2 points of origin

[evanesp26]

First off, I did this drawing on Inventor while at school. You'll notice there are two points of origin. My friend argued that since it is on the same line, and the line is 0, that it makes sense.

 

My argument was that the origin is a point and can't be called a line.

 

In this drawing I included the two points the way my friend did it.

 

So whose right?

 

[lpseifert]

Your friend may be confusing the term Baseline with Origin.

Draw a line from 0,0,0... where it starts is the drawing's origin.

[JD Mather]

One is 0 on the x-axis and the other is 0 on the y-axis. The zero on the y-axis needs to be realigned so that it is not so interferring with the y .23 - other than that it is corrrect as shown. Ordinate dimensioning should have been covered by your teacher.

 

I think I might have selected a different location for the origin on this part - but it all depends on the design intent.

[Pablo Ferral]

I agree with JD and lpseifert.

 

I would also suggest that the dimensions that you show on your drawing are a set of instructions to the guy on the shop floor. The origin point tells him where you want him to start measuring from.

[evanesp26]

First off, he did cover it. My teachers are very capable, which is why I'm able to make complex 3-d parts in inventor after only 1 class...

 

Secondly, these aren't drawings that were going to be made by anyone. Yeah I understand you need clear drawings for parts manufacture, but I wasn't trying to show off my dimensioning skills, I was trying to show a specific problem.

 

I get a little peeved when I put up an example and people start criticizing all the aspects of the drawing. Yeah I know these aren't professional drawings, I didn't post those, I posted an example from class.

 

I'm new to this forum but should I be wary about posting anymore questions? Would you just pick those apart too? If I ask a question about dimensions, will you grill me on my title block for not being ANSI standards?

 

I'm a student. I mentioned that. I already have great teachers, I'm not looking for more, especially ones I don't even know.

[Patrick Hughes]

At the risk of having my head bit off, I do not see where anybody had picked apart your question. J.D. gave you a succinct answer to your question and simply stated this is an area that should have been covered. That is, the x-axis y-axis nomenclature aspect. And I believe his comment regarding the selection of a different location was meant as a prompt for retrospection.

 

CADTutor is a great place to learn and you will find it to be a very civil place. Your coming here to ask your question implies that you are indeed looking for more teachers or was it more of a search to back up your "argument" with your friend ?

[evanesp26]

No, I showed my friend the article (forum answers) the next day and told him we was right. I like arguing with my friend and he likes being proven right, so it worked out fine.

 

I think what bothered me about a few of the replies (and indeed CAD in general) is the notion that you can explain CAD (or in this case Inventor) while covering 100% of it, which you can't. At least not in a semester. I really wanted to ask a follow up question which is that Inventor allowed me to put the coordinate dimensions on any axis, but I feel that the program didn't do that because it is right, but because the program isn't smart enough to tell the difference.

 

My second issue with CAD, or it's culture, is that CAD is many things to many people, and they all believe their way is the right way. I have been taught CAD by both engineers and architectures and both approach it radically different. Then there is me, who likes engineering and architecture, but really loves design more. I see AutoCAD as the most versatile drawing tool for the PC, while they see CAD more formulaic.