Jump to content

Requesting a free software recommendation to help with a home project.


AndyInTampa

Recommended Posts

[ATTACH]49088[/ATTACH]

 

This is the drawing I'm working on. The measurements in green are incorrect.

 

In DraftSight, I'm using ESNAP and the precision is set to 1/16".

OK, I opened the drawing and right away noticed a big issue. The first thing I usually do when looking over another person's drawing is to verify which units were used. AutoCad has a command called -dwgunits. I ran the command on your drawing, and It appears that your drawing template started off in millimeters. That combined with fractional dimensions is confusing the rounding thing. You are looking at fractions of a millimeter.

 

By the way, in your dimension style, I see that you are forcing rounding to the nearest 1/16". I would leave that at 0".

 

The thing about units is that the program does not care what you name them. Whether millimeters, or inches makes no difference to software. It will show you that 17 mm, divided into two equal parts is still 8 1/2 in fractional display. As long as you are the only one looking at the drawing, and it is only on the screen in modelspace, it doesn't really matter. Where this is a disaster, is when you try to print a scale drawing, or insert this drawing into another one that is in imperial units.

 

One more thing. I saw that the right (blue) cabinet is a little higher than the left one. I had to change the precision to 1/64 to find it. It amounts to less than 1/32 of a unit, but it could account for the dimension in the lower right corner (green) insisting on showing 1/16 too long.

 

What I usually do is keep my "-dwgunits", and dim style precision at 1/64" at least, then change it to 1/16" when I am satisfied that the drawing is accurate enough.

 

There's an old saying that "Nothing's smaller than 1/8" in the field", so if I show the guys in the shop a drawing with numbers like 33 3/64", they will just laugh at me.:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • AndyInTampa

    24

  • Dana W

    22

  • Dadgad

    19

  • ReMark

    9

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I'm going to try and fix this drawing, that is change it to Imperial units, and re-post it for you under a new name. It will take about 1/10th the time to do it than it will to explain how. Besides, I have no clue what the Draftsight commands for it might be.

 

Unfortunately I have to go and help somebody drink some holiday cook-out beer in about 1/2 hour, so it may be a bit before I can re-post it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, try to avoid drawing on Layers "0" and "Defpoints". They are good for other stuff, but having drawing objects on them just clouds things all up, especially defpoints.

 

In my modified version, I added layers for all the different object types in the drawing. I also added a whole new dimension style, suited for printing on an 8 1/2 x 11 home printer at 1" = 1'-0" scale, a layout for which has been defined. The layout plots a pdf file rather than hard copy, but it is still the same size. That way, you can print the pdf file without having to figure out how to modify the layout for your partular printer.

 

I am not sure Drsftsight can produce a pdf, so I will attach that too.

 

I also saw a number of dimensions with the node points off in the middle of empty space. The dim nodes need to be exactly on the point they are dimensioning. Otherwise, they can, and will move and jump around trying to find some sort of association.

 

Here is what I came up with after correcting the units issue.

 

I used the -dwgunits command to change mm to inches, and followed the prompts all the way through scaling the objects to match the new units. However this results in the objects still needing upscaling by a factor of 25.4, which I also did. The scaling in the command -dwgunits results in the objects being scaled to the actual size to which they were drawn, which was 63 mm wide. Then, scaling up by 25.4 brings them up to 63 inches wide.

 

IF you were able to copy your drawing, and insert it into my copy, you will see that your copy is 25.4 times smaller than the imperial one.

 

I left the precision level in my copy at 1/64", so you can see what accuracy level you were able to obtain. The trouble is, the looser your precision level, the more difficult it is to be accurate. Even with snaps on, you can miss a snap by 1/16" or less and never know.

 

I moved the right hand cabinet down to be horizontal with the left cabinet. It was somewhere between 1/64 and 1/32" high, which effected the dimension rounding. I did not move the right hand set of holes down, since I assumed you measured them off the walls, ceiling and countertop.

 

Computer programs don't do math incorrectly, ever. The issues were the dwg Units, the precision level, and the imposed rounding factor in the dimension style.

 

I hope this helps you out some.

Main Bath Mounting Holes Imperial-Sheet1.pdf

Main Bath Mounting Holes Imperial.dwg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dana, looking at your drawing, is this the perfect case study for using one of those Incra CNC accurate rulers, or what?

With the professional version you can nail dimensions to a hundredth of an inch. Any of them goes to 1/64th with CNC accuracy.

Try and do that with even a Starrett tape measure and you will be out of luck.

 

Andy, have you got a large caulking tube full of Construction Adhesive handy? :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dana, looking at your drawing, is this the perfect case study for using one of those Incra CNC accurate rulers, or what?

With the professional version you can nail dimensions to a hundredth of an inch. Any of them goes to 1/64th with CNC accuracy.

Try and do that with even a Starrett tape measure and you will be out of luck.

 

Andy, have you got a large caulking tube full of Construction Adhesive handy? :whistle:

As much as I love tools, I'm a woodworker after all. For me that Incra thingy would be like driving an F-22 Raptor down the county road to work. For instance, I know that the pores in most wood are bigger than 320 grit sandpaper, so what's the point. It's sorta like the framing carpenter cutting 2x4's over his knee with a hand held circular saw, while going by a drawing measured to 1/32".:ouch::lol:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I opened the drawing and right away noticed a big issue. The first thing I usually do when looking over another person's drawing is to verify which units were used. AutoCad has a command called -dwgunits. I ran the command on your drawing, and It appears that your drawing template started off in millimeters. That combined with fractional dimensions is confusing the rounding thing. You are looking at fractions of a millimeter.

 

By the way, in your dimension style, I see that you are forcing rounding to the nearest 1/16". I would leave that at 0".

Dana, I do not have AutoCad so I know nothing about -dwgunits. When you open DraftSight, everything is already in millimeters. I set my units to sixteenths of an inch according to what Gamma_au posted on page one of this post and continued from there. I did notice that all the fractions displayed were missing the " symbol, but thought nothing more of it. I had set the units to 1/16" because that is the smallest increment I can measure with a tape measure and is all the accuracy I need to install the cabinets.

Where this is a disaster, is when you try to print a scale drawing, or insert this drawing into another one that is in imperial units.

I was able to print it without having to define a print configuration. I just selected Fit to Page in my printer options. I don't understand the term "imperial" units.

What I usually do is keep my "-dwgunits", and dim style precision at 1/64" at least, then change it to 1/16" when I am satisfied that the drawing is accurate enough.

Excellent idea.

 

Earlier I said that most of the holes are for molly bolts. That means that the holes in the wall are approx. 1/2" wide to allow for the anchor portion, but the screw will still only be about 1/8" wide. That allows alot of leeway. The four holes going into studs must be more accurate or the screw will deflect into the hole if it's not right on thereby dragging the cabinet with it.

 

First off, try to avoid drawing on Layers "0" and "Defpoints". They are good for other stuff, but having drawing objects on them just clouds things all up, especially defpoints.

 

In my modified version, I added layers for all the different object types in the drawing. I also added a whole new dimension style, suited for printing on an 8 1/2 x 11 home printer at 1" = 1'-0" scale, a layout for which has been defined. The layout plots a pdf file rather than hard copy, but it is still the same size. That way, you can print the pdf file without having to figure out how to modify the layout for your partular printer.

I am completely unfamiliar with special terminology specific to drawing, drafting, architecture, etc. I don't understand layers, defpoints, dimension styles, upscaling factors, imperial units, or how to adjust scaling.

 

I also saw a number of dimensions with the node points off in the middle of empty space. The dim nodes need to be exactly on the point they are dimensioning. Otherwise, they can, and will move and jump around trying to find some sort of association.

 

I appreciate all the effort you took in recreating my drawing. You probably did it in 1/10th the time it took me to make mine. I didn't find a way to declare how large a box was or where to place it on my drawing so it was very "hack"ish. I'd make a box, find the dimension, then adjust the box until the dimension came up right. For placement, I created a dimension into space exactly as far as I needed it, then placed the box in line with it. This probably explains why you found nodes in space. Then when I had all the parts where I knew they should be, I tried to get dimension from the holes to the cabinet sides and that is where I was getting miscalculations.

 

You assumed correctly that the holes were measured to the walls and the counter, however the only wall used was the left as it is perpendicular to the counter. Your drawing appears to measure from the right wall which actually leans in the higher you go. Thank you for doing this. My whole purpose for this drawing is to have something to take with me from the computer to the project so I can mark exactly where to drill since the cabinets are not in the computer room. I still need to get it to 16ths, but this drawing will help to show me what needs to be adjusted. And yes, I know I can just round the 64ths, but I'd rather have it printed in front of me when I go to drill. Thank you for the help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regard to what you had written earlier, this is the choice given for the drafting styles. Layer 0 or Defpoint appears to be the only two options.

LayerDefpoint.jpg

 

EDIT: I figured out how to add layers, but I'm still working on figuring out how to use them.

 

And this is where I set the units to inches.

UnitSystem.jpg

 

I went through every option and didn't find another area to set global options.

Edited by AndyInTampa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All that stuff I wrote was for your information, to let you see why you were getting dimensions 1/16" off, and should you find more use for the drafting software. Maybe it will help you when encountering future issues.

 

You're right in that printing "To Fit" doesn't require worrying about the scale, as long as the dimensions are correct.

 

The Imperial measuring system is feet and inches. The Metric measuring system is, well, metric.:D

 

My dimensions merely indicate where the objects on the drawing are, in relationship to each other, per drafting standards. They are still where you drew them, except for the right hand cabinet being a mouse hair lower, to line up with the other one.

 

You set the units to inches for blocks. Blocks are basically re-usable copies of drawing objects that you can define for later use, like windows in an office building, there may be a thousand of them, all identical. If you had built any blocks, they would have inserted into your drawing 25.4 times larger than expected.

 

Your dimension style was defined as fractional. They can display 25 3/4 millimeters as easily as 25 3/4 inches.

 

Usually, the standard for pre-determined, or included drawing template naming conventions is for all the metric stuff to include the ISO acronym for International Organization for Standardization. The Imperial ones do not have ISO in their names. I see some ISO choices in your screen captures. I guess Draftsight is following convention.

 

See if Draftsight has any pre-defined drawing template files or sample files you can use as a starting point if you draw anything else. (No ISO).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See if Draftsight has any pre-defined drawing template files or sample files you can use as a starting point if you draw anything else. (No ISO).

 

I started something (not the entire drawing) using the Standard template and still ran into the same problem. I set the units to Fractional 1/64 and set Linear Dimension Precision to 1/256 and set rounding to 0. Then I created the two cabinets but I typed in the sizes using the keyboard so they would be correct. Then I set dimensions to measure all 4 sides of both cabinets (8 places). One of them is 1/256th off. I've attached the file for you to see.

 

TEST1.dwg

 

There are other templates. I can't tell in DraftSight which command is the equivalent to -DWGUNITS so that I can see if the template uses Imperial units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The outside rectangle on the right is caddy-womp. The top left corner is off by 1/256, which makes it 28-127/256" if you were to dimension it. But the right side is exactly 28-1/2" (28-128/256").

 

This is the error you're encoutering. I've attached the file.

TEST1_TZF.dwg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is particularly weird since the right rectangle pair is a copy and paste from the left rectangle pair. After that, I still had to adjust the inside rectangles because they were not perfectly centered, but I didn't touch either rectangle's sizes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*Shrugs* who knows. Quirky things like that can happen without warning so don't think you're alone. After a while we all learn those little quirks and know how to handle them.

 

8)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is particularly weird since the right rectangle pair is a copy and paste from the left rectangle pair. After that, I still had to adjust the inside rectangles because they were not perfectly centered, but I didn't touch either rectangle's sizes.

 

Andy, I have never used Draftsight, but in Autocad, in order to have fast, painless concentric entities, one would typically use the OFFSET command. :|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried finding information on the offset command but gave up and just started placing things where they needed to be. This image sums up my frustration with the math.

Grrrr.jpg

 

Since I'm drawing to 256ths, once I knock the precision down to 64ths, it should all look good for me to work. Right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andy, I sympathize fully, with your desire for the numbers to add up correctly.

Fractions? No thanks, I got over using feet and inches about 15 years ago, Metric is all decimal,

makes the math real easy.

 

Since you stated very early in the thread that you wanted to be accurate to within 1/16th of an inch?

Go pop a nice cold beer, bring the cabinets into the bathroom and hang them.

The 1/256 of an inch which is driving you (and I do understand) to distraction, is way beyond the capabilities

of the stupidly accurate Incra ruler (which I absolutely love) by almost a factor of 3.

What is more important getting the drawing perfect, or the cabinets hung?

When I saw you had reposted on this thread a couple days ago, I was really looking forward to photographic proof,

that it all came out in the wash. :beer:

 

Might those dimensions be taking into account the curvature of the Earth?

Edited by Dadgad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what you are trying to do a precision of +/- 1/8th of an inch would be more than sufficient. Once again you are making this way more difficult than it has to be.

Edited by ReMark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I love tools, I'm a woodworker after all. For me that Incra thingy would be like driving an F-22 Raptor down the county road to work. For instance, I know that the pores in most wood are bigger than 320 grit sandpaper, so what's the point. It's sorta like the framing carpenter cutting 2x4's over his knee with a hand held circular saw, while going by a drawing measured to 1/32".:ouch::lol:

 

I got spoiled real bad about 30 years ago by the first iteration of the Paralok Fence which we mounted on the table saw.

I remember to this day I needed to cut a dutchman to fill a hole in a door jamb out of clear pine.

I wanted it to look real good, measured and cut it to 23.5/32nds, or should I say 47/64ths of an inch.

Fit like a glove. I was blown away by how awesome that fence was.

Yeah, not too many guys in the field will go after 16ths with a wormdrive Skil 77,

but in a well tuned cabinet shop one can aim a little higher,

especially with Fenner drive belts on all your machines.

 

The whole reason I mentioned the Inca square and rules was

that the drawing is dimensioned to 64ths, which is a bit optimistic using a typical tape measure. :beer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got spoiled real bad about 30 years ago by the first iteration of the Paralok Fence which we mounted on the table saw.

I remember to this day I needed to cut a dutchman to fill a hole in a door jamb out of clear pine.

I wanted it to look real good, measured and cut it to 23.5/32nds, or should I say 47/64ths of an inch.

Fit like a glove. I was blown away by how awesome that fence was.

Yeah, not too many guys in the field will go after 16ths with a wormdrive Skil 77,

but in a well tuned cabinet shop one can aim a little higher,

especially with Fenner drive belts on all your machines.

 

The whole reason I mentioned the Inca square and rules was

that the drawing is dimensioned to 64ths, which is a bit optimistic using a typical tape measure. :beer:

Yeah, and when I drew up my guitar plans I took it out to three decimal places, too. Now that was optimistic, septin I am gonna get me one of these from Stewmac. Now that I am in a place with room for a small shop in the garage I am actually planning on building the thing this summer. Tools, and Jigs, and Glues, oh my. Tools, and Jigs, and Glues, oh my. Tools, and Jigs, and Glues, oh my. My apologies to L. Frank Baum.

 

I did move, but I am still in Florida. I moved a whole whopping 60 feet from a 2/2 duplex to a 3/2 single w garage and I got all my tools outa the self-storage unit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel for you too Andy. You do know don't you that the typical learning curve for a drafting program takes anywhere from 6 months to a year to overcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do realize how difficult I appear to be making this, but I'm really not. I have a slight addiction to solving puzzles. It cost me a job when I discovered the formula to calculate a security code. I'm also a little :censored: retentive when it comes to math, so those little 256ths really bothered me and at the same time presented a puzzle that needed solving. Well, I think I got it. This is my third attempt at making this drawing and with all the help I received here, I believe it's come out better than I even cared to have. Those math problems have disappeared.

 

DraftSight let me create a new drawing without a template in Imperial format (while I await Darth Vader to arrive). I used layers as suggested and now I can print the drawing with only the measurements I need to mark the holes for drilling inside the cabinets. It's not pretty, but it is functional. I can take this drawing to another room or rooms and work on the cabinets.

 

To be honest, the challenge of getting the drawing done was just fun - more fun than hanging cabinets. Also, my back went out again. :cry: Here is the final file.

 

Main Bath Mounting Holes Imperial.dwg

 

For a hack that's been playing with it for less than 24 realtime hours, I believe it's pretty good. I know there are ways to finesse the drawing so that it doesn't look like a wiring schematic, but that comes with experience and training.

 

Please let me know if you see any problems and tell me what you think. I will post a picture of the cabinets when they get installed.

 

I do have one more mystery. Why is my post count still zero?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...