CAD Standards – Silence equals permission

If the Standard is silent – users can do whatever they want

Do you have this perspective with your standard?

Or are you calling people on the carpet for not doing what you never told them had to do? Or for doing something that you never said they could not do?

Here is my thought…

If my standard does not cover a topic, then the users can do whatever they please with their Project Managers permission. If I have failed to include something in my standard, I am not going to yell at someone for being creative. I fully expect them to be able to defend their decisions. They should not just be randomly creating garbage. They need to use wisdom when selecting a path and be able to define the reasons they decided to do what they have done.

My goal is to put into my standard everything that is critical for my team to do correctly and in a unified manner. If I do not include it, then it is my fault if people are doing things in differing ways. I don’t blame the users.

BUT…

If it is not silent, then I expect (demand) that they follow the standard. There is no wiggle room. I have defined what is needed and they need to comply. If I have the full and complete backing of upper management, then no one can violate the standard without cause. And the causes are very few.

I just found out who the guy on the phone is. While swapping links with Joseph, he shared a previous post with me from his blog.

It turns out that the AU website folks got a kick out of it also…

Check out BLAUG for the whole story.

And I was thinking it was Scott Davis in an ADT class. Kind of looks like Scott doesn’t it?

Have you checked out the blog on AU that Joseph Wurcher is doing? Get the latest on the event directly from the folks that are putting it together…

News like — Registration is closing Nov. 9 – hurry up and register.

BLAUG – the AU blog

I run a meeting that brings together technology managers from several different firms. The Digital Task Force is a group that gathers monthly to discuss topics related to technology use in Architectural firms.

The topic this time around was plotting. We discussed hardware, software and output. We had hardware equipment mentioned that ranged from an HP 700 monochrome plotter to Xerox and Oce high end machines. There were software tools discussed that you may want to look into, like equorum (formerly Byers) for batch plotting, Metaprint (used internally by OCB) and PlanWell for digital plot submission to Repro houses.

We discussed internal plotting efforts and the troubles that accompany them. It was felt that anywhere from 25-35% of plotting troubles were cause by end users forgetting some settings or being in to great a hurry. This caused re-plotting and drove costs up and speed down. The rest of the errors were attributed to hardware troubles and software difficulties.

We discussed a few software tools that track your plotting and allow you to bill your clients. There are many out there. Tracking your plots and billing the client is an option for some firms. Others may not use it.

Shipping your plots out of house may be a viable option. When doing so – send full size TIF files. These are most preferred by the repro firms. Full size files can be reduced in size by the plotters. The Metaprint software in use by OCB does pen weight corrections so that the half size reduced prints are not muddy. PDF files are the next best thing. Most firms are using PDF for sharing information. Reducing the resolution of the PDF helps in some of the reduction issues as well.

When using DWG based plotting be aware that the “Wipeout” command may not produce the desired effects on the plots as they do on screen.

Finally we discussed PlanWell. This is a service used by most repro houses that allows you to electronically submit TIF’s for plotting. Accounts are often free with the cost coming from the amount of plots you request. There is a feature for submitting online work orders. Some firms even deliver the completed plots to your office.

Working from your Strength
– Leveraging the positives in your style – Part 2

Autodesk University Preview
– What classes am I doing?

A preview of my classes
– Content from my Handouts

Take a look at the latest issue

Not yet a subscriber? Sign up here

Taken from the AU 2007 site this past weekend. It struck me as kind of funny that they would use an image where someone is on their cell phone during class.

It is Las Vegas. Maybe this is a call to his bookie? Maybe the kids need to be picked up from daycare?

Can you think of a clever caption for this image? Post it as a comment…

From my AU 2007 class – BAD CAD:

The Infections

Here is a brief list of some of the areas that may be infected by having a gap that is too wide between your best user and your worst.

1. The expert users will be frustrated because they have to slow down and use CAD at a lower level than they want to.

2. Slow users will be frustrated trying to understand and keep up with advanced users constant pushing the tools to the cutting edge.

3. Differing levels of expertise create files that are a confusion of standards. You end up with high end entities created by advanced users that are often exploded down to their base units by lagging users. This creates a confusing mixture of entities that are often corrupted in the process.

4. Advanced users often set up projects differently than lagging users. This creates a twisted mixture of file names, drawing content, settings, configurations and more.

5. Project Managers don’t know who to believe or trust with their files.

6. Clients see a mixture of standards in the files they receive.

7. Consultants get files that differ from one background to another. Layers are not used consistently. files are not put together the same way.

From my AU 2007 class – Preventative CAD Management:

I call it Critical Customization. Customization that works may include the following principles:

• Only customize the stuff you have to
• Only customize when it returns major benefits
• Use the tools that are provided via the AutoCAD GUI
• When customizing, use the programming tools that are provided via the AutoCAD GUI
• Look for the easiest method for customization and use that
• Only escalate to another (harder) customization method when you have too
• Do not replace any Out of the Box commands
• Jettison your old stuff as soon as it is replaced by AutoCAD

From my AU 2007 class – CAD Manager Career Path:

The CAD Manager career path is one of the youngest forms of management in our technically advancing world. With the introduction of CAD in the mid eighties, there came a need for someone specialized technicians to run the computers. With the multiplication of systems, managers were needed to coordinate work efforts and all of the processes that surrounded the electronic drafting functions.

The Drafting Room Supervisor gave way to the computer operators and technical support people involved in learning, using and keeping the CAD equipment working. As users learned to operate this new technology, they began to teach users in the trades. As use expanded, drafting moved from the mundane efforts of drafting and saw the beginnings of design work being done on CAD.

It was quickly seen that the discipline trained users produced more accurate output than the technicians did. These design focused users soon took over the drafting efforts, but still had computer technicians around to maintain the equipment.

Eventually the discipline trained draftsman started coordinating the work of other users. With the introduction of the PC the need for the master technician was reduced and eventually eliminated. The discipline user advanced into managing the efforts and eventually supporting the PC