On Fri, 21 July 2000, "Paul Bowers" wrote:
>
> Double-Dimensioning: The appearance of more than one reference to a
physical
> dimension in a project. These days it would specifically refer to printed
> drawings, as CAD models do not typically feature dimensions.
>
> In "the old days" double-dimensioning was a definite no-no. Multiple
> references to the same physical object can cause major headaches when it
> comes time to revise a drawing. Sure, the "plan" is correct but someone
> forgot to update the detail drawing. When the fresh prints get to the
field
> this can cause a lot of confusion.
>
> Maybe it's just an isolated observation of mine, but it seems that with
the
> trimming of drafting staff (let's say checkers, for example) due to the
> increased efficiency of CAD many times engineers are the ones doing the
> checking. If said engineers are not familiar with the decades-old
traditions
> of effective graphical communication chaos can result.
>
> Any opinions out there?
I would agree with you there. On any job there WILL be mistakes made, a note that someone forgot to add...or in the case of changes, a note that was not moved or removed when it should have...so the note might be pointing to the wrong thing or pointing in thin air. Most of these ARE caught...but once in a while they slip thru the cracks. Face it, EVERYONE makes misteaks occasionally.
Another issue, is concerned w/drawing according to codes...I would say the MOST mistakes that get thru are in drawings that something isn't according to the local code...the biggest send back from P.C. for corrections. Yes...I even saw drawings done by someone who was practising for 20 YEARS get sent back for P.C. corrs. Like the Doctor said, "I've been practising for 50 years, and I'm gonna keep on practising till I get it RIGHT!" Hee hee.
Stephie
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 04 2008 - 11:40:08 EST