CAD Standards and CAD Users – a partnership

I work in the Architectural industry. The process of design and construction is a partnership between owner, designer and builder. The role of the architect is to place into the construction documents enough information to define the design, provide performance and material specs and to determine constraints. The role of the contractor has been to develop the means and methods and to construct the project in accordance with the performance requirements given in these documents. The role of the owner is to define the building use and provide financial funding and constraints.

So I look at CAD Standards as a relationship similar to the one above. The CAD Standard defines the goal, defines the end product and determines constraints. The CAD User defines the methods and means for achieving that goal, works toward a consistent end product and lives within the constraints. I do not think you allow users to run wild and create files any way they please. But I think the Standard should not be the place to define “how” they create files.

You may want to develop a secondary document that supplements the standard and leave the how to methods out. This would allow you to give your standard to the client without giving away your superuser CAD methods.

The CAD Standard may at times define methods when it impacts production speed or where a number of legitimate, but differing “paths” to get there. When the methods need to be unified, the Standard should speak up. When the methods don’t matter, then it should remain silent.

I believe the CAD Standard you develop should be a target to hit and not a path to follow. It should be goal to achieve but not the step on how to get there. Delve into the steps only when those steps help unify the production methods and the way the files are constructed.

I have found that many firms may get tied up in trying to make a perfect standard. They try to get everything just right and think through every last option before they publish the standard. This can get tedious and put a damper on momentum. Once you are on a positive progressive path, the trick is to publish while the momentum is still there.

Don’t get too bogged down in the details. No standard is ever perfect or completely done. If you have that frame of mind then you will publish what you think is a perfect standard and be very tempted to never change anything again. Thinking that you have a perfect standard actually makes it tend toward imperfection. Your standard will get stale and you may still think it is perfect. Your standard will be outdated and you will still think it is perfect.

So – get it into your mind that it is always about 85-95% complete. There will always be something that need to be tinkered with. You will always be thinking of things to improve upon.

I suggest you shoot for “almost perfect, but not quite”.

Here is a listing of 9 areas that you may want to check in the files when you do your review.  By looking for these items you can most likely find the areas where the files are not up to snuff.

1. Directory Structure
    a. Are the folders correctly named?
    b. Are there any unneeded folders?

2. Filenames
    a. Are the filenames correct?
    b. Are there any junk files that should be removed?

3. Layers
    a. Is the layer list clean?
    b. Are the names correct?
    c. Are the objects on the right layer?
    d. Are the linestyles correct?

4. XREF Attachments
    a. Are the attachments on the right layer?
    b. Are they in the correct location?

5. Object Location
    a. Are the objects in the right file?
    b. Are the objects on the right Layers?
    c. Are the objects in the right Space (MS/PS)

6. Settings
    a. LTSCALE
    b. Visretain
    c. Dimension Styles
    d. Text Fonts and sizes
    e. Does it call for any fonts of shape files that are not found?
    f. Referencing from incorrectly located files that are not in the project folders?
    g. Incorrectly used Images
    h. Use of text fonts that are not standard SHX or TTF files
    i. Mismatched, incorrect, exploded and faked dimensions
    j. Bad Viewports
    k. Bad Layout use and setup

7. Production methods
    a. Overly creative, innovative, advanced functionality
    b. Failure to use OSNAPS
    c. Inconsistency – Laziness
    d. Bad block definitions
    e. Corrupted linestyle, multiline definitions
    f. Faked objects to get good plots
    g. Exploded dimensions
    h. Element overrides

8. Plotting
    a. Settings that make plotting difficult
    b. Essential files (like CTB or STB files) located on local hard drives

9. Consistent Presentation
    a. Detail Layout and presentation
    b. Level of Detail
    c. Title Block text
    d. Graphic element locations (Key map, North Arrow, Graphic Scale)
    e. Spelling
    f. Logos
    g. Date
    h. Title of the Submittal (Plan Check, Client Review)
    i. Reference numbers correct
    j. Legibility
    k. Nomenclature
    l. Project Title Block

Okay – Happy New Year – now get back to work…!!! (har har)

Reviewing your CAD Standard should be something that you do constantly. Changing things that are outdated. Adjusting things that need some work. Expanding things that need more clarity.

Here are a few things that you may want to review…

Think of the problems you have had in the past year. Take a look at what I have called BAD CAD to see if any of them are related to how you use the program or what the standard calls for. If the CAD Standard is silent on an area that you have seen problems with, then add some info on that issue.

See if you can make it any simpler. Sometime confusion crops up from too many words. Maybe your standard has too many pages. Large standards can make users hesitant to try to read the whole thing. Less is More!

Ask your users what the CAD Standard says. See if they can tell you without looking. Maybe your standard is great and you just need to have a refresher class in what it covers. Training in the standard is one of the greatest overlooked areas of training.

Ask a new user or non-user if it makes sense. If it is too complicated or written to a level of understanding that your average user does not have, it will not be followed. Again, keep it simple.

Republish it with new formating. Maybe just a face lift on the look and feel of the standard is all you need. Keeping it looking fresh makes a world of difference.

So get out your standard and take another look at it. Even small changes can make a large improvement on productivity.

I think that what is written in your CAD Standard says a lot about your firm and whoever put together the standard. A good solid standard will garner respect. One that is haphazard and confusing or incomplete will cause concern.

Take a quick look at your CAD Standard… What does it say about you and your firm?

Is it well organized and up to date? If not – then people will think that you or your firm are not very organized or maybe you are outdated.

Is it incomplete and lacking in detail? Then your internal users will think that you are not fully versed in CAD and do not know when to provide the proper level of detail needed to get the job done. Your clients may think that you cannot design to the level needed for their project.

Is it full of inconsistencies? Then your internal users will become confused and not know which way they should go.

Is your standard easy to read and understand? Then your internal users will be able to quickly know what is needed and what to do.

Your CAD Standard needs to be rock solid. A positive reflection on your CAD ability and the quality of your firm. Make some quick notes about what you need to review and how you can apply some edits to improve your document.

Check this out. You can mind map the relationship of words. pretty cool.

http://www.visualthesaurus.com

From the site:
The Visual Thesaurus is an interactive dictionary and thesaurus with an innovative display that encourages exploration and learning. You’ll understand language in an exciting new way. To understand the power of the Visual Thesaurus, you really need to see it in action. Type in your favorite word and give it a try!

There are many ways to purchase your seat of AutoCAD. The license you buy plays an important role in how you can use the license, the flexibility with which you can transfer licenses between workstations, the method of deployment, and whether usage tracking is possible. The following table from the Autodesk website summarizes the three license types and their distinct benefits.

Click on the link to go to the Adesk site to see more info on each type.

Multi-seat Stand-Alone licensing and Network licensing appear to be the best way to approach firmwide installs.

Part of the Ancillary Service Agreement for Home Use is the following wording…

“Subject to the terms set forth below, the Home Use benefit commences on the date of the issuance of the authorization code from Autodesk and continues for a period of 13 months from such date, at which time the software program will be disabled and will no longer function.”

So if you get that home use seat up and running, then plan on it going south after a year or so.

It goes on to say…

“Home Use Licenses are not upgradeable and may not be replaced. Home use may be requested only for current versions of the software programs plus the two immediately preceding versions of the software program. You must have originally and validly licensed and have legally in your possession all versions, including prior versions.”

So you can get older releases if you already have the licenses.

Again – for the fine print – check with your reseller or go to http://pointa.autodesk.com

Here is a list of the possible home use seats you can get if you are on Subscription…

Architectural Desktop
AutoCAD
AutoCAD Electrical
AutoCAD LT
AutoCAD Mechanical
Building Systems
Civil 3D
Inventor Professional
Inventor Series
Land Desktop
Map
3ds Max
Raster Design
Revit
Revit Series
Revit Series Structure
Revit Series Systems Plus
Revit Structure
Survey
Viz

Again – check with your reseller to get exact details. Home Use is not currently
available for all software programs or in all locations.