Underlined Text

[looslib]

One of our designers is complaining of the distance between text and an underline on our drawings. I looked in ASME Y14.2 and could not find any requirements, other then the obvious "basic requirement for lettering on a drawing is to produce fully legible copies". He claims the space is not enough to produce legible copies. We routinly issue 1/2 sclae (E to C) plotted drawings and in some cases 1/4 scale (E to A).

Does anyone know of a standard that defines the spacing between the text and its underline?

Reference CAD is Wildfire 4m150.


"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

 

[drawoh]

looslib,

In my opinion, it is not possible to plot readable copies of E_sized drawings onto an A_sized sheet. B_sized plots are fairly readable. If the end user wants A_sized prints, do not draw anything larger than C_size.

I have seen E_sized drawings done with weird sized fonts in an attempt to make small plots readable. It can sort of work, but the result is an amateurish drawing.

The following font sizes are adapted by me from the 21st edition of the Machinery's Handbook. I could find this in my 26th edition, but it is still useful.

[dl]
[dt]E size[/dt]
[dd]4mm or 5/32" font. Full sized prints probably do not fit on workbenches. The fonts are readable from 2m or 6ft, allowing the full sized print to hang on a nearby wall. B_sized prints are fairly readable. A_sized prints are not readable.[/dd]
[dt]D size[/dt]
[dd]4mm or 5/32" font. Full sized prints probably fit on your workbench. The fonts are readable from 2m or 6ft, allowing the full sized print to hang on a nearby wall. B_sized prints are readable. A_sized prints are readably by some of us, if you have a good printer.[/dd]
[dt]B and C size[/dt]
[dd]3mm or 1/8" font. Full sized prints fit on your workbench. A sized prints are readable.[/dd]
[dt]A size[/dt]
[dd]2.5mm or 0.1" font. A sized prints are (not surprizingly) completely readable.[/dd]
[/dl]

A_size prints can be punched in stored in a binder. B_sized print can be foled and punched, and stored in a binder.

JHG

 

[11echo]

You guys do know the trick about using %%U in front and %%U at the end of a text string you want underlined, AutoCAD automatically underlines the text and at an appropriate distance.

 

[metalonis]

looslib,

It's best to use the underline fonts in the CAD program to take care of it. I would think underlining of text is rarely, if ever, desirable anyway.


drawoh,

We use these text sizes:

A size 1/8”
B size 5/16”
C size 7/32
D size 5/16
E size 3/8

We find these sizes allow for readable reduced drawings, even E to A, and not at all amateurish.

 

[looslib]

In Pro/Engineer Wildfire, there is a style box for text formatting and one option is an underline. Click the box and apply to your selected text string. I can use any font I ant and underline any section or word. We have started using ISOFONT as our standard font. I did experiment with different fonts and they all seem to put the underline too close to the text itself. The bottom of an 'E' appears to blend into the underline.




"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

 

[dgallup]

11echo - Beware the AutoMAD special codes (they have ones for diameter and degree symbols among others). At least in older versions (AutoMAD 2000), they do not translate properly via DXF or IGES.

The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.

 

[looslib]

Special text code strings don't translate in any CAD system. The text string with the special characters is placed in the text string of the DXF or IGES file as just that, a text string. The display 'translation' is done when that text string is used in the application. UG/NX has a lot of special characters that translate out as text strings, too.


"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

 

[drawoh]

metalonis,

I assume you are using 3/8" font on your E_sized drawings so that you can print them A_size.

What is the point? I do E_sized drawings so that I can document things that are too complicated to fit on smaller sheets. I do not have room for 3/8" lettering. The E_sized drawing hanging on a wall 10ft from me has 1/4" lettering I can read fairly easily. Perhaps it is 6mm. I can't remember, and I cannot bother moving over to measure it.

I make E_sized drawings so that I can print them E_sized if I want. If I have a requirement to be able to print A_size, I do not exceed C_size.

JHG

 

[KENAT]

Why do you have underlined text on drawings, or at least enough of it to care about how far away the underline is?

Off the top of my head I can't think underlining in the drawing standards except for 'not to scale' dimensions.

As to text size, we settled on .15 after reviewing the standards. This works well enough on an E scaled down to B, and doesn't take up too much extra space except on maybe a B size drawing. However, by the time you have a title block and rev block to the standards and some 'standard notes' there's not much real estate left on a B anyway. We do allow it to be reduced to .12 on B prints if so desired.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[ewh]

[begin rant]
Unfortunately, there are still some large companies that have entire departments dictating just what a "clear and concise" drawing consists of. My current assignment is at such a company. In addition to all view labels requiring underlining, many hours of meetings have occurred attempting to (re)establish policy to require ALL drawing views on all drawings to be labeled, including the obvious standard projections (among other such vital practices, such as whether the scale in the title block should be blank [company preferred], or if "NONE" is allowable [even though the standards are clear on this issue]). If you overlook such requirements, your drawing is sent back and your quality "metrics" take a huge hit. It wouldn't be so bad if the applicable standards were more widely understood and applied, but bickering over different interpretations of such undocumented inconsequential issues have wasted many man-hours.
Meanwhile, tha actual model files are not checked ay anyone.
I sure wish I had that kind of $$ to spend on such important "problems".
[end rant]

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[looslib]

When one company I worked for decioded to implement a PDM system, all the divisions that used the CAD system of the PDM vendor held some meetings. The purpose of the meetings was to establish corporate standards and set PDM characteristics. We spent 4 hours on discussing how long the part number field should be in the database.
2 years later corporate adapts a different CAD/PDM system as the corporate standard and only the original division going to PDM is allowed to keep their system. The division I worked for had to chnage to the new standard CAD/PDM and the other 2 divisions got sold off.
Since then, the division I worked for was sold off and they changed CAD/PDM systems to their new corporate parent standard. At least the engineers who had been through it all knew UG/NX, Pro/Engineer Wildfire and CATIA V5/6. Great resumes!



"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli