hi808nv702
Computer
In the SW drawings, I want to show clouds around any revisions that I make. Is there such a thing and what wher is it located?. In autocad there I used "revcloud". The e-drawings also show clouds.
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
revision cloud 10
- Thread starter hi808nv702
- Start date
- Status
CorBlimeyLimey
Mechanical
As far as I know SW does not have clouds for the Revision module, it uses only "recognized" standards.
Clouds are normally only used for notes or when "red-lining" a drawing and adding comments.
![[cheers]](/data/assets/smilies/cheers.gif "[cheers] [cheers]")
Clouds are normally only used for notes or when "red-lining" a drawing and adding comments.
-
2
- #3
SW doesn't have Revclouds, but they provide other symbols for Revisions.
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP![[pc2]](/data/assets/smilies/pc2.gif "[pc2] [pc2]")
3DVision Technologies
Merry Christmas![[santa3]](/data/assets/smilies/santa3.gif "[santa3] [santa3]")
faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies
Merry Christmas
faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users
-
1
- #4
I not sure adding "clouds" on your print is a good idea from a document control stand point. Typically drawing changes are listed on the ECN in a 'was/is' format and the ecn number is called out on the print. That way the loop is closed. I remember being at a company that did all their design work on the board and they listed all the changes in the rev control box....it got a little sluttered after rev C. That's my two cents......
Best Regards,
Heckler
"Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups" John Kenneth Galbraith
Best Regards,
Heckler
"Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups" John Kenneth Galbraith
Our company places the revision letter in parentheses next to all dims that have changed. Works for us.
[green]"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."[/green]
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
[green]"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."[/green]
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
-
2
- #6
I agree with you ctopher.
We don't describe changes in the rev block, that history is entered into our MRP system that handles the ECOs. Most of our drawings are on A and B sizes, not many zone identifiers there.
[green]"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."[/green]
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
We don't describe changes in the rev block, that history is entered into our MRP system that handles the ECOs. Most of our drawings are on A and B sizes, not many zone identifiers there.
[green]"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."[/green]
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
jlcochran1
Mechanical
The lack of a rev cloud is unfortunate. It has been used in our industry for decades in certain cases and is taken for granted by AutoCad users. I was able to akwardly emulate in SW using spline tool.
Moving from AutoCad Mechanical to SW,(or other mid range MCAD product), the 2D environment seems the weakest aspect of the transition. Our customers still want .dwg approval drawings, so it boils down to how efficiently we can produce 2D drawings from solids in SW that approach the quality of the 2D drawings we are currently producing in AutoCAD.
Moving from AutoCad Mechanical to SW,(or other mid range MCAD product), the 2D environment seems the weakest aspect of the transition. Our customers still want .dwg approval drawings, so it boils down to how efficiently we can produce 2D drawings from solids in SW that approach the quality of the 2D drawings we are currently producing in AutoCAD.
But why? Revision Cloud is not an ANSI standard or any standard that I'm aware of. With AutoCAD you can deviate from Standard. That's what screwed up CAD standards from the beginning (AutoCAD). If AutoCAD had used standards like those that are provided by ANSI (as an example), then the question of standards wouldn't be a question at all. Instead, we all would be finding ways to improve the standard instead discussing things that are not really relavent, because it shouldn't exist.
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies
Merry Christmas
faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies
Merry Christmas
faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users
If you really would like to use rev clouds. Why don't you just create a block of a cloud that is suitable to you and then you can reuse that block over and over again. Also you can scale the block to be smaller or bigger and you can position blocks onto selected geometry depending on what you want to put the cloud over.
Look in SW help on creating and using blocks.
A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. -Albert Einstein
Challenges are what makes life interesting; overcoming them is what makes life meaningful.
Look in SW help on creating and using blocks.
A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new. -Albert Einstein
Challenges are what makes life interesting; overcoming them is what makes life meaningful.
Scott, I couldn't agree with you more. The industry standard, ASME Y14.100, titled Engineering Drawing Practices, is the adopted standard for engineering. I think this is a closed issue. I wish everyone the best of luck with their "revclouds" but please do not submit this as an enhancement request.
Best Regards,
Heckler
"Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups" John Kenneth Galbraith
Best Regards,
Heckler
"Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups" John Kenneth Galbraith
FYI
ASME Y14.100 is available for purchase from IHS. For more information, consult with an IHS sales representative by calling 800-854-7179.
ASME Y14.100: Engineering Drawing Practices
Adopted on Jan. 30, 1998 the Department of Defense, DoD.
Date of Issuance: Nov. 23, 2001
Scope
This Standard establishes the essential requirements and reference documents applicable to the preparation and revision of engineering drawings and associated lists. It is essential that this Standard be used in close conjunction with ASME Y14.24, ASME Y14.34M, and ASME Y14.35M.
References
The following is a list of publications referenced in this Standard. When the following American National Standards referred to in this Standard are superseded by a revision approved by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the revision shall apply.
ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)
ANSI Y14.6, Screw Thread Representation
ANSI Y14.6aM, Screw Thread Representation (Metric Supplement)
ANSI Y14.7.1, Gear Drawing Standards - Part 1: For Spur, Helical, Double Helical, and Rack
ANSI Y14.7.2, Gear and Spline Drawing Standards - Part 2: Bevel and Hypoid Gears
ANSI Y14.13M, Mechanical Spring Representation
ANSI Y32.10, Graphic Symbols for Fluid Power Diagrams
AIIM (Association for Information and Image Management)
ANSI/AIIM MS4, Flowchart Symbols and Their Use in Micrographics
AWS (American Welding Society)
ANSI/AWS A2.4, Standard Symbols for Welding, Brazing, and Nondestructive Examination
ANSI/AWS A3.0, Welding Terms and Definitions, Including Terms for Brazing, Soldering, Thermal Spraying, and Thermal Cutting
IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers)
ANSI/IEEE 91, Graphic Symbols for Logic Functions
ANSI/IEEE 200, Reference Designations for Electrical and Electronic Parts and Equipment
ANSI/IEEE 260.1, Letter Symbols for Units of Measurement (SI Units, Customary Inch-Pound Units, and Certain Other Units)
ANSI/IEEE 260.3, Mathematical Signs and Symbols for Use in Physical Sciences and Technology
ANSI/IEEE 268, Standard Metric Practice
ANSI/IEEE 280, Letter Symbols for Quantities Used in Electrical Science and Electrical Engineering (Same as ANSI Y10.5)
ANSI/IEEE 315a, Supplement to Graphic Symbols for Electrical and Electronics Diagrams
ANSI/IEEE 991, Logic Circuit Diagrams
IEEE 91a, Supplement to Graphic Symbols for Logic Functions
IEEE 315, Graphic Symbols for Electrical and Electronics Diagrams
IPC (Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits)
ANSI/IPC D-350, Printed Board Description in Digital Form
ANSI/IPC T-50F, Terms and Definitions for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits
IPC D-325, Documentation Requirements for Printed Boards, Assemblies, and Support Drawings
IPC 2221, Generic Standard on Printing Wiring Board Design
ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)
ASME B46.1, Surface Texture (Surface Roughness, Waviness, and Lay)
ASME Y14.1, Decimal Inch Drawing Sheet Size and Format
ASME Y14.1M, Metric Drawing Sheet Size and Format
ASME Y14.2M, Line Conventions and Lettering
ASME Y14.3M, Multi- and Sectional-View Drawings
ASME Y14.4M, Pictorial Drawing
ASME Y14.5M, Dimensioning and Tolerancing
ASME Y14.8M, Castings and Forgings
ASME/ANSI Y14.18M, Optical Parts
ASME Y14.24, Types and Applications of Engineering Drawings
ASME Y14.34M, Associated Lists
ASME Y14.35M, Revision of Engineering Drawings and Associated Documents
ASME Y14.36M, Surface Texture Symbols
ASME Y14.38, Abbreviations and Acronyms
ASME Y32.2.6, Graphic Symbols for Heat-Power Apparatus
ASTM (ASTM International)
ASTM E 380, Standard Practice for the Use of the International System of Units (SI)
ASTM F 856, Standard Practice for Symbols - Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC)
ASTM F 1000, Standard Practice for Piping Systems Drawing Symbols
EIA (Electronic Industries Alliance)
EIA 632, Processes for Engineering a System
SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers)
SAE AS 1290, Graphic Symbols for Aircraft Hydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
IHS and ASME
IHS has been the leading distributor of ASME standards and codes since 1974. In 1989, IHS and ASME first produced a full-text, electronically searchable, hyperlinked version of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code on CD-ROM. The 2004 edition is now available.
Best Regards,
Heckler
"Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups" John Kenneth Galbraith
ASME Y14.100 is available for purchase from IHS. For more information, consult with an IHS sales representative by calling 800-854-7179.
ASME Y14.100: Engineering Drawing Practices
Adopted on Jan. 30, 1998 the Department of Defense, DoD.
Date of Issuance: Nov. 23, 2001
Scope
This Standard establishes the essential requirements and reference documents applicable to the preparation and revision of engineering drawings and associated lists. It is essential that this Standard be used in close conjunction with ASME Y14.24, ASME Y14.34M, and ASME Y14.35M.
References
The following is a list of publications referenced in this Standard. When the following American National Standards referred to in this Standard are superseded by a revision approved by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the revision shall apply.
ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)
ANSI Y14.6, Screw Thread Representation
ANSI Y14.6aM, Screw Thread Representation (Metric Supplement)
ANSI Y14.7.1, Gear Drawing Standards - Part 1: For Spur, Helical, Double Helical, and Rack
ANSI Y14.7.2, Gear and Spline Drawing Standards - Part 2: Bevel and Hypoid Gears
ANSI Y14.13M, Mechanical Spring Representation
ANSI Y32.10, Graphic Symbols for Fluid Power Diagrams
AIIM (Association for Information and Image Management)
ANSI/AIIM MS4, Flowchart Symbols and Their Use in Micrographics
AWS (American Welding Society)
ANSI/AWS A2.4, Standard Symbols for Welding, Brazing, and Nondestructive Examination
ANSI/AWS A3.0, Welding Terms and Definitions, Including Terms for Brazing, Soldering, Thermal Spraying, and Thermal Cutting
IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers)
ANSI/IEEE 91, Graphic Symbols for Logic Functions
ANSI/IEEE 200, Reference Designations for Electrical and Electronic Parts and Equipment
ANSI/IEEE 260.1, Letter Symbols for Units of Measurement (SI Units, Customary Inch-Pound Units, and Certain Other Units)
ANSI/IEEE 260.3, Mathematical Signs and Symbols for Use in Physical Sciences and Technology
ANSI/IEEE 268, Standard Metric Practice
ANSI/IEEE 280, Letter Symbols for Quantities Used in Electrical Science and Electrical Engineering (Same as ANSI Y10.5)
ANSI/IEEE 315a, Supplement to Graphic Symbols for Electrical and Electronics Diagrams
ANSI/IEEE 991, Logic Circuit Diagrams
IEEE 91a, Supplement to Graphic Symbols for Logic Functions
IEEE 315, Graphic Symbols for Electrical and Electronics Diagrams
IPC (Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits)
ANSI/IPC D-350, Printed Board Description in Digital Form
ANSI/IPC T-50F, Terms and Definitions for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits
IPC D-325, Documentation Requirements for Printed Boards, Assemblies, and Support Drawings
IPC 2221, Generic Standard on Printing Wiring Board Design
ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)
ASME B46.1, Surface Texture (Surface Roughness, Waviness, and Lay)
ASME Y14.1, Decimal Inch Drawing Sheet Size and Format
ASME Y14.1M, Metric Drawing Sheet Size and Format
ASME Y14.2M, Line Conventions and Lettering
ASME Y14.3M, Multi- and Sectional-View Drawings
ASME Y14.4M, Pictorial Drawing
ASME Y14.5M, Dimensioning and Tolerancing
ASME Y14.8M, Castings and Forgings
ASME/ANSI Y14.18M, Optical Parts
ASME Y14.24, Types and Applications of Engineering Drawings
ASME Y14.34M, Associated Lists
ASME Y14.35M, Revision of Engineering Drawings and Associated Documents
ASME Y14.36M, Surface Texture Symbols
ASME Y14.38, Abbreviations and Acronyms
ASME Y32.2.6, Graphic Symbols for Heat-Power Apparatus
ASTM (ASTM International)
ASTM E 380, Standard Practice for the Use of the International System of Units (SI)
ASTM F 856, Standard Practice for Symbols - Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC)
ASTM F 1000, Standard Practice for Piping Systems Drawing Symbols
EIA (Electronic Industries Alliance)
EIA 632, Processes for Engineering a System
SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers)
SAE AS 1290, Graphic Symbols for Aircraft Hydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
IHS and ASME
IHS has been the leading distributor of ASME standards and codes since 1974. In 1989, IHS and ASME first produced a full-text, electronically searchable, hyperlinked version of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code on CD-ROM. The 2004 edition is now available.
Best Regards,
Heckler
"Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups" John Kenneth Galbraith
-
1
- #14
jlcochran1
Mechanical
We are a century old company. Most of the detailing practices are similar to what they were 50 years ago. Little has changed in detailing of pressure vessels and storage tanks except that CAD is used instead of board drafting.
Typically numbered revision triangles are used to indicate revisions. The 3 areas we see rev clouds used is to call attention to items that need clarification on approval drawings (typically an isolated clouded note like "specified customer supplied detail does not comply with OSHA requirements, please advise" in conjunction with a "Verify and Approve" arrow. 2) by the engineering companies or customers to highlight markup changes and 3)in house we use to highlight unusual requirements for the shop in isolated bold note form. Over the past 2 decades I have seen detail drawings from several competitors, they are very similar in approach to detailing. The majority still use AutoCAD and have not moved to 3D MCAD yet.
The real question for me is whether SolidWorks has the flexibility to allow us to detail the way our customers and shop expect to see. Keep in mind that this is a niche industry, typically these are smaller shops, there are not zones around the border, ECN's or geometric tolerances. The vessels can be over 150' in length or 80' in diameter with several levels of structural platforms or internals. Dimensions are fractional.
I am primarily interested in flexibility similar to AutoCAD to produce a document format that has worked successfully for decades. If we have to export to AutoCAD to "finish" our drawings then SolidWorks would be of little value. Creating models and assemblies is fun, but the end product in our environment is still 2d. I plan to try a couple of actual projects during the holidays to see if SW 2d has improved enough for our needs. Typically we have used SW for special projects only and focused on modeling in the past 5 years and exported to AutoCAD for any detailing. We are just now seriously investigating whether SW, (or Alibre, Inventor or SolidEdge) could someday replace the need for AutoCAD.
I am finding other detailing tasks much more difficult to accomplish in SW than AutoCAD, lack of rev clouds is just a minor disappointment.
Typically numbered revision triangles are used to indicate revisions. The 3 areas we see rev clouds used is to call attention to items that need clarification on approval drawings (typically an isolated clouded note like "specified customer supplied detail does not comply with OSHA requirements, please advise" in conjunction with a "Verify and Approve" arrow. 2) by the engineering companies or customers to highlight markup changes and 3)in house we use to highlight unusual requirements for the shop in isolated bold note form. Over the past 2 decades I have seen detail drawings from several competitors, they are very similar in approach to detailing. The majority still use AutoCAD and have not moved to 3D MCAD yet.
The real question for me is whether SolidWorks has the flexibility to allow us to detail the way our customers and shop expect to see. Keep in mind that this is a niche industry, typically these are smaller shops, there are not zones around the border, ECN's or geometric tolerances. The vessels can be over 150' in length or 80' in diameter with several levels of structural platforms or internals. Dimensions are fractional.
I am primarily interested in flexibility similar to AutoCAD to produce a document format that has worked successfully for decades. If we have to export to AutoCAD to "finish" our drawings then SolidWorks would be of little value. Creating models and assemblies is fun, but the end product in our environment is still 2d. I plan to try a couple of actual projects during the holidays to see if SW 2d has improved enough for our needs. Typically we have used SW for special projects only and focused on modeling in the past 5 years and exported to AutoCAD for any detailing. We are just now seriously investigating whether SW, (or Alibre, Inventor or SolidEdge) could someday replace the need for AutoCAD.
I am finding other detailing tasks much more difficult to accomplish in SW than AutoCAD, lack of rev clouds is just a minor disappointment.
CorBlimeyLimey
Mechanical
jlcochran ... What "detailing tasks" are you needing?
The cloud can easily be produced as per jksolids post above.
BTW .. SW2005 drawing environment is supposed to be much improved, but I have not actually used it, so cannot verify.
The cloud can easily be produced as per jksolids post above.
BTW .. SW2005 drawing environment is supposed to be much improved, but I have not actually used it, so cannot verify.
-
1
- #17
I see a battle of engineering dwg vs structural detailing.
It's true SW does not have the detailing ability so useful to the structural detailers use to autocad. It is also true SW does a fantastic job of causing adherence to established dwg standards.
Some time spent wringing the "art" you want out of SW will be required. But it can be done. The other option is to adapt your dwg process to what SW does most efficiently.
It's true SW does not have the detailing ability so useful to the structural detailers use to autocad. It is also true SW does a fantastic job of causing adherence to established dwg standards.
Some time spent wringing the "art" you want out of SW will be required. But it can be done. The other option is to adapt your dwg process to what SW does most efficiently.
Falcon4 - their is no battle between engineering drawings and structural detailing going on here. The battle is between industry adopted drawing specifications/standards and the company that has being doing things a certain way for so long that it must be "right"!...but I guess one could call that "ART"
Best Regards,
Heckler
"Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups" John Kenneth Galbraith
Best Regards,
Heckler
"Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups" John Kenneth Galbraith
In my experience, (since the board and a Vemco) the only symbols I have seen used to high-light revision changes have been triangles with the rev letter inside. I always disliked having to do it, but for several companies that I worked for (commercial not Military)used this as thier standard.
That's the point. Companies make their own standards up as they go along instead of using the proper standard. I worked for a company like this once. They had an unskilled person working for them and they trusted that person. They lead them astray and when I got there after they left. The company switched to SW and actual true standards were introduced. Well I got the task of getting them converted over to actual ANSI standards. It wasn't easy and it wasn't complete even after I left.
The point is, if companies want to use software like SW, then using the true ANSI standard is standard. If users want to customize if to fit theirs they can, but it will be more cumbersome for them. IMO SW should not change this, because why should SW change their software to match the unorganized standards of AutoCAD? AutoCAD is the one that screwed the Standards up (Mostly) in the first place, because of that freedom AutoCAD provides. SW doesn't have that freedom, however you can make custom things, But they are not true stnadards, and SW should and hopefully will not change this. Staying true with ANSI standards, is better to get your point across after your users understand them.
They had to learn once they might as well learn it over again the right way.
It's like when I was thinking of trying to quite smoking. "There is never a good time to quit, you just have to quit."
FYI - I did quit and have been free for 3.5 years. So your users will learn over and they may not like it, but they will switch.
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies
faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users
The point is, if companies want to use software like SW, then using the true ANSI standard is standard. If users want to customize if to fit theirs they can, but it will be more cumbersome for them. IMO SW should not change this, because why should SW change their software to match the unorganized standards of AutoCAD? AutoCAD is the one that screwed the Standards up (Mostly) in the first place, because of that freedom AutoCAD provides. SW doesn't have that freedom, however you can make custom things, But they are not true stnadards, and SW should and hopefully will not change this. Staying true with ANSI standards, is better to get your point across after your users understand them.
They had to learn once they might as well learn it over again the right way.
It's like when I was thinking of trying to quite smoking. "There is never a good time to quit, you just have to quit."
FYI - I did quit and have been free for 3.5 years. So your users will learn over and they may not like it, but they will switch.
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies
faq731-376
faq559-716 - SW Fora Users
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question