Units and scale is killing me

[neophoible]

Sorry, I don't agree. It should be plotted to a recognizable scale unless it is a schematic in which case it would be noted somewhere that the drawing is "not to scale".

 

Maybe you need to change paper sizes.

 

Yeah, or just enjoy some extra space! This is a great explanation of the setup process for a beginner, but I was quite surprised to read a comment to the effect that an arbitrary scale is quite acceptable or possibly even the norm. I would not have thought so. Is there a thread in one of the forums here that addresses this issue? If so, perhaps it should be referenced here?

[ReMark]

Arbitrary scales are only good in horseshoes and grenade throwing. You drew your model space objects to their exact size. Therefore you should print the drawing to some sort of recognizable scale otherwise why did you bother in the first place?

[Dana W]

If you want to use a scale ruler, go back to drawing on the board.

You will need to decide which is more important, having an optimized drawing or being able to use a scale ruler.

By the time it is properly dimensioned and noted you shouldn't have any need of a scale ruler, and the commensurate inaccuracies that come with.

Remember that in CAD, unlike on the board, we draw at full size in MODELSPACE.

No matter WHAT you are drawing, from galaxies to subatomic particles. That is why we have, and frequently use ZOOM. :wink:

 

I would agree, septin' for that old dude in the back office using a six sided engineer's scale and an adding machine to do material take-off's from a hard copy he thinks matches one of his edges.

[Dadgad]

Sorry, I don't agree. It should be plotted to a recognizable scale unless it is a schematic in which case it would be noted somewhere that the drawing is "not to scale".

 

Maybe you need to change paper sizes.

 

I didn't mean that it should be displayed and locked on a totally arbitrary scale, but rather that the scale chosen needn't be one that is on the scale rule. I will use 1:18 if that fits the best. I want my drawing to display as large as it can while still affording me sufficient room for comfortable and highly legible dimensioning.

No doubt there are disciplines where it might need to be,

but not in the type of work that I do

Edited August 22, 2012 by Dadgad

[danellis]

I always thought one of the reasons for using "regular" scales is that people are used to seeing things drawn at that scale so can recognise them and compare their relative sizes without needing to measure them.

 

As an example I work with housing estates in the UK, the site plans for which are usually drawn at 1:500. Even on a simple level I can recognise the size of a parking space and it's associated turning area and pretty much know whether a car, or refuse lorry, would be able to turn in it. If these plans were always printed at different scales such intuiton for them may be more difficult.

 

90% of drawings are produced to be printed, where the ability to zoom is no greater than when they were drawn by hand.

 

dJE

[ReMark]

1:18 will work if you include a scale bar because as we all know the person who gets the drawing is going to try to scale off of it no matter how much we tell them not to.

[dbroada]

"CAN YOU PRINT THIS TO SCALE?"

"ITS ALREADY PRINTED TO SCALE. DO YOU MEAN PRINTED TO A SCALE YOU CAN USE?"

and appologies for caps lock

[Dana W]

I didn't mean that is should be displayed and locked on a totally arbitrary scale, but rather that the scale chosen needn't be one that is on the scale rule. I will use 1:18 if that fits the best. I want my drawing to display as large as it can while still affording me sufficient room for comfortable and highly legible dimensioning.

No doubt there are disciplines where it might need to be,

but not in the type of work that I do

 

It's probably only important to use a "Standard Scale" in the residential building industry. The field dudes will measure the drawings with a tape measure if something seems wrong or doesn't fit like it should. They're used to 1/4" or 1/2" or 3/4" equaling one foot, and that makes it easy for them to get up to speed with a drawing that has coffee, mustard, salsa, and paint covering up the dimensions.

 

What about accuracy, you ask? Hah, just don't ask.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Dana W
clarity, the unatainable level.

[Dana W]

1:18 will work if you include a scale bar because as we all know the person who gets the drawing is going to try to scale off of it no matter how much we tell them not to.

They just don't trust the numbers, especially if they have been around long enough to have worked with hand drawn plans. We are mostly talking about materials take-off procedures, but, there are plenty of draftsmen who somehow manage to not provide the proper set of dimensions for a plan to be easily laid out. All the numbers are there, they just don't provide the proper progression from one to another or simply leave out the most important bits at times. A few years ago, I had to explain to one college trained newbie why it was not a good idea to locate potty stall panels with dimensions from the toilet drain center lines. When the tradesmen see this sorta stuff, they just whip out the tape measure and use it as an architect's scale rule.

[ReMark]

And I'll bet someone out there has taken a manufacturer's spec sheet and tried to scale a dimension or two that was left off only to find it just doesn't quite make sense. I've seen this done with pumps where the manufacturer provides only the most important dimensions but leaves off plenty of others a draftsman or CAD tech wish he had provided.