise building and site plans or
design roadways & erathworks &c. That is then real trick, and the computer
cannot do it (yet?)
>- Can you learn at home using an "Autocad for Blithering Idiots" book?
Yes. How tricky is it to know that to draw a circle you press the circle
button...
>- Is a certified program/instructor important? Should it cost $1000's?
No, but a friend with slightly more experience is always handy, and
ABSOLUTELY NOT, it is a rip-off...
>- How many courses/levels are necessary to gain working expertise?
None, working experience cannot be gained this way. Just sit down at home
and draw your actual work, not stupid exercises....
>- What about learning the basics, then taking an advanced course?
Course, schmorse. Just do your work and read the book....
>- Did your employer pay for classes, or did you? How much in total?
At one time in the distance past I actually arranged a course for about
20 of our staff, but our real paedagogical method was to sit the chap
in front of the computer, toss a book in his general direction, and tell
him to finish the drawing by friday or we shoot him. Believe me, if
(and only if) you know how to draw, CAD is no-brainer, if you don't all
the computers in the world won't help you...
Cheers,
dba
Chad Berreau
John et al,
I am curious, If you would actually recommend autocad over others and
why?
But more importantly. Could someone out there legitimately explain why
it is that we (as individuals and a profession/society) are allowing one
application to dictate how we work, think and design.
Heck before computers there existed many forms of document creation.
albeit using some type of stick on paper mounted on some kind of board
was the most common. to better aid accuracy and legibility templates and
straight edges were often employed in what was termed drafting.
Depending upon prefrences, techniques, experience, and economics. There
seemed to be a multitude of ways to do things and non was collectively
forced upon the individual or profession in the manner as with one
application today.
To clarify one thing, I am an avid user of a cad application. I no
longer see the value, nor the desire to draft on boards again.
With this stated. I am concerned with the general notion that If I work
in an Architecture Firm. and that firm does work on computers. that
therefore I must use Autocad. This type of sentiment really goes against
my belief of what and how we should work. A belief that is often tested.
A belief that is often needed to be reminded of. (Especially after
seeing thread of how much "house plans should cost" (the answer you get
what you pay for, there is a reason a less expensive item is often
referred to as cheap))
As stated earlier, I am an avid user one an application. No it wasn't
the first one I had used or had experience with. Yes, I did happen to
learn it due to employment. Yes, I will give future version of acad the
benefit of the doubt.
But I have found many other applications easier to use. Easier in that
it function in a manner akind to how think, and act. This is often a
point which is sorried missed by many when purchasing anything computer
related (which is sad, since it is the biggest function in the a program
which needs to be addressed and answered.)
I realize that I have to this point not stated the application I most
strongly prefer. It is MicroStation95. Why, I have found it to be most
flexible in how it performs many tasks. It rarely dictates to me how I
perform things. And when it does, it is often in a manner I would have
done it in. And while presently I am forced to endure the hell only
known to many as "windows"* (see below for two definitions of windows),
I am comforted to know that I could choose many other hardware/os
variants to my choosing and still operated microstation. If I had the
choice, it would be most certainly an Apple that would gleefully be apar
of my desktop.
with that I must depart.
cheers,
chad
how about them apples,
windows definition any version:
I find it ironic that the logo is a 4 pane window. This quickly leads me
to define the windows operating systems in the following manner. That is
based upon the view of what its graphic symbolizes.
The fact it use multi panes of glass. could infer to just how much of a
pain it really is.
The fact that the four panes are seperated by rather thick mullions (as
wide as the frame) could represent how it imprisons the soul of those
forced to endure it.
The fact that it is a window, could reflect how those seating imprisoned
before wish they could have a window nearby. A window perhaps to offer a
chance to view a nice colorful Apple tree.
as state before, I must really depart.
cheerio,
chad
John William Rich wrote:
>
> Bob Stahl wrote:
> >
> > I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
> > know how other professionals have gained the expertise.....
>
> I learnt Autocad fairly quickly and have taught a couple of people how
> to get started on it.
> Before Autocad I was familiar with MacDraw and MacDraft and was highly
> computer literate, from the user sense, rather than the technician
> sense.
> I have since also used VersaCad, Microstation and Sonata.
> You must by now appreciate that computer manuals are written in Martian
> for the benefit of computer nerds. Perhaps there is a college or school
> out there which teaches Manualspeak.
> My method;
>>>>>cut<<<<<<
--
Chad Berreau
Timothy Boyd
On 5 May 1997 15:34:48 GMT, "Bob Stahl" <bobs...@sirius.com> wrote:
>
>I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
>know how other professionals have gained the expertise to,
I took a course at the local community college..$160 or so...and then
force yourself to use it...even if not using it is easier..
Timothy Boyd
Suburban Philadelphia
"Dreams are the answers to questions your mind
hasn't figured out how to ask." Fox Mulder
John William Rich
Bob Stahl wrote:
>
> I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
> know how other professionals have gained the expertise.....
I learnt Autocad fairly quickly and have taught a couple of people how
to get started on it.
Before Autocad I was familiar with MacDraw and MacDraft and was highly
computer literate, from the user sense, rather than the technician
sense.
I have since also used VersaCad, Microstation and Sonata.
You must by now appreciate that computer manuals are written in Martian
for the benefit of computer nerds. Perhaps there is a college or school
out there which teaches Manualspeak.
My method;
1. Get used to the Menu Commands, esp. Limits, Zoom, View(Preset),
Layers, O'Snap, Assist (ID Point, Distance) - the ones that help you get
around the drawing.
2. Using Polyline(2D) draw a shape using cartesian points(x,y) when
prompted.
3. Draw a 3D polyline as a vertical line, entered as x,y,z points.
4. Use View(Preset) and choose a point to view your two objects. Use
Zoom(window/dynamic) to get close to the drawing.
5. Draw 3D - Tabulated surface. Pick the shape, pick the line - look
what's happened.
6. Now play but stay with 3D and draw some things. Get used to the UCS,
3D Mirror, 3D Rotate etc. Get used to points defined as relative to
another point with the use of @. 7. Learn to plan your layers, name,
color, linetype etc.
8. When you feel comfortable, draw something in 2D, multi-layered.
Because of the 3D experienced 2D seems really easy - your progress goes
ahead in quantum leaps.
Hope this helps.
Regards
John
John William Rich
Hi Chad,
> I am curious, If you would actually recommend autocad over others and
> why?
No, I wouldn't.Since R11 ACAD has been better, and the Autodesk guys
will probably dislike my view, but like all industry standards, it is
not as good as other programmes. I prefer Microstation and love Sonata,
a Unix based program on Silicon Graphics.
Lotus 123, Word Perfect, Acad have all been industry standards. Like
DOS. People go through so much pain learning these programmes that they
never again want to learn a new programme - and become closed off to
other better programmes e.g. Excel, MS Word for Windows, Microstation,
etc.
This is more true of 5years ago than now - there has been much
improvement.
People who had their computer introduction on Mac have a diffrent
attitude, they are more willing to try something new - this is because
of the user friendly interface (see even I know a bit of Martian) and
the ease with which they got started.
But for my need to converse in the industry standard, I would be using a
Mac.
It seems you and I share similar views on this.
> But more importantly. Could someone out there legitimately explain why
> it is that we (as individuals and a profession/society) are allowing one
> application to dictate how we work, think and design.
The reason is about the pain of the older people in the profession/s
whose intro to computing was a Manualspeak nightmare - they are in
control and are closed off to other programmes. Rational and objective
views, such as I can do more work, I can work faster, it is easier, are
ignored along side the knee jerk "it's the industry standard" response.
> Yes, I will give future version of acad the
> benefit of the doubt.
As well you should, because the improvement is happening. Autocad R12
for Windows is great for 3D work compared with R9 which is where I
started. I haven't used R13 yet.
Regards
John Rich
geodes...@xtra.co.nz
Dennis Shinn
Hi "Bob Stahl" <bobs...@sirius.com>!
~I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like
to
~know how other professionals have gained the expertise .....
Like most of the rest of the people who have replied here, I learned on my
own. Spent many evenings just 'playing' with it until it got to the point
that I knew the commands well enough that I didn't have to think about what
to type, what button to push or what menu option to pull down. In other
words the program becomes like second nature - much the same as touch
typing; you don't think about where the keys are, you just type away.
But I would hasten to add that merely transfering your drafting skills to
an electronic medium is wasting a great deal of what CAD, AnyCAD, has to
offer. Try to learn to think of it as preparing a database of information
that you can leverage in as many ways as possible. Move from the flat plane
of the paper to the virtual world you can construct within your machines
'mind'.
Should it cost $1000? Assuming you get your instructions in a well equiped
cmputer 'lab' with decent hardware and the software is current, consider
the cost of all this along with a decent salary for the instructor and
something left over as a profit incentive for the folks that put the
program together. All that under the assumption that the instructor knows
her stuff and you actually learn something.
One of the advantages of taking a series of classes that are taught by a
group of instructors is that you'll get a better perspective of what the
software offers. I know in my own case, being self taught, that I've
developed some very innefficient habits and probably don't utilize the most
appropriate commands or processes for a given task.
Dennis Shinn
Seattle AutoCAD User Group
CAD Systems manager/GLY Construction
Steve Whittet
In article <336E79...@wcla.com>, cha...@wcla.com says...
>
>John et al,
>
>I am curious, If you would actually recommend autocad over others and
>why?
>
>it is that we (as individuals and a profession/society) are allowing one
>application to dictate how we work, think and design.
I go back to when plastic leads were a big inovation. In 1982 I
began with AutoCad R 1.9 on an IBM AT with a green screen.
You could have a coffe break while the screen regenerated and
go out to lunch while the machine plotted. When you got back
you would find as often as not the pens had run out of ink
halfway through the plot:)
The way you learn AutoCad is the way you learn to draw. Experience
is just having already made all *those mistakes* before.
Over the years I have worked with Wang AE Cad, Generic Cad, Skok
Arview, GKS with Fortran, Mathcad, McDraw, Auto Cad on the Mac,
Datacad, Intergraph on VAX/VMS, Intergraph on a Microstation,
Intergraph on a Mac, Autocad for DOS and Windows and Windows NT.
I run R13 for windows at home and we now have R14 in Beta. I
like Autocad because it is an industry standard with which
everyone is familiar and I don't have to spend a lot of time
messing with the reference level symbology..
Recently I tried looking around to see if I could hire a good
CAD draftsman cheap. I interviewed a bunch of kids just graduating
from The Boston Architectural Center, Wentworth, Northeastern,
harvard and MIT. Their drafting and CAD skills were attrocious
but they were willing to work for between $8 and $11 an hour
where a real draftsman runs between $18 and $33 an hour.
The question then became how long it would take to teach a
complete novice how to use Autocad.
I picked my reasonably intelligent 21 year old daughter as a
guinea pig. She had no prior drafting, construction, or
architectural experience to speak of, other than what she
might have picked up by osmosis from the enviornment
she grew up in.
She did already know how to turn on a computer and open
an application.
First I explained about paper space and model space
and how to make viewports. I showed her how to make
a block with attributes, set up a title sheet, work with
a dialog box, put in text and dimensions, ddmodify, and pedit.
I showed her how to pan and zoom, draw a line, offset a line,
make a rectangle, stretch with a window and grips, make a circle,
trim and extend a line, fillet, copy, mirror, rotate, edit her layers,
As I was showing her these things we did a little project. I
told her the standard dimensions for doors, and corridors,
explained how window spacing related to the spacing of
partitions, showed her how to lay out a typical office
with desk, chairs, files and counters, It took her two
days to complete a small tenant fit out with dimensions
and text. At this point she probably had used about 1 %
of the available AutoCad commands.
A competent $18/hr CAD draftsman might have done it in half
as long and I would expect to see some difference in things
like line weights,pens, hatching, layering, legends and keys.
>
>Heck before computers there existed many forms of document creation.
>albeit using some type of stick on paper mounted on some kind of board
>was the most common. to better aid accuracy and legibility templates and
>straight edges were often employed in what was termed drafting.
Why stop there? When I was first apprenticed to Wilbur Burnham
he began with a watercolor which he then blew up (zoomed extents)
to a full scale "cartoon" executed in charcoal using a grid.
From there a pattern was copied onto brown paper using carbon paper.
Remember carbon paper? It could do the job of an E size copier.
Joe Zalinger the painter still mixed his own paints and used a
sugar glaze to get crackle. When we etched with hydroflouric acid
it turned our beards white. Most of the tools we used to measure
with (ruler, rod, square, plumbob, level, merkhet) are represented
in Egyptian Hieroglyphics. Most of the tools we used to paint
and gild and glaze and carve would have been familiar to a scribe.
>
>Depending upon prefrences, techniques, experience, and economics. There
>seemed to be a multitude of ways to do things and non was collectively
>forced upon the individual or profession in the manner as with one
>application today.
When I started drafting you could not only tell what school
somebody had gone to by their lettering, you could tell who
they had worked for and how long. People spent years learning
how to sharpen a pencil and practicing how to hold it
when they drew a line
>
>To clarify one thing, I am an avid user of a cad application. I no
>longer see the value, nor the desire to draft on boards again.
I still burn a lot of trace, and what the heck, sometimes you
run into a job where somebody wants to make minor revisions
to an existing set on mylar.
>
>With this stated. I am concerned with the general notion that If I work
>in an Architecture Firm. and that firm does work on computers. that
>therefore I must use Autocad.
You can use whatever you want. Right now Architron, Datacad, GDS,
are hot in some firms, (for some applications). Intergraph is still
around. A while back Aris, and McDraft made some converts. Sun is
still out there. Everything is AutoCad DXF compatiple, so what?
> This type of sentiment really goes against
>my belief of what and how we should work. A belief that is often tested.
>A belief that is often needed to be reminded of. (Especially after
>seeing thread of how much "house plans should cost" (the answer you get
>what you pay for, there is a reason a less expensive item is often
>referred to as cheap))
To be honest with you, the role of architects is changing. A builder
may do a better job with house plans, cheaper and faster than an
architect, chiefly because of what he is willing to leave out.
The "I designed it on the back of an envelope" approach works
for some people. When the contractor says "I'm good at making
decisions, if I happen to make the right one so much the better,
why should I wait around for you to make drawings?" or " I can
build it for less than it costs you to draw it" What do you say?
Where an architect is useful is on large complex projects where
his role is more administrator than designer. His design team
includes specialists; engineers, interiors people, CAD people, etc;
that he gets to bring to meetings where he can sit them down with
the contractors requests for information and the owners reguest
for budgets and schedules and listen to them all talk.
>
>As stated earlier, I am an avid user one an application. No it wasn't
>the first one I had used or had experience with. Yes, I did happen to
>learn it due to employment. Yes, I will give future version of acad the
>benefit of the doubt.
>
>But I have found many other applications easier to use. Easier in that
>it function in a manner akind to how think, and act. This is often a
>point which is sorried missed by many when purchasing anything computer
>related (which is sad, since it is the biggest function in the a program
>which needs to be addressed and answered.)
>
>I realize that I have to this point not stated the application I most
>strongly prefer. It is MicroStation95. Why, I have found it to be most
>flexible in how it performs many tasks. It rarely dictates to me how I
>perform things. And when it does, it is often in a manner I would have
>done it in. And while presently I am forced to endure the hell only
>known to many as "windows"* (see below for two definitions of windows),
>I am comforted to know that I could choose many other hardware/os
>variants to my choosing and still operated microstation. If I had the
>choice, it would be most certainly an Apple that would gleefully be apar
>of my desktop.
What you know is what you do...
>
>with that I must depart.
>
>cheers,
>chad
>...snip...
>John William Rich wrote:
>>
>> Bob Stahl wrote:
>> >
steve
Rio Benson
On Mon, 05 May 1997 19:19:28 -0500, Chad Berreau <cha...@wcla.com>
wrote:
>John et al,
>
>I am curious, If you would actually recommend autocad over others and
>why?
>
>But more importantly. Could someone out there legitimately explain why
>it is that we (as individuals and a profession/society) are allowing one
>application to dictate how we work, think and design.
>
(snip)
Chad:
The reason is the ability to communicate. And, let's face it, that is
what we do, communicate. AutoCAD was the first on the block with a
usable, PC based, computer aided drafting program. Other applications
came along that were an improvement over AutoCAD, but AutoCAD had
already established a large customer base. Since the users of AutoCAD
were, for the most part, the people we had to communicate with, we
followed suit and purchased AutoCAD. Not because it was the best, but
because it was the standard with the people we had to communicate
with. It's like any other standard; it's a communication thing, not
necessarily a user thing.
However, the technology for translation between CAE applications is
improving rapidly, and will make AutoCAD's user base a moot point.
Once the technology gets there, we will choose whatever CAD program
best suits our needs; i.e., there will be no standard, and it will
become a user thing.
Rio
Rio Benson
Mechanical Development Engineer
CAD/CAE/Modeling Consultant
rio...@worldnet.att.net
http://home.att.net/~RIO-NC (under development)
John Cabrall
Let's not forget that AutoDesk has done the CAD community a big favor by
helping to establish a standard for translation between CAE applications
(DXF).
It may have it's faults, but when it was first introduced, the
alternative (IGES) was frighting!
There has to be an underlying standard in order for applications to
translate.
> (snip)
>
> Chad:
Robert W. Glatzl
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I agree absolutely !!!
- --
ROBERT W. GLATZL
- --------------------------------------------------------------
mailto:r...@sbox.tu-graz.ac.at
http://www.sbox.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rwg/
puplic key is available at my homepage and the most keyservers
fingerprint: 6F D3 F7 B6 A8 42 E6 25 89 45 EA 54 1C 20 49 6A
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: cp850
iQCVAwUBM29iVwtFPilkGJrpAQF+fQP/fLB28LK/2UMQUhQdABXgBQRIarWMxcd1
Fkc7W+nRG7jIrUu/qWlU+4q+wLg8wJ19Klv2ZqLapuqh/um94W8fCTWSqIMyKLjZ
0r2Yi1TqvsDUGf9lMbguJybdgNsFT8BQkTFe38LcE/OGKmTWerFTuliYI7MqUv/n
fghK4tObL9Y=
=393G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
ADH9000
John Cabrall wrote:
>
> Let's not forget that AutoDesk has done the CAD community a big favor by
> helping to establish a standard for translation between CAE applications
> (DXF).
> It may have it's faults, but when it was first introduced, the
> alternative (IGES) was frighting!
>
A big favor?
AutoDesk developed .DXF as a way to protect their native .DWG code. Why?
Greed, plain and simple. Why don't they give the code to other software
developers so we could all use .DWG foramt instead of fighting with
..DXF?
Allen
Brian Allardice
>When I started drafting you could not only tell what school
>somebody had gone to by their lettering, you could tell who
>they had worked for and how long.
On my very first job, lo! those many years ago, the senior draughtsman
took one look at my lettering and had me come in an hour early every day
for weeks until I had mastered the house style, or rather he despaired
of my ever doing so.... CAD really is a piece of cake compared to that...
Cheers,
dba
Patrick Hillier
Bob Stahl wrote:
> - Any general recommendations?
Autocad is the standard. Even if you dont like is's quirks I would
suggest you learn it over something else.
> - Can you learn at home using an "Autocad for Blithering Idiots" book?
for a book with task oriented projects that show you how to do something
real.
> - Is a certified program/instructor important? Should it cost $1000's?
would be over a book, assuming you know enough about computers to turn
it on and get around DOS/WINDOWS. If you dont know that much, you need
a course in that first.
> - How many courses/levels are necessary to gain working expertise?
program (not time spent listending in courses) are what will make you
better and faster.
I first started using Autocad in 1988 in a very poor course at school.
Most of my learning was by done by picking a project and figuring out
how to do it. That is the biggest key, in my opinion, pick a project
and do it.
Patrick Hillier
Jose Falcao de Melo
I too, agree that the most effective way to learn it is to do your work
in CAD, not exercices.
Jose Melo
Civil Engineer
Portugal
Erik H. Link
>Their drafting and CAD skills were attrocious
> but they were willing to work for between $8 and $11 an hour
> where a real draftsman runs between $18 and $33 an hour.
$18+ an hour???!!! hello! I think I'm being underpaid. I consider myself a
very good draftsman with 10 years experience, 5 using computers. Is
$15.40/hr. not enough? Is it time to start brushing up my resume?
--
Erik
Erik H. Link
> "Bob Stahl" <bobs...@sirius.com> wrote:
> >I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
> >know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
> >low-rise building and site plans or 2) design roadways, earthwork &
> >subdivisions.
Let your employer pay you to learn cad. I lied to get my first acad job 4
years ago. After they hired me I bought a book and I just "winged it" for
the first couple of weeks. Good thing their expectations were low.
Eventually they became very happy with my work.
--
Erik
Chris Parton
You will find that most of the commands that you need to run 2-d autocad
are located on your pointer. Fortunately, I have a 16 button pointer so
I have many at my commands. Before I started using this pointer, I had
to type all of my commands. We have an Autocad Shortcut List here in
the office that has 15 or 20 of the most frequently used commands. My
advice is to go throught the tutorial if you have access to them, and if
not, just sit down at a machine with a manual and try to produce a
drawing. Ask co-workers and friends for help. I had to do that quite a
bit the first few months I was learning. I have been working with ACAD
for over a year now, and still don't know as much as I should. It will
take time.
chris parton
William Gati
Christoph Candido wrote:
>
> "Bob Stahl" <bobs...@sirius.com> wrote:
> >I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
> >know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
> >low-rise building and site plans or 2) design roadways, earthwork &
> >subdivisions.
>
>
> And buy some good books ...Rusty Gesner, it's your chance :)
>
> Chris
> --
> *********************************************
> Christoph Candido
> E-Mail: h854...@edv1.boku.ac.at
> University of Agricultural Sciences
> Vienna, Austria
> *********************************************
Get Auto Cad for Dummies and a good friend that knows the ropes.
Auto Cad is not easy to learn, but is easy to use once you have learned
it...
Nora R. Klebow, AIA
Erik H. Link wrote:
>
> Let your employer pay you to learn cad. I lied to get my first acad job 4
> years ago. After they hired me I bought a book and I just "winged it" for
> the first couple of weeks. Good thing their expectations were low.
> Eventually they became very happy with my work.
>
Expectations are not low any more, and I'd be careful trying to sell a
skill you don't possess. Most new employees are monitored quite
closely, including their ability to adhere to firm standards and achieve
a decent productivity rate. Almost all firms have people who know CAD
well -- which was not the case 4 years ago.
Most community colleges offer AutoCAD at very affordable rates. Unless
you're a real whiz with manuals, I do advocate taking a course if this
is your first CAD experience. The typical lab portion of the course,
with a good teaching assistant or lab monitor, is worth every penny.
Most people dig holes they can't climb out of. Working on imaginary
projects (or better yet, real ones on a tight deadline) is essential to
putting the pieces together coherently. Once the beginner course is
under your belt, the manuals can work quite well.
Robert Callori has written several good guides to AutoCAD.
clinx
William Gati wrote:
> Get Auto Cad for Dummies and a good friend that knows the ropes.
>
> Auto Cad is not easy to learn, but is easy to use once you have learned
> it...
Autocad is getting easy and easier to use because of "Windows."
Ian A. White
Please send all replies to waiw...@zip.com.au
On Wed, 07 May 1997 08:16:38 -0700, mod...@earthlink.net (Erik H.
Link) wrote:
>
>>Their drafting and CAD skills were attrocious=20
>> but they were willing to work for between $8 and $11 an hour
>> where a real draftsman runs between $18 and $33 an hour.
>
>$18+ an hour???!!! hello! I think I'm being underpaid. I consider myself=
a
>very good draftsman with 10 years experience, 5 using computers. Is
>$15.40/hr. not enough? Is it time to start brushing up my resume?
You need to be careful when comparing the hourly rates of independent
contractors and those of salaried employees. For example a salaried
employee on a rate of $ 16.00 per hour for 40 hours per week compares
equally with an independent contractor on an hourly rate of $ 32.00
per hour for 40 hours per week.
=20
--
Please send all replies to waiw...@zip.com.au
Regards,
Ian A. White, CPEng
waiw...@zip.com.au
WAI Engineering
Sydney 2000
Australia
Junk e-mail will be returned, as is, to the sender or the sender's host =
system.
Maximillian Natzet
RIO...@worldnet.att.net writes:
>
> The reason is the ability to communicate. And, let's face it, that is
> what we do, communicate. AutoCAD was the first on the block with a
> However, the technology for translation between CAE applications is
> improving rapidly, and will make AutoCAD's user base a moot point.
> Once the technology gets there, we will choose whatever CAD program
> best suits our needs; i.e., there will be no standard, and it will
> become a user thing.
That really is the bottom line, it doesn't make much difference
which program you use for CAD, as long as it has the capability
to save files in an ACAD format. I have seen several packages
that cost a fraction of what the full blown ACAD package cost
that have that capability.
As for the original question of how to learn ACAD, I just
started using it and asking questions of knowledgable users
when I hit an impasse. However, my company set itself up with
AutoCAD for Windows, so everything that I needed was in a
pulldown menu somewhere and not too hard to find.
The commands that are executed by the pulldowns are displayed
in a text window at the bottom of the screen, after a while you
remember which are easier to type and which are easier to click.
--
Maximillian F Natzet, Combat Botanist
North American Combat Botany Institute
University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA
http://watt.seas.Virginia.EDU/~mfn8j/
Steve Whittet
In article <3376f7ec...@news.zip.com.au>, whit...@WAI.Engineeringð
says...
>
>Please send all replies to waiw...@zip.com.au
>
>On Wed, 07 May 1997 08:16:38 -0700, mod...@earthlink.net (Erik H.
>Link) wrote:
>
>>
>>> but they were willing to work for between $8 and $11 an hour
>>> where a real draftsman runs between $18 and $33 an hour.
>>
> a
>>very good draftsman with 10 years experience, 5 using computers. Is
>>$15.40/hr. not enough? Is it time to start brushing up my resume?
>
>You need to be careful when comparing the hourly rates of independent
>contractors and those of salaried employees. For example a salaried
>employee on a rate of $ 16.00 per hour for 40 hours per week compares
>equally with an independent contractor on an hourly rate of $ 32.00
>per hour for 40 hours per week.
On the East Coast there are a number of firms which supply
CAD draftsmen, hired as the supplying firms employees on an
as needed basis to architectural firms. The draftsmen get a
rate usually somewhere between $18 and $26 dollars an hour
depending on their experience with no benefits or taxes
taken out (1099 style). The supplying firm charges about
a 25 to 30 % markup (They quote $33/hr but will negotiate)
They know the standard billing rate is $75/hr to $100/hr
which with a standard multiplier of 2.5 makes costs of
from $30/hr to $40/hr reasonable.
At that rate you are supposed someone who is supposed to be
reasonably competent, but that is not always the case. If you
don't like them you have no obligation to keep them, you can
send them back and try another one.
The "on an as needed basis" part is attractive to employers who
can staff by project and get rid of overhead when things are slow
without any of the usual severance hassles.
It's attractive to employees because the money looks good, in the
short term anyway, you get to work for a lot of big name firms
(with the hottest hardware and software around) on good projects.
On the other hand it can be a fairly intense workout to
punch out jobs at that kind of a pace.
My personal opinion is that this is really not a good deal,
but that may be just because I happen to think money is not
the best reason for doing or not doing anything.
If you spend a good chunk of your life in the workplace, it
ought to be a place where you feel like you belong, and where
you would want to do what you are doing even if you didn't
get paid for it.
Hospitals pay for a big piece of this action. The standard
rate they expect to pay for architectural projects in the
$1M to $3M range is about 10%. Larger projects may go down
to 2%. Most really large projects get broken down into
sizes that contractors and subs can handle which is
in that range.
Lets say it takes five CAD draftsman 12 wks to do a $3M project
from Skematic design through WD's. You pay $6,600/wk or $79,200.
Your overhead includes rent, utilities, the CAD system, Repro
and expenses, say $24,000. Your fee is $300,000 plus expenses
and consultants.
By the way, if you really want to save on the overhead, try
letting your employees telecommute with laptops.
>Regards,
>
>Ian A. White, CPEng
>
steve
Fred Talmadge
I was in a similar boat when my employer didn't pay for training. So I stayed
late and spent about a week learing how to draw lines and circles. After
about a month we had a big project so they brought in a real cad drafter. He
set up our layering, drawing archive and plotting techniques. That helped out
a LOT.
I tought myself how to draw lines and some customizing but getting organized
with cad probably would never have happened without outside help.
Good Luck
Fred Talmadge
Paco Pumps
In article <01bc5969$76066520$0eec...@bobstahl.sirius.com>, "Bob Stahl"
<bobs...@sirius.com> wrote:
>I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
>know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
>low-rise building and site plans or 2) design roadways, earthwork &
>subdivisions. (I am a civil engineer in San Francisco; do not plan to use it
>full-time as a drafter or developer; do not have an employer who is willing to
>pay for classes; & concerned about cost.) I am aware that there are a number of
>colleges (UC Extension, SFSU, etc.) and private outfits that offer courses in
>the SF area for up to $500 to $800 per course/level. I have a student copy of
>Autocad.
>
>- Any general recommendations?
>- Can you learn at home using an "Autocad for Blithering Idiots" book?
>- Is a certified program/instructor important? Should it cost $1000's?
>- How many courses/levels are necessary to gain working expertise?
>- What about learning the basics, then taking an advanced course?
>- Is there an FAQ somewhere that covers this?
>- Did your employer pay for classes, or did you? How much in total?
>
>TIA
>-------------------------
>Bob Stahl
>San Francisco, California
>bobs...@sirius.com
>
Fred Talmadge
Paco Pumps Engineering
www.Paco-Pumps.com
email: Fred Talmadge <flow...@fbtc.net>
Johnnie
I guess I'm the stupid one. I had spent 22 years as an over the road
truck driver and owner. When I hurt my back I needed to find a new
career which I enjoyed as much as driving the big rigs around the
country. I remembered the mechanical drawing classes I took in
Highschool and thought...why not try that?
I looked around and finally enrolled in a class at one of those
technical training centers which offered a state recognized AS Degree.
I had to learn it all from the ground up! The school I went to spent
a year teaching basic and not so basic
drafting.....pencils...pens....bond....velum...mylar....You know? All
this was by hand at the boards. Then for 6 months we learned Autocad
rel10. I got my first job before finishing the school and really
started to learn the system. School taught me (who knew nothing) the
basic skills I needed to enter the field later in life. The work I've
done since graduation has really taught me AutoCAD......Its a lot more
than just lines on paper.....It is an entire world all to itself which
you just have to be brave enough to explore!
Advanced Software Designs
> I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
> know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
> low-rise building and site plans
Bob,
I teach a class in AutoCAD at the University of New Mexico. One of
the best
self-teaching aids I have seen for AutoCAD is "AutoCAD Revision 13 for
Windows"
by Shana Lockhart - Addison-Wesley publisher. The book takes you
through 17 or
so tutorial lessons. It is not civil engineering specific but it will
give you
a very nice background in AutoCAD.
You will, of course, need access to AutoCAD. You cannot learn the
program
through reading alone. If you are a student, you can purchase a student
version
of AutoCAD Rev 13 from Addison-Wesley for about $350.00. This student
version seems to be a complete version of the program. About the only
difference
that I have noticed is that it writes "For Educational Use Only" on the
plots that
it creates.
After you have finished with the Lockhart book and are feeling
comfortable with
AutoCAD, you might want to download our Roadway Design software from the
web site
listed below. It runs outside of AutoCAD but exports drawings to
AutoCAD. The
downloadable package contains a tutorial that will get you up and
running on the
software. The free trial version of the software will run for 60 days.
--
Robert Greenlee, P.E. - (a...@Rt66.com)
President, Advanced Software Designs
Albuquerque, NM
http://www.rt66.com/~asd
JAS
> RIO...@worldnet.att.net writes:(snip)
> As for the original question of how to learn ACAD, I just
> started using it and asking questions of knowledgable users
> when I hit an impasse. However, my company set itself up with
> AutoCAD for Windows, so everything that I needed was in a
> pulldown menu somewhere and not too hard to find.
Not to Pick Nits... well, OK... I'm picking nits! ACAD pull downs are
part of all acad releases, WIN or DOS. Unless they removed that "bug"
from R14! ;]
I think the bottom line is to become as proficient as possible with the
mechanics of ACAD, so that you can design without thinking "OK, how do I
make a line". You should think of it as your pencil, straight edge,
calculator, data base, modeling clay, etc.
--
Jas Growney - I.S. Analyst
Butte County Public Works
Remove "_NO SPAM_" to return mail
or click here mailto:j...@shocking.com
JAS
Steve Whittet wrote:
>
> In article <3376f7ec...@news.zip.com.au>, whit...@WAI.Engineeringð
> says...
> >
> >Please send all replies to waiw...@zip.com.au
> >
> >On Wed, 07 May 1997 08:16:38 -0700, mod...@earthlink.net (Erik H.
> >Link) wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>> but they were willing to work for between $8 and $11 an hour
> >>> where a real draftsman runs between $18 and $33 an hour.
> >>
a seasoned draftsman in CA - around $20 / hr
a seasoned DESIGNER - the sky's the limit.
David Clark
>> "Bob Stahl" <bobs...@sirius.com> wrote:
>> >I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
>> >know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
>> >subdivisions.
>>
I started from scratch with my first PC and AutoCAD R11about 7 years
ago. I knew zip about PC's and computing. The first thing I did was
take a 1 week full time course in Acad, which used the Autodesk
recommended syllabus. I suppose it would be OK for some, but I came
away from the course very disappointed. I felt I would have done
better on my own with the manuals, had I sat at the PC for the same
time period, and could have enjoyed a holiday with the course fees.
What really got me going was starting a new project, and committing to
doing it with ACAD. Of course it would be too much to expect to learn
ACAD and your profession simultaneously, so doing it this way
presupposes that you already have a very clear idea of what your end
product should be. I just dove in the deep end,
I started taking first the Acad Manual and then later the
Customisation manual and the Autolisp Programmers reference as
bedtime reading, and read the whole thing cover to cover, regardless
of whether I understood it at all. The brain has the ability to tie it
all together, if you just let it be and have the confidence.
I had the advantage of being totally innocent, and therefore
completely uninhibited about where I set my targets. In less than
month I was building 3D models of a residential development design.
Fortunately there was no one to tell me I couldn't or shouldn't be
doing that. After all, this was why I had bought the package in the
first place.
Once I had that project in the bag, I had the confidence to tackle
anything. 7 months later I received two awards at the AutoDESK Africa
Expo, prexented to me by John Walker. One for Design and the use of
AutoCAD in Architecture, and the other a special award for the Best
Wishlist Suggestion in which I had sketched out the 3D viewing feature
that was implemented later in R12 as the DDVPOINT command.
All you need to do is to fire up the "joy of discovery" part of your
mind. I think what leads people to believe learning CAD is a difficult
process is the fact that it is really a very complex package with a
myriad possibilities. The trick is to stay focussed on getting the job
done, starting to produce one basic drawing, and then adding to it and
your skill incrementally, and never stopping. Accept that it will take
some time to reach your current level of productivity without CAD, but
that in time this ground will be regained, many times over. More
importantly than doing it faster, you will eventually be able to do it
DIFFERENT. New skills, new possibilities.
I first thought I would experience a learning curve that would
eventually come to a plateau, at which point I would have all the
necessary skills and procedures under control. I now realise it is a
learning cliff, and it grows in height faster than any single person
can climb. This should not be daunting, as one learns to survive on
the cliff face, just as climbers spend the night hanging in a sling
from a pin jambed into a crevice halfway up the Matterhorn. Don't drop
the tools. The view is great, anyway.
David Clark
South Africa
Dog Trot
In article <01bc5969$76066520$0eec...@bobstahl.sirius.com>, "Bob Stahl"
<bobs...@sirius.com> wrote:
> I want to learn Autocad for arch/engr/constr design, etc. and would like to
> know how other professionals have gained the expertise to, say, 1) draft
> low-rise building and site plans or 2) design roadways, earthwork &
> subdivisions. (I am a civil engineer in San Francisco; do not plan to use it
> full-time as a drafter or developer; do not have an employer who is willing to
> pay for classes; & concerned about cost.) I am aware that there are a
number of
> colleges (UC Extension, SFSU, etc.) and private outfits that offer courses in
> the SF area for up to $500 to $800 per course/level. I have a student copy of
> Autocad.
AutoCad is one of the biggest frauds (not a legal opinion) going today.
Just check out the responses to your post and it's pretty clear that an
entire industry is devoted to *teaching* AutoCAD. There are many other CAD
programs which do just as much and are far easier to learn to use--you DO
NOT NEED to spend big bucks on course materials, books, training videos,
etc. Most of the supporters of AutoCAD spent a *whole lot* of time and
effort into learning it. They can't say "Don't waste your time, because
that would be admitting that *their* effort was a waste. And because there
are so many sheep in the world, and no one wants to get "left behind",
businesses spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on software, hardware
(OK, you gotta have the hardware) and training. Why don't they adopt
software which has the "training" built into it? Because it's not AutoCAD!
AutoCAD is the standard, it's what *everyone* uses (baaaaah! baaaaaaah!).
So what if it sucks! Who cares? Just don't let the cat out of the bag,
and everyone can make money, from the trainee (once they've learned), to
the employer (who can now charge big bucks for "electronic documentation"
which is (was anyway) frequently worse than the hand drafted variety, to
the book publishers, to the instructors, to AutoDesk, which charges over 3
grand, and *then* you buy a bazillion more add ons and crap to run on top
of it! It's a freakin' pyramid scheme, a feeding frenzy, an incestuous
orgy of nonstop spending. Some people are waking up to this, others will
continue to flush money down the toilet.
> - Any general recommendations?
Cut your losses. You've only bought the student version, so you're not out
much......YET. Check out the field. Get other recommendations. Find out
what you can do with other software at various price points. Find out
which ones people have sat down with and begun being productive with, with
*no training* at all. Once you get hooked in to AutoCAD, you will be
shelling out a *lot* more money in the future.
> - Can you learn at home using an "Autocad for Blithering Idiots" book?
Sure. But why do you need to learn how to grind the valves on your car
when you can buy a car which will go for years with some simple
maintenence?
> - Is a certified program/instructor important? Should it cost $1000's?
A certified instuctor will tell you it's worth it.
> - How many courses/levels are necessary to gain working expertise?
There are *excellent* CAD programs which you can easily gain a working
expertise in a short period of time on your own. AutoCAD is *not* one of
them>
> - What about learning the basics, then taking an advanced course?
> - Is there an FAQ somewhere that covers this?
> - Did your employer pay for classes, or did you? How much in total?
Many employers have wasted *big bucks* training employees when they could
have used a *much less expensive* package. But most business owners are
sheep, and they'll throw away a lot of money just because everyone else
does. Do you want to?
Gordon Price
Dog Trot <Now...@nothere.net> wrote in article
<Nowhere-ya0240800...@news.loop.com>...
>
> AutoCad is one of the biggest frauds (not a legal opinion) going today.
> Just check out the responses to your post and it's pretty clear that an
> entire industry is devoted to *teaching* AutoCAD.
There is a whole industry devoted to teaching Architecture too, and as I
prepare to graduate from Architecture school, I think it is the fraud! I
got much more out of community college classes in Acad!
As for learning Acad, etc., I think a good JC is about the best bet to
start with. Good instructors, good prices, group learning (because everyone
has a better way to do something). You can learn the basics from a book,
but what you really learn is the commands, not how to use them. After you
have the basics, there is NO SUBSTITUTE for professional networking. Talk
to other users to see how they are doing it. Lots of people are still not
using Paperspace or Xrefs, because they can't figure it out from the books.
A few hours with someone who really puts it to use and you will believe you
can't live without it! This networking is hard to come by because so many
architects think helping the competition is helping the enemy. Architects
are the one group consistently missing from the "special interest group"
list of most Acad User Groups. As for Acad or not Acad, there are some very
good programs out there, and most are easier to learn (Microstation is the
exception). The thing to remember is that easy to learn is usually because
of limited function. Yes you can learn GooberCAD in 10 minutes, but you
find things it can't do in another 20. In the end, Autocad is only worth
the money if you are willing to learn a few new ways of doing things. If
you just want to draft on the computer, get something cheaper. Or better
yet, don't use a $3000 drafting board. I personally like to change the way
I work every so often.
Off the soapbox, I recommend DeAnza college for Cad classes (and others) if
you are in the San Jose area.
I hope you can find something valuable in all the opinion!
Gordon Price
albedoDesign
DogTrot
In article <01bc5f65$1a0c98a0$6f86b3cc@gordon>, "Gordon Price"
<gor...@albedodesign.com> wrote:
> There is a whole industry devoted to teaching Architecture too, and as I
> prepare to graduate from Architecture school, I think it is the fraud! I
> got much more out of community college classes in Acad!
Yes, the architectural *education* business is quite a scam too. The gulf
between what students learn and what they need to know in the profession
has possibly never been wider.
> Lots of people are still not
> using Paperspace or Xrefs, because they can't figure it out from the books.
Yep, this is part of my point.
> Architects
> are the one group consistently missing from the "special interest group"
> list of most Acad User Groups.
They are too busy to learn a complex drafting program. They need to be
able to design, deal with contracts, clients, specifiers, engineers, *not*
spin the propellor on their beanies.
> As for Acad or not Acad, there are some very
> good programs out there, and most are easier to learn (Microstation is the
> exception). The thing to remember is that easy to learn is usually because
> of limited function.
This is probably the single biggest myth of all, and it pervades a lot of
disciplines. Architectural theory is an excellent example of sometimes
painfully convoluted thinking and doublespeak--under the guise of advanced
thinking--which can generally be simplified into plain English. It is like
saying that a car which needs fixing every couple of days is "more
functional" than one which just gets you where you want to go. Do you
prfer DOS or Unix to Windows? Is Windows less functional, for what you
want to do?
>Yes you can learn GooberCAD in 10 minutes, but you
> find things it can't do in another 20.
GooberCAD? Yeah, there are some lame ones out there, too.
>In the end, Autocad is only worth
> the money if you are willing to learn a few new ways of doing things.
Good software is written to support what you need to do, and just works.
It isn't tortuous. Drafting with a pencil can be learned in about ten
minutes, and you can spend a lifetime getting good at it. Some software
works this way, or at least sets that model as its goal. AutoCAD doesn't
try.
James Adrian van Wyk
The one argument, for having autocad, in fact an arguement, for having
at least 3 versions, of it, is that owners, especially government
agencies (Federal, State, Local, Authorities, et. al.) demand it, and in
addition demand a particular version, of it, in their Requests for
Proposals. Without autocad architects, civil engineers, environmental
engineers, electrical and mechanical (buildings services & utilities)
engineers, etc. can't bid on /propose for projects. Most RFPs sopecify
drawings must be done in Autocad 11, Autocad 12, or Autocad 13; some
allow drawings to be done with Autocad LT or other program with drawing
files compatable, with their favored version, of Autocad, but most
require them to be done in the full version Autocad. This is being
complicated, by the new release, of Autocad 14. Autocad training and
retraining seems to be a major industry around here. Autocad is
expensive; the add-ons make it more expensive.
A similar, but less expensive, situation, exists, with specifications,
where each owner specifies, in each RFP, which outdated version, of
Wordperfect (usually), or Lotus or Microsoft Word, they want it in.
This seems also, to be true, of US Government Agencies, who are supposed
to want their specifications, in Spec-in-Tak (or however you spell it),
I don't remember.
Building owners want what they want.
javw
Swiloughby
If I were you. I would investigate this a bit further. I know of many
agencies that require and demand the same type of thing. But in this
case require microstation. check it out with the dot's and army corp's.
as for should this be the practice. the answer is no.
Chad,
Why shouldn't the agencies be able to specify the software they want used
on a project? They spend hundreds of thousands if not many millions a
year per agency of tax payer money. They should be able to get the
product they want. When a DOT has phase 1 of a project done by consultant
x using brand A cad software and brand Z road design software, then phase
2 is done by consultant y - brand B cad software and brand Q road design
software, is the tax payer getting the most for their money? Probably not
since they just payed twice to have everything done. So, why shouldn't
the agencies specify software and save tax payers money??
James Adrian van Wyk
Chad Berreau wrote:
>
> James Adrian van Wyk wrote:
> javw,
>
> If I were you. I would investigate this a bit further. I know of many
> agencies that require and demand the same type of thing. But in this
> case require microstation. check it out with the dot's and army corp's.
>
> as for should this be the practice. the answer is no.
>
> better to use. I just don't think the way acad dictates. a very suitable
> way to describe it.
>
> Furthermore, I am beginning to wish I existed in the days of the
> drafting board (and not acad virtual rendition of it). Back when it was
> my decision over which pencil I used. yah dah yah dah yah dah.
>
> The point is. That people who are making these decisions today. Don't
> know what they are doing to put it simply. They don't use the programs.
> They don't know the issues involved. All they really know is brand
> names. Its sad really. To think, you will be learning of the worlds
> events tonight from the same type of person on the tele.
>
> How would I recommend learning autocad.
> simply, don't.
>
> >
> > The one argument, for having autocad, in fact an arguement, for having
> > at least 3 versions, of it, is that owners, especially government
> > agencies (Federal, State, Local, Authorities, et. al.) demand it, and in
> > addition demand a particular version, of it, in their Requests for
> > Proposals. Without autocad architects, civil engineers, environmental
> > engineers, electrical and mechanical (buildings services & utilities)
> > engineers, etc. can't bid on /propose for projects. Most RFPs sopecify
> > drawings must be done in Autocad 11, Autocad 12, or Autocad 13; some
> > allow drawings to be done with Autocad LT or other program with drawing
> > files compatable, with their favored version, of Autocad, but most
> > require them to be done in the full version Autocad. This is being
> > complicated, by the new release, of Autocad 14. Autocad training and
> > retraining seems to be a major industry around here. Autocad is
> > expensive; the add-ons make it more expensive.
> >
> > A similar, but less expensive, situation, exists, with specifications,
> > where each owner specifies, in each RFP, which outdated version, of
> > Wordperfect (usually), or Lotus or Microsoft Word, they want it in.
> > This seems also, to be true, of US Government Agencies, who are supposed
> > to want their specifications, in Spec-in-Tak (or however you spell it),
> > I don't remember.
> >
> > Building owners want what they want.
> >
> > javw
>
>
> Chad Berreau
I agree with most, of what you said.
I see the Autocad re quirements in RFPs and summaries, of RFPs, in
Softshare all, of the time. I saw it, to a lesser extent, a few years
back, when I was an engineer, for the Army. I early retired, in Jan
95. Jan 93, I was RIFed, to an Environmental Project Engineer, from a
chief engineer position. I wasn't with the Corps, they did (mostly
contracting & residentr engineer svcs.) work, for us. I didnot put
CAD or drawing methods, on my engineers, or on consultant architects and
engineers. When I designed projects, I usually used neither CAD nor
drawing board. I usually used 8-1/2" X 11" phantom line paper & a
straight edge, and either glued them to drawing mylars, with glue stick,
or if possible used only *-1/2X11 drawings & stapled them, to the specs.
I did adopt Spec-in-Tak (sp.), for specs.
In my relatively new private practice, I use either phantom line paper,
or TURBOCAD, for 8-1/2"X11" drawings and a Drawing board, for larger.
I feel that I'm being forced, to get Autocad. I'll likely get Autocad
LT, I don't like the idea, of programs, that cost as much as a computer
(and if you get all the library, of add-ons, more than a computer).
javw
JRobbin645
$18+ an hour???!!!! I think I an under paid as a P.E. also!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
John Griffith Evans
On 15 May 97 James Adrian van Wyk <jimv...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
(snip)
>The one argument, for having autocad, in fact an arguement, for having at
>least 3 versions, of it, is that owners, especially government agencies
>(Federal, State, Local, Authorities, et. al.) demand it, and in addition
>demand a particular version, of it, in their Requests for Proposals.
>Without autocad architects, civil engineers, environmental engineers,
>electrical and mechanical (buildings services & utilities) engineers,
>etc. can't bid on /propose for projects. Most RFPs sopecify drawings
>must be done in Autocad 11, Autocad 12, or Autocad 13; some allow drawings
>to be done with Autocad LT or other program with drawing files compatable,
>with their favored version, of Autocad, but most require them to be done
>in the full version Autocad. This is being complicated, by the new release,
>of Autocad 14. Autocad training and retraining seems to be a major industry
>around here. Autocad is expensive; the add-ons make it more expensive.
(snip)
Not long ago I was informed by the technical services department of a very
large local authority in the UK that all CAD submissions had to be prepared
in AutoCAD.
I protested, claiming that 'the Town Hall' was favouring a particular product
at the expense of competing companies and thereby fostering a monopoly.
The legal department of the council reviewed the situation and decided that
any CAD program could be used on condition that the files submitted were in
DXF. I accepted that as a compromise.
It is astonishing that authorities in the USA are permitted to impose the
condition described by Mr van Wyk - here in the UK we believe that freedom
of choice is very well developed in all the States (we are envious of your
Freedom of Information Act, too, since we have nothing of the kind!).
Incidentally, AutoCAD 13 here costs around US$5040 plus Value Added Tax at
17.5%. AutoCAD-LT for Windows 95 is US$744 and US$512 for the DOS version;
plus VAT. These prices appear on page 46 of 'CAD CAM' magazine dated May 1997.
(I have not posted the above to <alt.architecture> or to <comp.cad.autocad>
simply because I am not a subscriber to these groups).
John G. Evans,
Consulting Engineer,
Lichfield.
Dog Trot
In article <337B73...@worldnet.att.net>,
jimv...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net wrote:
> The one argument, for having autocad, in fact an arguement, for having
> at least 3 versions, of it, is that owners, especially government
> agencies (Federal, State, Local, Authorities, et. al.) demand it, and in
> addition demand a particular version, of it, in their Requests for
> Proposals. Without autocad architects, civil engineers, environmental
> engineers, electrical and mechanical (buildings services & utilities)
> engineers, etc. can't bid on /propose for projects. Most RFPs sopecify
> drawings must be done in Autocad 11, Autocad 12, or Autocad 13; some
> allow drawings to be done with Autocad LT or other program with drawing
> files compatable, with their favored version, of Autocad, but most
> require them to be done in the full version Autocad. This is being
> complicated, by the new release, of Autocad 14. Autocad training and
> retraining seems to be a major industry around here. Autocad is
> expensive; the add-ons make it more expensive.
>
> A similar, but less expensive, situation, exists, with specifications,
> where each owner specifies, in each RFP, which outdated version, of
> Wordperfect (usually), or Lotus or Microsoft Word, they want it in.
> This seems also, to be true, of US Government Agencies, who are supposed
> to want their specifications, in Spec-in-Tak (or however you spell it),
> I don't remember.
>
> Building owners want what they want.
>
> javw
I do not do any government work, and from all the stories I have heard
about how long it takes to get paid, I am not too eager to do any. I have
no doubt it is true, but I would question how this can be legal? (Well,
governments do whatever they want and it is by definition "legal").
Architects are not generally permitted to specify products by brand or
proprietary trademark unless offering "or equal" clauses, or by writing
such tight specs as to eliminate all others. So haw can government
agencies do this, legally? Why do they not have to observe the same
standards that they require? The whole concept of "government approved"
proprietary standards really pisses me off.
Reese Knight
The easy way to learn autocad is to use it daily. As a user of Autocad
from version 1 to version 13, I have seen CAD grow. The use of a digatizer
with special menus was a big plus to me. Then, you could customize the
menus, then they added pull down menus. I have also used Microstation,
and the windows and win95 versions of both products. In college I TA'ed
Engineering Drawing with CAD (Design CAD). All revolve around producing
drawings. Students and new users are frustrated by all the options, but
most drawings are very simple. As students use a CAD product daily, they
can get good at it. Some students will never be experts, but can do simple
redlines and submit to a drafter for clean up.
Swiloughby <swilo...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970517151...@ladder02.news.aol.com>...
> If I were you. I would investigate this a bit further. I know of many
> Why shouldn't the agencies be able to specify the software they want used
> on a project ...
As someone that has converted DXF's and different versions of Autocad 10,
11, 12, 13, they all don't talk to each other very well. You can lose
precision and wblock information in conversions. Forget about dbase links.
Layers can be messed up. Fonts lost. Pen tables gone. Forget about add
on products functioning. As a user of an end product (the drawing file), I
insist that my job be as easy as possible. Why not use the standard that
all my drawings are in? As many Federal, State, And Cities downsize (yes,
it is happening), they are contracting out the Drafting and Design. As the
CM, we have to have all players at the same point in the book.
The company I work for uses Microstation 95 and inroads. Contractors must
submit in this format, or we lose the ability to integrate with our
existing drawing base and computer packages. We also lose the ability to
quickly make changes in design, slowing the time from submission to bid.
Reese Knight
rkn...@tanet.net
All opinions are my own.
Maximillian Natzet
m...@my.place writes:
> >
> > The one argument, for having autocad, in fact an arguement, for having
> > at least 3 versions, of it, is that owners, especially government
> > agencies (Federal, State, Local, Authorities, et. al.) demand it, and in
> > addition demand a particular version, of it, in their Requests for
> > Proposals.
> I do not do any government work, and from all the stories I have heard
> about how long it takes to get paid, I am not too eager to do any. I have
> no doubt it is true, but I would question how this can be legal? (Well,
> governments do whatever they want and it is by definition "legal").
> Architects are not generally permitted to specify products by brand or
> proprietary trademark unless offering "or equal" clauses, or by writing
> such tight specs as to eliminate all others. So haw can government
> agencies do this, legally? Why do they not have to observe the same
> standards that they require? The whole concept of "government approved"
> proprietary standards really pisses me off.
The government can't (and in my experience doesn't) demand that
contractors bidding on government work use any particular piece
of software. They do demand that the files they receive be in
Autocad format. Afterall, once the files are created and have
that nice .dwg extension, whose to say how they were made.
It seems only reasonable that anyone, the government included,
should request files that are compatible with the software they
use. Considering that most modern CAD software has the option
to save files in ACAD format, the forcing of industry to use one
piece of proprietary software isn't really an issue.
Swiloughby
The company I work for uses Microstation 95 and inroads. Contractors must
submit in this format, or we lose the ability to integrate with our
existing drawing base and computer packages. We also lose the ability to
quickly make changes in design, slowing the time from submission to bid.
Reese Knight
rkn...@tanet.net
That's exactly the point. When consultants hire subs to work with them on
a project, they know they will save a considerable amount of time and $$
if the sub uses the same cad software and design software. How does that
differ from an agency requiring that it's consultants use a particular
drafting and or design package??
Rick Palmer
: The government can't (and in my experience doesn't) demand that
: contractors bidding on government work use any particular piece
: of software. They do demand that the files they receive be in
: Autocad format. Afterall, once the files are created and have
: that nice .dwg extension, whose to say how they were made.
The Corps of Engineers uses Microstation as their standard, though WES
(waterways experiment station) uses mainly AutoCad. When I spec out a
contract for the Corps I always specify that the electronic plots be in
Microstation 95 format. Usually the contractor will use Terra Model or
Autocad etc and then have a subcontractor convert to Microstation, which is
fine with me.
Rick Palmer
Hydraulic Engineer
Corps of Engineers
Frank
I agree with you that AutoCad in alot of ways still as complex as DOS
program, and we do not like it either, there is a Cad Software called
Mini CAD. Has anybody worked with this software to see how easy it is.
Frank
Brian Kripowicz
just checking, ignore this message
--
======================
Brian Kripowicz
This is your signature
======================