Layer Standards

Just a guess, someone has decided to go out on his own?

Just doing some side work, have a consortium of sorts of people that got laid off, and are now working in other fields, that are working together when we can. Don't really like the idea or being a carbon copy of former employers (plus maybe legal issues).

Google "US National CAD Standard". The full version costs real money, but a clever person can glean enough from what's freely available to get a good start.

Such a flaw in the standards process in instance after instance (like ISO and others) that they seek universal adoption, yet they then go ahead and put a price tag in the way as a barrier to adoption. Need a better model.

Somebody should publish an article in one of the magazines detailing a proposed standard.

One could probably synthesize a good layer standard based on the current body of knowledge, and make it available on a non-proprietary, open source basis.

EE-(name) = "existing entity" all existing vectors (linework, blocks, hatch, etc.)
EP-(name) = "existing point" all existing points
ET-(name) = "existing text" all existing text labels

linetypes vary but the one thing I suggest is make sure your boundary lines and boundary text are BOLD. I can't believe some surveys I see were everything is the same pen weight...

Layers and linetypes standards are very company specific. A good example of the system gone wild is the current CofE system. Extremely LONG layer names and WAY too many layers. If you use the "change layer" command from the keyboard, those long layer names will cost time. And if you put in all of the layers for Surveying you end up with something like 250 layers. That's just silly.
For our in-house stuff, the layer name tells you directly what each line ios when you list it. I do surveying only, thus ALL of the things I show on my maps are existing, so no need for an "existing identifier". Someone wants to add a prefix later, that's fine with me. Until then ASP will be the asphalt layer; CONC will be the concrete layer, WATER will be the water layer; SD will be the storm drain layer, etc.
It's the KISS system in action. Saves time in configuring my Field To Finish and saves time in use. Time is money.
Set up your system in a way that works best for you . Use the linetypes that you feel most clearly define the features that you will be showing. A good plat is all about clarity and accuracy.

What I've typically done in the past is get a copy of the CAD and linetype standards that my various clients and prime contractors use, for example DOT and other agencies, and for the engineering firms and other companies I work with - and then crosswalk them to the core set of layers I need and use, then use a script to between different layer naming, weight and linetype conventions. I pulled the layers and settings into Excel columns which I could manipulate and then spit out a CSV and did some global search and replace on the CSV to generate the script. I also use standard text styles based on leroy, with oblique for existing features, those can be generated based on drawing scale. A lot of that stuff can be automated.

I have my own layering standard that I consistently use on my surveys that I set up in 1986. They work great for me, but not anyone else.

The only time a layering standard means anything is when you are collaborating on a project with others. Then it is vital that the entire team uses a single layering standard.

There are as many layering "standards" out there to choose from that it seems there really isn't a "standard" at all, except what is defined for the particular project. There are enough of them out there, that I can't imagine why anyone would want to invent one of their own these days.

That said, the standard that I'd recommend is the one the client or the team chooses. If you're likely collaborate with others often, choose a standard they employ. The less translating you have to do, the better when you share your files.

Another thing I'd recommend is that, anytime you are requested to share an electronic file, find out what standard they are using, what symbols, design blocks, etc., they need to have in the drawing. Then, convert your drawing to meet their specs before you release it. It helps greatly to justify why you need to be paid to provide a product they need and it keeps you in control of the data being transmitted (no need for those lengthy CYA disclaimers).

JBS

Send me an e-mail & I will send you my drawing template for whatever it may be worth...

ott@mainstreetconsulting.com