Something that we all see regularly and is posted here often is the problem of architects etc. scaling drawings to their preferred units. We usually end up with a site plan scaled by 1000 or 12 and in negative co-ordinates. As I posted below in the thread by Scotland I try to get these clients to xref in and bind my drawing, setting their desired units in the target drawing and therefore maintaining the grid albeit it 3 decimal places out . I work in metric so this usually works for me.
I was considering providing a pre-scaled drawing along with the original to prevent the problems of the client scaling but was trying to consider what may be the pitfalls of doing so?
Send em a reversed image, with a rubber scale bar across the middle.
Nothin personal... Just revenge!
Find a way of locking the drawing so it simply can not be scaled. NO DRAWING SHOULD EVER BE SCALED FOR ANY REASON.
Can you tell I'm passionate about this subject? I've been messed over too many times (and once is 3 times too many) by others who scale drawings instead of learning how to use cad and printing techniques.
John, post: 431334, member: 791 wrote: Find a way of locking the drawing so it simply can not be scaled. NO DRAWING SHOULD EVER BE SCALED FOR ANY REASON.
Can you tell I'm passionate about this subject? I've been messed over too many times (and once is 3 times too many) by others who scale drawings instead of learning how to use cad and printing techniques.
That's all well and good, now all you have to do is convince architects to work in the same units as yourself.....good luck with that.
I will continue to try and find a solution to make my life easier.
Totalsurv, post: 431341, member: 8202 wrote: That's all well and good, now all you have to do is convince architects to work in the same units as yourself.....good luck with that.
I will continue to try and find a solution to make my life easier.
Its interesting to see that all the way over in Ireland you deal with the same issues!
We are always dealing with the scale issue. We used to put our curb stakes in feet and inches since that is the way the curb guys liked them.
We stopped doing that quite a while ago and only get a complaint once in a while.
Totalsurv, post: 431341, member: 8202 wrote: That's all well and good, now all you have to do is convince architects to work in the same units as yourself.....good luck with that.
I will continue to try and find a solution to make my life easier.
Might I politely suggest that this is but one of the many advantages of the metric system...
jim.cox, post: 431347, member: 93 wrote: Might I politely suggest that this is but one of the many advantages of the metric system...
Nah, Architects would use centimeters for everything and surveyors and engineers would insist on the meter as their base unit.
Whilst a strong advocate of metric system, architects use mm, we use metres.
Scaling still an issue. And they also rotate to suit their preferred orientation.
Flattening 3D objects is also an issue here.
I try to make it simple for architects where possible but that's almost impossible!
One major problem from my perspective, in reverse, mm back to metres makes dimension arrows etc go berserk. Maybe there's a fix, but not needing them I just erase them.
jim.cox, post: 431347, member: 93 wrote: Might I politely suggest that this is but one of the many advantages of the metric system...
I am pretty sure the architects in Ireland use mm, same as UK.
The problem we have is just a scale (1000) and move problem.
Feet of various types would be a whole other inconvenience that I couldn't imagine.
Richard, post: 431410, member: 833 wrote: Whilst a strong advocate of metric system, architects use mm, we use metres.
Scaling still an issue. And they also rotate to suit their preferred orientation.Flattening 3D objects is also an issue here.
I try to make it simple for architects where possible but that's almost impossible!
One major problem from my perspective, in reverse, mm back to metres makes dimension arrows etc go berserk. Maybe there's a fix, but not needing them I just erase them.
I have tried a few ways around this but often end up deleting.
Inserting the drawing as a block into anoher draiwng can work. The block units and drawing units need to be set differently.
Otherwise dimensions "overall scales" can help.
jim.cox, post: 431347, member: 93 wrote: Might I politely suggest that this is but one of the many advantages of the metric system...
Well yes, but that's mostly outweighed by the overarching disadvantage that the metric system is, of course, a brainstorm of French revolutionaries, who aimed to destroy all of the inherited traditions and ways of life of the people they came (briefly) to rule over as a way to consolidate their power in part by creating, as Gustave de Molinari wrote, ??the system of weights and measures, invented by professors of mathematics, in contempt of the experience and needs of those engaging in exchange.?
Other than the dehumanizing totalitarian nature of it the metric system, much like communism, does seems quite efficient. 😉
Totalsurv, post: 431306, member: 8202 wrote: what may be the pitfalls of doing so?
Delivering something that is out of the ordinary is likely to confuse them. You risk becoming that guy who delivers oddball product. I wouldn't do it.
The wise through excess of wisdom is made a fool.
Stephen Ward, post: 431399, member: 1206 wrote: Nah, Architects would use centimeters for everything and surveyors and engineers would insist on the meter as their base unit.
It depends on what kind of engineer. For software that could accommodate a decimal point, we used to base everything on micrometers. The software that couldn't accept a decimal point used hundreds of picometers.
James Fleming, post: 431433, member: 136 wrote: Well yes, but that's mostly outweighed by the overarching disadvantage that the metric system is, of course, a brainstorm of French revolutionaries, who aimed to destroy all of the inherited traditions and ways of life of the people they came (briefly) to rule over
Much the same could be said of Democracy and of Republicanism
I've been metric from the git go, just didn't know it. Feet are for hard copy maps - if requested.
_________
I was pointing out to someone a summary of work on a small farm survey.
"Measured this, distance that, ...".
"Did you measure it in rods?"
(I almost didn't understand the question.)
"I measured it as a quantity. What unit would like it expressed in? (It's like translating Spanish to German.)"
James Fleming, post: 431433, member: 136 wrote: Well yes, but that's mostly outweighed by the overarching disadvantage that the metric system is, of course, a brainstorm of French revolutionaries, who aimed to destroy all of the inherited traditions and ways of life of the people they came (briefly) to rule over as a way to consolidate their power in part by creating, as Gustave de Molinari wrote, ??the system of weights and measures, invented by professors of mathematics, in contempt of the experience and needs of those engaging in exchange.?
Other than the dehumanizing totalitarian nature of it the metric system, much like communism, does seems quite efficient. 😉
Having been raised on the standard public school line regarding the metric system, it was only a few years ago that I came to appreciate a more thorough perspective:
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/metric-system/
In reading this I chuckle a bit, we as surveyors complain a bit of other disciplines not understanding some of our conundrums, but its pretty clear we don't under stand theirs either. Try taking your last project, switch the units to architectural and give a go at labeling things in feet and inches. My point is, perhaps we can take the higher ground and understand the unit issue is a software problem and offer to verify the translation of the CAD data is accurate.
Similar to an earlier threads in past weeks, I too have a project where the record surveyor scaled the CAD file, supposedly from grid to ground. He also noted the basis of bearing as "True" North. I spoke with him on the phone to try and understand his logic, as it certainly is not grid anymore, and nearly impossible for others to reproduce with a localization. His explanation: he put's his GPS base on a on record monument, using geodetic north and the published grid coordinate of the monument. Then scales the project from grid to ground. On his plat he notes the NAD83 datum and True north, ambiguous for sure. Should be no big deal for me, as I'm only working inside the building envelope for structural work, as this is now a construction project, and I will not be using GPS. We ask surveyor to offset stake the building corners, then I work in from there. I check his hubs with Robotic TS, the differences in 128.0' building line are off by 0.06'. My guess is he is using GPS for layout. Why, why, why??? How are we suppose to set wall corners, piers and anchor bolts from this??? Looks like another call to surveyor is eminent.
leegreen, post: 431625, member: 2332 wrote: impossible for others to reproduce with a localization
nearly impossible for others to reproduce without a localization