Drawing everything in Paper Space?

When drawing in AutoCAD's model space, one needs to consider the scale that will be used in paper space, so that he knows what size to make the text and other elements. http://academics.triton.edu/faculty/fheitzman/space.html

My boss is old fashioned, and prefers Autodesk's AutoSketch to AutoCAD because it simplifies the drafting process for him, as everything is drawn directly onto the paper.

Has anyone heard of using AutoCAD to draw everything directly into paper space? Are there any problems with this?

I've met only one person who drew entirely in paper space. All he created were simple schematics that required no scale.

Doesn't your boss have more important "management" type things to do? If he wants to doodle then give him a mechanical pencil and a pad of quadrille paper. Leave the CAD work to the professionals. That is what he is paying you to do right? CAD work?

Has anyone heard of using AutoCAD to draw everything directly into paper space? Are there any problems with this?

Yes, one major problem. Things that are drawn in paper space cannot be xreff'd into other drawings.

If the boss balks at using model space, layouts and viewports I'm taking a wild guess here that using Xrefs will not be very high on his list of "necessary" features. Mind you, it's only a guess.

True, and if they do everything in-house, and don't ever have to coordinate, (share files), with outside consultants, they can create their drawings any way they want. You and I would never draw in paper space, but I know there are some who do. I got a file from a surveyor one time who had done his entire site topo in paper space. I couldn't believe that one. I had to send it back and explain to him that I could not use the file he sent and he needed to provide me with a drawing in model space. I got one from an architect once also. He had his building plan, elevations, details and everything in paper space. It just makes me wonder where these guys learned Autocad?

"It just makes me wonder where these guys learned Autocad?"

I believe it was the Acme All-Star AutoCAD Academy on Ave A in Appalachia, Alabama.

remark,

it's Ap·pa·la·chia

digger

digger,

as in chia pet? gotcha. thanks.

remark,

actually here in appalachia we pronounce it ap-uh-latch-e-uh.

digger

Back to the post if you must draw in one space then only use model space the first thing you need to do is is bring in your title block and rescale it so you can see if what your drawing will fit at that scale. this also has an advantage that you can still use paperspace with a copy of the title block at 1:1 with the viewport set up to be just inside the model space title block at the plotted scale so you can show the boss how its done. Add a second viewport at a different scale showing a blown up detail without copying the original which is what you would have to do in modelspace.

Hi,

it always depends on the complexity of the work. There are no general rules.

But for me it's like asking:

"I bought a race car, I can only use it with the reverse gear?".

The only advice ironic that you could give is: "Be careful not to go too fast!":)

I wholeheartedly agree with the previous replies and in some cases appropriate comments regarding this subject.

Until joining this remarkable forum "and I sincerly mean that", I was of the old school who used model space to draw and print my competed drawings from.

Having said this, it would appear that I remain a little in the dark regarding this subject and would therfore apprecaite your comments/advice regarding this matter?

Possibly the best means of explaining myself is to refer to the method I currently use to prepare a drawing, which is as follows:

Back in earlier days when layout, eventully paper space appeared I ignored it, as I was obtaining good results using model space.

Yes one needs to determine the final plotted scale in order to establish the drawing sheet size or vice-versa, and yes I have now saved al l my metric sized (A0 to A4) title blocks as templates in paper space.

My main concern as a relatively new AutoCad paper space user, is that although it is suggested by some, to perform all text and dimensioning operations in paper space, I still feel more comfortable deciding on my final drawing sheet size/scale at the modeling stage (drawn full size) and establish my final scale plot text and dimension settings at modeling stage. This practice obviously refers to Acad releases prior to annotation.

In terms of scaling details, yes paper space is definately the way to go as one has the facility to create veiwports of items of various scale without having to create a dedicated sacle, dimension/text size setting for the various enlarged details.

The practice of adding text and dimensions in paper space remains a concern to me, shall we term something to do with "old dogs and new tricks?", I somehow obtain comfort/assurance in inserting dimensions in model space.

I hope that this material is appropriate to this thread and if not I appologise, and look forward to your reply.

Yes I am aware of similar material in the past but hope that this is specific to the relative thread.

You seem comfortable in model space and already know of a couple of ways to handle text and dimensioning so you may just want to maintain the status-quo and forget about using layouts and viewports.

But, since you were the one to bring it up, what are your concerns about putting your text and dimensions in paper space instead?

I noticed you stayed away from the topic of Annotation Scaling so my guess is that its use has already been ruled out. Am I right?

My appologies ReMark

i have just replied to the latest forum responses and seem to have created a 'hornet's nest" which was not initially intended.

I wouold like the opportunity of continuing this subject further.

Please refer to previous reply?

Following on from Willbri drawing in model space and dimensioning in paper space just a straight out no-no. Text yes we do a mixture but try to do all data text in model explanatory sometimes in paperspace, Warnings standard company stuff often in paperspace easier to place on layouts.

Bigal

Thank you for your contribution.

Have been following some of your input and most impressed.

As an independent i.e. Not specifically bound by any company's preferences, but as a contractor preferring to be able to produce a drawing that would normally be acceptable by most, I am seeking some guidance here.

Remark

Yes with some personal logic persuasion, I would prefer to go the route that you prescribed to me some months ago.

So I dont have a problem with that. It is being able to communicate Innotative and other AutoCad information by electronic means to users of other CAD software. i.e, In my country we have many CAD users, using different CAD software i.e. TurboCad, VersaCad, Allycad, Caddie, InteliCAD satilites and others such as Microstation many of which are preferred by cvarious companies due to their cost or additional facilities.

So therefore my seeming reluctance to utilizing the Acad Annotative properties, that in the past, you have tended to steer clear of? Maybe I am wrong?

Hi,

I work with both ways. When they arrive in the company to verify drawings of windows, doors and facades made of aluminum by the firm which won the contract, I work in model space, because they work in model space. Important to say that the drawings in this case have no more than about 20 layers.

When I have to work for example on a floor plan of a complex building, such as a hospital, where you have groups of layers of architectural design, plants, furniture, etc. with its rating with attribute, and the layer becomes 150-200 and more, it is almost impossible do not use paper space.

In paper space we only put the logo and markups.

If we give drawings a few companies that does not use the paper space we use the command "Export layout" to export a single sheet in a single file with all entities model space.

This command is very useful for communicating with different versions of autocad and send by e-mail lighter files.

Regards

I place all my text and dimensions in my layout. I am disciplined enough to do the required upfront work so when the time comes to start adding my dimensions and text very seldom, if ever, do I need to go back and change the scale on one of my viewports. And, since I make my dimensions associative (which is not the same as annotative) if I do change scale the dimensions self-adjust. Thus I avoid having to deal with different annotative scales and the dread bloated scalelist disease. LOL

Wilbri: Sharing information between companies that use different CAD systems can be a challenge. Many of the other CAD programs you mention tout as one of their main features the ability to read and save in DWG file format. I've always been somewhat skeptical of that claim. For most simple 2D drawings it is probably true but as drawings become more complex I think it may not always be so. Perhaps it has gotten better over time. I don't know. The last CAD program I tested was ZWcad (much like yourself) and I found it to be fairly capable of handling the AutoCAD drawings I threw at it but I did not test it with some of my more complex 3D drawings only 2D drawings.

For UK Nuclear we (should) have all geometry, dimensions, and text in MS with the drawing border, item lists, and general notes in PS.

Of course, as always, there is an exception in that piping isometrics are drawn fully in PS.

Not sure why it is specified like that; but its probably because piping isometrics are rarely drawn to scale and dimensions have to be overridden anyway.

Diagrams, flowcharts, etc are done in PS.

 

I noticed you stayed away from the topic of Annotation Scaling so my guess is that its use has already been ruled out. Am I right?

Annotation scaling text is awesome when put to proper use.

I've begun doing nearly all my dimensioning and noting in modelspace with annotative objects and then adding a range of scales to them. Then in paperspace I have the ability to quickly change the scale of my drawings or to use different scales for the same object and not have to redraw it.

It also will help with consistency as you set the annotative text styles to the plotted height rather than a constant height.