Equipment Drawings and thickness of lines

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges and frustrations associated with the quality of equipment drawings received from vendors, particularly focusing on line thickness and clarity in CAD-generated drawings. Participants express concerns about the decline in drafting standards and the impact of modern CAD tools on traditional drafting practices.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses frustration over the uniformity of line thickness in vendor drawings, making it difficult to distinguish between different types of lines such as dimension lines and outlines.
  • Another participant notes that the ease of creating 3D models has led to a decline in teaching good drafting skills, contributing to overcrowded drawings and poor dimensioning practices.
  • A third participant misses the utility of projection lines in paper drawings, suggesting that CAD's flexibility has made it harder to correlate features between views.
  • One suggestion is to find or create a standard for drawings and require suppliers to adhere to it, referencing a specific document for guidance.
  • A link is provided to an article discussing the art of drafting and concerns about losing traditional skills in the field.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally share a common annoyance regarding the quality of drawings but express differing views on the causes and potential solutions. There is no consensus on the best approach to address these issues.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific drafting standards and express a desire for improvements in vendor compliance, indicating a reliance on external resources for guidance. The discussion highlights a gap between traditional drafting skills and modern CAD practices.

Who May Find This Useful

Professionals in engineering, design, and drafting who are concerned about the quality of technical drawings and the implications of CAD technology on traditional drafting practices.

rollingstein
Messages
644
Reaction score
16
Warning: Rant ahead

I get more and more drawings from vendors where all lines seem to be of the same thickness. Makes it awfully hard to tell if a line's a dimension line, a leader, a projection or a real part outline.

Do others share my annoyance? Is this an evil of the post-AutoCAD era? Or is this when they send me those as pdf's?

It's not just some iffy small vendor, but even reputable ones seem to send such uni-darkness line drawings.

Has the legacy of 2H, H, HB, B, 2B etc. been relegated to the trash can? Or am I unusually unlucky in encountering these moronic draftsmen?

Sigh.

/end rant
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Its all too easy with 3d models. No one actually teaches good drafting anymore.

Also overcrowding of the page is my main irritation. I also hate when people dimension to hidden features. With cad systems it's just so much easier to create a new view.

People need to be forced to draw something on a board. Its a vital skill to plan the drawing in your head before you ever put pencil to paper.
 
Another thing I sorely miss, was the utility in paper drawings of projection lines between views. Merely by tracing down or horizontally one could often correlate features.

CAD has added liberty about placing views and made this so hard to decipher.

Anyways, asides of ranting, any constructive solutions to these problems? Surely CAD can be used in smarter ways? Have people seen CAD drawings that were exemplary or a pleasure to work with? I'd love some as examples to smack the next vendor on the head with when he shows up with one of their typical atrocities.