Drafting Standards

[donneyclark]

It would be nice to have drafting standards integrated/integrable into LayOut.
E.g. United States National CAD Standard - V6

[Lindsey]

@donneyclark, desiring to understand better, are you referring to the AIA CAD Layer Guidelines section or a different element of standard? Best.

[donneyclark]

Not AIA standards. I am not an architect nor do I work for an architectural firm.
I am a design technician (drafting technician) working for a design builder.

[DaveR]

But are you talking about layer naming conventions or what?

[donneyclark]

Uniform Drawing System

(Sorry. I double checked the website and saw what you were asking about.)

[Lindsey]

Are you requesting drafting symbols be embedded in LO?

[AK_SAM]

+1 for globally recognised standards to be considered.

Linetypes, swatches, layer organisation, symbols, fonts, etc should be incorporated into SU/LayOut so that it is possible to create a compliant drawing if necessary.
A “Drafting Standards” expansion pack for LayOut could be created.

But then are we supposed to do anything in LayOut or are we supposed to draft in SketchUp and export to LayOut for annotation and page arrangement?

[donneyclark]

Not necessary drafting symbols embedded per se. I believe that there are some symbols available in the Scrapbooks tray.

(Maybe this actually gets into the need for better LayOut tutorials, including Scrapbooks tutorials.)

[DaveR]

I’m still trying to understand what you want to have added to LayOut.

[donneyclark]

I like this comment.

Drafting Standards

+1 for globally recognised standards to be considered. Linetypes, swatches, layer organisation, symbols, fonts, etc should be incorporated into SU/LayOut so that it is possible to create a compliant drawing if necessary. A “Drafting Standards” expansion pack for LayOut could be created. But then are we supposed to do anything in LayOut or are we supposed to draft in SketchUp and export to LayOut for annotation and page arrangement?

[DaveR]

All of that stuff can be incorporated into LayOut with a combination of added scrapbooks and templates with appropriate layers added for your application. I don’t think those things should be forced on users, though. Standards vary around the world and by discipline.

You should be making a template or templates that suit your needs so you don’t have to set up those things each time.

[Lindsey]

@donneyclark, I agree and second Dave’s comments. The different drawing/drafting standards around the world set a fabulous starting point for developing one’s chosen toolset, based upon discipline, project and locality.

Creating expansion packs (scrapbooks) is a wonderful professional and business opportunity for those so interested in this element of what we do.

For my workflow, line work (still thinking through new SU lines choices), symbols and sheet standards are a part of my LayOut usage.

[AK_SAM]

We want the transition from AutoCAD/etc to SketchUp & LayOut to be easy for users, not require all users to undertake many hours of manually re-creating and categorizing drafting symbols.

Above all , we want to be able to create professional documents generated by LayOut that hold up to scrutiny by the recipient (contractors, authorities, etc), not resemble student projects filled with of custom elements. Many authorities and large contractors enforce drafting standards, and LayOut is unable to comply with those rules currently.

To facilitate easier standardisation:

• ‘scrapbook’ symbols need to be more intelligent (parameteric and scalable), not just be static objects that require 4 versions for different output scales.
• Scrapbooks should also be shareable/manageable with colleagues in our organisation or external parties, and be exportable to DWG/DXF/IFC.
• We need to be able to select industry standards (or our preference) for arrow styles, cross section styles, line styles, fonts, etc.
• Line weights, swatches and annotation styles need to be selectable via a simplified drop-down menu for consistency and clarity, not be applied via a MSOffice-inspired chooser (very inefficient and unintuitive)
• etc.

All basic stuff, I think…for a Drafting Program…which LayOut currently is not.

[DaveR]

So you would force your desires on all LayOut users?

I think Lindsey has a great idea:

@Lindsey

Creating expansion packs (scrapbooks) is a wonderful professional and business opportunity for those so interested in this element of what we do.

[AK_SAM]

Regarding the 4 bullet point items, Yes, those are added functions or capabilities. No one who doesn’t want them would have to use them and they don’t change the default.

Use some imagination:
The default Drafting Symbols could be incorporated into one of the default Templates . In this case, a SketchUp template called “USNCS v6 compliant” could be an option.

Essentially:
All Layout users have professional licenses and expect a product suitable for professional output. We don’t need to worry about offending the 20 million kids and occassional-hobbyists by making things “super simple”.

[simoncbevans]

@DaveR

I think Lindsey has a great idea:

Lindsey:

Creating expansion packs (scrapbooks) is a wonderful professional and business opportunity for those so interested in this element of what we do.

An interesting idea because different packs could be made to suit different local standards. But it hasn’t happened yet and maybe it never will. The two problems I foresee are:

1. Will enough people pay enough to make it viable?; and
2. Can a template (say) be made impossible to copy without having paid for it?

[donneyclark]

As I said:

@donneyclark

Maybe this actually gets into the need for better LayOut tutorials, including Scrapbooks tutorials.

(I am hoping for increased functionality from LayOut in the future. I am thinking that AK_SAM’s suggestions would be available and optional features. It wouldn’t be forced upon users that don’t want them. E.g. A lighter version of ConDoc Tools that is used specifically within LayOut.)

[donneyclark]

From a different thread:

@donneyclark

For about a year, I have considered using the ConDoc Tools. But, it seems like this extension is better geared for AIA Architectural Graphic Standards. I am not an architect nor do I work for an architectural firm, so AIA standards are most likely beyond what I need.
Next week, I have a meeting with the drafting instructor at the local community college to discuss ANSI and ISO drafting standards for construction documents. Info online about ANSI drafting standards only covers mechanical drafting.

[donneyclark]

The response to that post:

Layout Ruby API

ANSI is defunct (I believe.) Any of the old standards sill in use have been adopted by other professional associations. For example, ANSI Y14.100 (replaced MIL-STD-100) and is now ASME Y14.100 having been updated as late as 2004 … The ASME adopted most of the old Y14 series of standards from ANSI. So you’ll have better luck searching using "ASME Y14.{number}" than "ANSI Y14.{number}". You might find free PDF editions available through collegiate online libraries. For example here is one … …

[donneyclark]

And an additional question:

@donneyclark

ANSI/ASME paper sizes vs ARCH paper sizes. (ARCH sizes from AIA?) A construction company should use ARCH paper sizes for construction document drawings?