Multiple Dimstyles

Reading comments in another thread got me thinking. When dimensioning in layouts, are multiple dimstyles for different scales really necessary? Just about everyone I know who uses CAD does this.

I have one standard dimstyle only, set to ‘Scale dimensions to layout’ under the Fit tab, and a ‘Scale Factor of 1’ and ‘Apply to layout dimensions only’ under the Primary Units tab. I use this no matter what scale my viewports are set to, and it automatically adjusts to suit. I don’t need to worry that I’m using the right dimstyle when swapping from viewport to viewport.

I understand that there is a necessity for multiple styles when dimensioning in modelspace, to make sure text and arrows are displayed at the correct size, but since we (the company) never do this don’t they just complicate matters? Or am I wrong? Am I missing the point completely and just not picking up on the benefits of multiple styles?

I think I agree with you Bonehead, in the short time i used CAD, I never had multiple dimstyles and only ever used the "scale Dimensions to layout" setting.

Not sure if there is a problem with this, but I'd be interested to see the discussion that follows.

We do not use PSPACE to dimension anything. Ever. That is a forbidden rule at my company, so we have tons of styles.

The reason is that AutoCAD has a lot of inertia. It's a very long process for adoption of new program features and a longer time to phase out old ones. It usually takes new employees joining a company, employees that have a firm understanding of both the reasons the legacy method was necessary and is still in use; and also the benefits and possible limitations of the newer methods. Then the employee needs to be able to demonstrate these benefits persuasively enough to get the company to change. And considering that there is still a large subset of AutoCAD users (such as dbroada) that really have no need of even utilizing paperspace...the legacy dimstyles are likely to remain for quite some time.

I have to agree with you Mr Edison, but I think it was about 2002 when the use of Multiple Dimstyles became unneccessary??? I think we all should have progressed far enough by now that these dinosaurs have either died off for poor drawing practices or evolved into the single Dimstyle animal (unless of course you're unfortunate enough to locked into the past because you haven't upgraded).

I see the bigger problem being that the leader of the pack doesn't properly review the software to find the good and part parts before subjecting the dinosaurs to the new software - however is he to support it if he doesn't know what it does? The leader should have a solid understanding of any new features and highlight these to the rest of the pack because not only is he doing his own team a disservice, but he later launches them onto some other poor unsuspecting employer.

Oh, and by the way, I'm allowed to talk about Dinosaurs because I really am one. Admittedly, I'm one that has evolved (and continues to do so every 12 Months when a new version of AutoCAD is thrust upon me)

Well I just had a thought for a reason behind a second dimstyle at least. If you have different drawings in a file going to different people. For example, we use an Architectural dimension style on our plans, but a mechanical style for our shop paperwork.

I thought multiple dimstyles weren't needed anymore for those who had gotten their heads around annotative scaling?

We do not use PSPACE to dimension anything. Ever. That is a forbidden rule at my company, so we have tons of styles.

And are you happy with that system Styk? Or is it just that "it works, why change it", as Max and Al seem to suggest? I can't see that being the case. I've been hanging round here long enough to know that you're not the kinda guy to just put up with things if you don't like them!

......that really have no need of even utilizing paperspace...

See I don't get that. I have no need to use it, and I'm certainly not going to be so controversial as to suggest it's wrong not to, I just find it simplifies matters when you don't have to worry about what size / scale your text and dimensions are required to be. For me the pros outweigh the cons.

With the (relatively) new Annotative Scaling, it certainly adds to the argument of only ever needing one Dimension Style these days.

And are you happy with that system Styk? Or is it just that "it works, why change it", as Max and Al seem to suggest? I can't see that being the case. I've been hanging round here long enough to know that you're not the kinda guy to just put up with things if you don't like them!

We have too many changes that occur in our plans throughout the life of the job to even try and think to dimension in Paperspace. Plus we deal with large floorplans mostly, so multiple page viewport layouts is usually a must, and when we have to create large scale partial viewports of an area, we need the dimensions to go with it. It would be devastating to our quality control if we even thought about going to Paperspace for dimensioning.

We have too many changes that occur in our plans throughout the life of the job to even try and think to dimension in Paperspace. Plus we deal with large floorplans mostly, so multiple page viewport layouts is usually a must, and when we have to create large scale partial viewports of an area, we need the dimensions to go with it. It would be devastating to our quality control if we even thought about going to Paperspace for dimensioning.

I have nothing against PSPACE dimensioning. Its just that our drawings would not function correctly for our specific use. For someone who can benefit, I say by all means do it.

I thought multiple dimstyles weren't needed anymore for those who had gotten their heads around annotative scaling?

I can't chip in with any thoughts on that issue skips, we don't have that here. What does annotative scaling bring in to the mix?

it adjusts the height of the text via the viewport scale, so the size of text/leader/etc is sustained no matter the scale.

But its more trouble than its worth at best, honestly. Be careful when using this feature of AutoCAD. Its a great idea, but poorly executed within the program IMHO.

Got to agree with all - Basically this discussion proves that there is no right or wrong way, but the need for multiple Dimension Styles to address different scales is really unneccessary these days. Everyone should make themselves aware of the available tools and apply them to suit their particular requirements. If there are corporate Standards - they MUST be used, but at the same time, if you can find a better way that works, fight tooth and nail to get the standards changed for the betterment of all.

That's what I call evolution...