Dimensioning in paperspace
Dimensioning in paperspace
(OP)
We've got a new guy and he has a practice that is new to me. I'm looking for some opinions.
He actually dimensions parts right in paperspace. What he does is make a dimension style that scales the dimension according to the scale of the paperspace. Let me illustrate since that description is probably confusing. Say the paperspace scale is 3/16" = 1' ie(1/64). Then he would use a 64 multiplier on the dimension annotation.
My initial reaction was don't do this. Dimension stuff in model space. But then I got to thinking at least you could do transparent zooms while dimensioning. I'm still not convinced it's a good practice, for one thing it introduces the possibility of human error. Suppose the user thinks he's got 1/64 paperspace but he really has 1/65, too small a difference to notice if you're just flying along trusting the numbers popping out.
Anyway, I don't want to be accused of being inflexible so I would like some feedback on what some of you think about this practice.
Thanks
He actually dimensions parts right in paperspace. What he does is make a dimension style that scales the dimension according to the scale of the paperspace. Let me illustrate since that description is probably confusing. Say the paperspace scale is 3/16" = 1' ie(1/64). Then he would use a 64 multiplier on the dimension annotation.
My initial reaction was don't do this. Dimension stuff in model space. But then I got to thinking at least you could do transparent zooms while dimensioning. I'm still not convinced it's a good practice, for one thing it introduces the possibility of human error. Suppose the user thinks he's got 1/64 paperspace but he really has 1/65, too small a difference to notice if you're just flying along trusting the numbers popping out.
Anyway, I don't want to be accused of being inflexible so I would like some feedback on what some of you think about this practice.
Thanks





RE: Dimensioning in paperspace
Actually, most AutoCAD standards advocate annotating dimensioning in "paper space". Some call these standards or refer to these "good CAD practices".
The only initial problems I see with this is modifying details tends to be tricky.
One:
Do you activate the floating viewprt and make the modification while in paper space and risk the chance of messing up the zoom factor.
Two:
Or do you totally switch to model space and hope that the CAD users doesn't forget to modify every dimension string in paper space.
Three:
What about standard blocks for your library? From time to time details will be developed in which you feel would make a good addition to your library. Now the annoatation and dims need to be moved to model space and scaled to the appropriate scale and adjusted to the detail again.
Four:
This is really not a complaint but the CAD user must know how to maintian his many dim styles and where to modify the multiplier. Although you run into this when you just do you dims in model space, so this really can't count.
The only thing I see as a good thing is...
One:
For plans when referencing the annotation and dims won't be seen becuase "paper space" items can't be "xref'd". One less step for others to do when composing their drawings.
Two:
One or two text heights are only required to be remembered. 3/32 and 3/16 OR 1/8 and 1/4 depending on your office standards. Factors for different dim style is still a list of numbers, but the only list of numbers to remember.
I do it in maodel but others here vary with personalities. I can work it both ways. But it requires me to train everyone who comes in to know both ways so there are no surprises when drafting with each others files.
These are my thoughts ....
RE: Dimensioning in paperspace
For strictly 2D work, it is less common. I tend to agree that it is not good 2D practice. There is more room for error, particularly when you have different details shown at different scales.
RE: Dimensioning in paperspace
RE: Dimensioning in paperspace
I use paperspace all the time but my dims are in the model with different dimstyles. So, if I have to resize a viewport in paper space, I just change the dimstyle of the dims included in it. Then I'll always have the same text high, arrow size, etc. in my hard copy.
Just remember to Lock your viewports once you have them set up.
The only "good reason" you have to use dims on PS is when you have a huge drawing as a Xref wich somebody else in working on and you have different people drawing small portions or details of it at the same time.
RE: Dimensioning in paperspace
RE: Dimensioning in paperspace
RE: Dimensioning in paperspace
I realize that you've basically closed off this discussion, but it seems to me that THE WHOLE POINT of paperspace is to facilitate a good paper presentation with a consistent and matching dimension style. When you dimension in model space it forces you to scale all the dimensions and text so that letters are 6 ft high. Then when you open another window as a detail off the same model in a different scale you get all the odd sized dimensions and you have to mess around with layers on and off etc. and two sets of dimensions on the model. Open the window and set the scale then dimension in PS. Every detail on the drawing then has the same dimensioned appearance.
If you don't do that, why on earth are you even in PS in the first place?
I hate to say this in the face of such a lot of people clearly still dimensioning in MS but the word Dinosaur
Sorry guys but I'm with the new chap (he's not only new he's up-to-date!!)
RE: Dimensioning in paperspace
GOOD LUCK!
RE: Dimensioning in paperspace
Another thought would be to use a standard dimensioning style that is not scaled at all (this way you don't have to worry about the scale of the drawing), set the dimscale to 0 (yes, I said 0), and dimension THROUGH the viewport. This is the same as dimensioning in model space with the dimscale set the same as the scale in the viewport.
Brian
RE: Dimensioning in paperspace
Brian
RE: Dimensioning in paperspace