Which is better

What is the best way of doing things.

1. Dimensions & text in Modelspace Veiwed in Paper Space
or
Dimensions & Text in Paperspace.

2. Multiple layout tabs or Multiple Drawings.

Has anyone conducted a study, or has Autodesk released any papers on this.

Cheers

Greg

 

IMO, dim & text in MS.. Multiple drawings (1 10MB drawing.. or 12 830K
drawings?.. i'll take smaller files any day).

 

If done in modelspace, they are part of the drawing and can be xrefed. If
in paperspace, they cannot be xrefed. My belief is they are part of the
model, not the paper so that is where they should be. Others have different
opinions.

 

I agree.

try to issue a changeorder or site instruction or addendum on 8 1/2 by 11
showing the changes to the model AND the text & dimensions all nicely
bubbled - without creating a copy of the paperspace items - thus destroying
the most basic precept - each object drawn once only.


--
Jamie Duncan

"How wrong it is for a woman to expect the man to build the world she wants,
rather than to create it herself."
- Anais Nin (1903-1977)

 

try to issue a changeorder or site instruction or addendum on 8 1/2 by 11 showing the changes to the model AND the text & dimensions all nicely bubbled - without creating a copy of the paperspace items <<

um... plot window?

or

Copy layout tab to new tab?

 

Multiple drawings (1 10MB drawing.. or 12 830K drawings?.. i'll take smaller files any day).<<

Model is gonna be 4-12MB any way, multiple sheets viewing the same model won't increase that all that much.

 

If done in modelspace, they are part of the drawing and can be xrefed. If in paperspace, they cannot be xrefed. My belief is they are part of the model, not the paper so that is where they should be<<

XREFs are the reason we annotate in PS, the model isn't cluttered up with layer upon layer of annotation required for the different views and scales. Secondarily, annotation in PS requires only one dimstyle, textstyle, and annotation layer.

 

Dunno 'bout any studies or papers.

We annotate in PAPERSPACE and use multiple layout tabs. Annotation in PS reduces layer/style overhead, and results in an uncluttered model.
And for us, multiple layout tabs are more efficient. A site plan, or structure may require several plan and elevation sheets with multiple matchlines and it is considerably easier and faster to remain in the same file.

 

My opinion is that now it is more practical for dimensions and notes to
reside in PS. That is because now paperspace dimensions can retain
associativity with modelspace geometry and therefore functionality is lost.

For *most* applications I believe multiple drawings are most practical.
This is for two reasons. One, with multiple drawings, multiple users can
have concurrent access to the job. Two, the new R2005 sheet set
functionality is predicated on the idea of one sheet per drawing. The sheet
sets also accomplish much of what multiple layout tabs do (and then some)
regarding project management and organization.

That said, multiple layouts do have their place in specific instances. For
example, if a job has multiple sheet size plotting alternatives ( i.e. 11x17
and 24x36), it makes sense for a single drawing to have each of those
options on its own layout. Also, it makes sense to have different layouts
of the same sheet if it is showing different stages of a project (i.e. bid,
construction, & as builts can each have a layout). My basic rule is that
only one actual numbered sheet (and the other "versions" of it) should be
represented on a drawing. Therefore you can, for instance, have different
output sizes of sheet "A-1"; or bid and asbuilt versions of "A-1" in
seperate layouts but all on one drawing. However, it is not advisable to
have A-1, A-2, and A-3 all in one drawing, even if they are all the same
size or phase of work. That is mainly my own opinion based on the
experience that this method economizes the size of the drawings by
minimizing the amount of xrefs in a drawing and maximizes the workflow among
the drafters.


LT

 

if you have to repeat text or dimensions often on different sheets and don't
want to edit all of the repeats, then go with modelspace. the only things
in my paperspace are titleblocks and unique text for that sheet.

both, as the situation decrees. no matter which, it is VERY important to
have some kind of note (an RTEXT is good) on every plotted sheet indicating
drawing name/path and named layout (if applicable).

 

so you have a 30x42 drawing, and you've done the dimensions and text in
pspace, and you have to issued a series of 8 1/2 x 11 drawings for an SI or
CO, so - I know you plot and then print on a preprinted title page. - but we
don't use preprinted forms - besides I want to plot to pdf - so it can be
emailed to the Owner & consultants.

Room numbers - used in many drawings/ layouts by various consultants - where
is the advantage of having that in paperspace.



--


Jamie Duncan

Consulting - If you're not part of the solution, there's good money in
prolonging the problem.
11 showing the changes to the model AND the text & dimensions all nicely
bubbled - without creating a copy of the paperspace items <<

 

The safest precept is item drawn once. and if you can get away with your
dimensions and text and other annotation items being available to one layout
only, that's great. Doesn't always work for us. We reserve pspace for
legends, general & coded notes, . But items that have to appear in more
than one layout - well it goes to mspace.

And we don't really worry about dimscales/texthts/layers etc - that's all
automatic for us - our lisp/activex does all that.

Jamie Duncan

Consulting - If you're not part of the solution, there's good money in
prolonging the problem.
If in paperspace, they cannot be xrefed. My belief is they are part of the
model, not the paper so that is where they should be<<

layer upon layer of annotation required for the different views and scales.
Secondarily, annotation in PS requires only one dimstyle, textstyle, and
annotation layer.

 

they will for ram - multiple layouts mean multiple display lists. 10-12
detail viewports with lots of detail hatches can easily top 1 gig - and the
slowdown for paging is extreme. Obviously turning of viewports helps, but
that's a workaround - you really do want to be able to see everything
eventually.

--


Jamie Duncan

Consulting - If you're not part of the solution, there's good money in
prolonging the problem.

won't increase that all that much.

 

agreed.

The ease of using pspace for annotation objects - which goes way beyond just
text and dimensions - is fine untill someone changes a note in one layout on
one drawing - and no else really sees the change - 'cause after all it's not
part of the xref - and so a bunch of things get missed - in the rush to get
the job out, and the owner is furious because it's now going to cost big
bucks to overcome this error. So then try telling the owner that we do it
that way so that we don't have so many layers or dimstyles....

--


Jamie Duncan

Consulting - If you're not part of the solution, there's good money in
prolonging the problem.

 

Every time I see someone annotate plan or profile in PS, things get screwed up.
I have watched (studied) this since Acad 10 and am amazed how people still annotate plan view things in PS.
Even though you can lock views, there is always some new user that screws things up. It is so critical that the zoom is
correct for text in PS to work, I'm not sure how you watch every single person. Just wait until you find a zoom mistake
in front of a client and someone has estimated quantities off a hard copy. The best way to avoid this is have the
annotation in MS, then you have a chance of noticing that things don't look right.

Doing multiple sheets in one file is just insane given the instability of Acad with lots of xrefs. You can get away
with it on exhibits, and I do it occasionally, but this idea extinguishes itself over time. You will get tired of slow
drawings and recovering drawings with multiple paperspaces. I find it much easier to automate things if I dont have
multiple PS's. I have only seen really small shops get away with the multiple layouts. Its just asking for trouble on
things like plan and profile drawings.

If all users were up to speed and acad was really stable and fast, you could get away with doing things either way, but
that is not the case, at least doing Civil type plansets.


"Greg McLandsborough" <>
|>What is the best way of doing things.
|>
|>1. Dimensions & text in Modelspace Veiwed in Paper Space
|>or
|>Dimensions & Text in Paperspace.
|>
|>2. Multiple layout tabs or Multiple Drawings.
|>
|>Has anyone conducted a study, or has Autodesk released any papers on this.
|>
|>Cheers
|>
|>Greg
|>

James Maeding
Civil Engineer/Programmer

 

so you have a 30x42 drawing, and you've done the dimensions and text in pspace, and you have to issued a series of 8 1/2 x 11 drawings for an SI or CO, so - I know you plot and then print on a preprinted title page.<<

Actually, no, we revise and re-issue the drawing. There are times when we wish to send a "preview" of the coming change to a fabricator or vendor, we will plot a window to a PDF and fax it with a cover note.

Room numbers/column numbers and the like that may be required by multiple disciplines are held in separate files and overlain as XREFs into modelspace or paperspace (and scaled) as desired.

 

But items that have to appear in more than one layout - well it goes to mspace. <<

Therein lies the rub. 3-level, 4-bay by 4-bay structure requires 3 sets of plan annotations and 8 sets of elevational annotations. For all this to reside in the model, and then be properly visible/invisible in the different layout viewports will require at least 3 different sets of annotation layers. Add to that the multitude of details required and you have another 3-4 sets of annotation layers.

Viewing all this in the model is cluttered, to say the least, and hard to edit. Then there's the added overhead of maintaining the proper visibility of those layers in the proper layout viewports.

We did all that for a couple years, then we tried one job with annotations in PS, and haven't looked back once.

 

Sounds like a hardware problem.

hmmm... the biggest model I've done had 31 layouts, 4 of those were detail sheets showing 81 details, the file size after purge was around 140MB.


(Tip: Don't use dot hatch, use line hatch on a layer that uses a dot linetype.)

 

ah. For speed and cost factors we issue small changes on 8 1 /2 by 11. The
master is always updated and bubbled - so a 'construction' set can be
printed at any time.

the overhead of dealing with multiple annotation layers/dimstyles is a
pain - but now that it's been automated it really works well. And I always
like having the notes right where you make a change. But then we do mostly
renovations to hospitals and have a lot of repeatability in that one floor
plan serves as the basis for 1:50 plans, floor patterns, furniture,
pneumatic tubes, fie separation, demolition plan, med gas, sprinkler, nurse
call/comm, power, reflected ceiling, project phasing, hvac etc.


--
Jamie Duncan

"How wrong it is for a woman to expect the man to build the world she wants,
rather than to create it herself."
- Anais Nin (1903-1977)


pspace, and you have to issued a series of 8 1/2 x 11 drawings for an SI or
CO, so - I know you plot and then print on a preprinted title page.<<

wish to send a "preview" of the coming change to a fabricator or vendor, we
will plot a window to a PDF and fax it with a cover note.

disciplines are held in separate files and overlain as XREFs into modelspace
or paperspace (and scaled) as desired.

 

untill someone changes a note in one layout on one drawing - and no else really sees the change <<

Communication is still the obligation of the designer. Even if that note resided in modelspace there is no guarantee I'll see it. I may have finished my work in that area and moved on, or I may have frozen that XREF layer so that I don't have your annotation in my drawing.

If things are missed, it is the fault of the designer and design leader, not the tool. A proper system of checking, squad checking, and review will reduce costly errors.