- "R. Beale" <bealer@telusplanet.net> wrote:
> I knew at some point I was going to feel compelled
> to get involved in this
> dialog, so here's the way I see it.
>
> CADD can do some wonderful things, but it can't
> substitute for design
> experience. And I don't just mean layout experience;
> a good senior
> understands orderly project execution, where to go
> for information and when
> to raise flags. I believe we've thrown the baby out
> with the bathwater. Good
> processes and procedures have fallen by the wayside.
> When I was a junior I
> learned from the mentorship of the seniors.
> Primarily I learned from my
> mistakes, i.e customary practice was to backdraft
> one's own drawings.
>
> With CADD the industry changed. Software
> manufacturers sold oil and gas
> companies on the storage and retrieval benefits of
> CADD files and EPC
> companies latched onto the fact that they could
> charge a premium to the
> client by having CADD. Project managers were sold on
> the notion that it was
> faster and cheaper. Younger people are generally
> quicker on CADD and they're
> certainly cheaper, so it was inevitable that they
> would become the primary
> operators. Consequently companies started to ask
> themselves why they should
> have those expensive seniors around? (maybe one or
> two to oversee); bring
> them in later to check. After all, changes could now
> be made at the push of
> a button, couldn't they?
>
> Designers used to take pride and ownership in their
> work. It was a point of
> honour that a checker would not find anything to
> mark-up on your drawing.
> I'm sure anyone with fifteen years plus experience
> has witnessed some pretty
> heated discussions between designer and checker. Now
> the checker can bleed
> all over a drawing and the originator often doesn't
> even get to see it, let
> alone backdraft it. And operators have come to
> believe that it's the job of
> the checker to put things right. The "fast-track"
> philosophy hasn't helped,
> and 3D has compounded the problem. Designers assume
> that with 3D where
> everyone is working in real-time, e.g. structural
> are right behind piping in
> the model, changes are automatically communicated.
> Unfortunately rework
> becomes par for the course.
>
> Let's go back fifteen years................... We're
> doing a project that
> requires a plastic model and it is decided that the
> junior/intermediates can
> build this model, with some supervision, but
> essentially on their own from
> the P&IDs and plot plan. When it's done we'll get
> the senior people to check
> it. I think you would've heard the screams from
> Houston to Anchorage. But
> that is essentially how things are being done,
> except now the model is CADD.
> I know things have changed somewhat and seniors are
> making inroads into
> getting trained, but still the recognition of the
> worth of a senior piping
> designer has been lost both within and outside our
> discipline.
>
> The piping designer interfaces with all others
> disciplines, and piping being
> the heart of a project can have a big influence on
> the outcome. CADD is here
> to stay and while I personally lament the passing of
> the manual draftsman
> (but not getting hit with one of those eraser powder
> poaches) I recognize
> that we have to work with it. The technology is
> fascinating, and it's also
> enticing that companies pay a premium for PDS
> operators, so it's easy to
> understand why designers focus on it. But it is only
> a drafting tool. Let's
> get back to some basic understanding of how a
> project should be run and what
> we're drawing: the study stage, seniors passing
> their layout knowledge down
> to junior/intermediates, and pushing back when we
> don't have all the info we
> need to carry-on (how many of you have felt
> pressured to check and issue a
> drawing when you only have preliminary vendor
> information?).
>
> Paul, I believe you said that you thought pipers
> would be a more chatty
> bunch. I believe we are (we certainly have a
> grapevine that rivales any old
> lady network), but usually only over a pint (or two,
> or three) in the pub.
> All design/drafting disciplines have been divided
> into two categories -
> those who know CADD and those who don't. Let's keep
> this conversation going
> as I for one am optimistic we can meld the best of
> both worlds.
>
> Richard Beale
> Piping Supervisor,
> Calgary, Alberta
>
>
>
>
Thanks Paul for bringing this Cad subject up a
couple a weeks ago. I was one of the first to reply,
and have been following it daily. I still believe that
grey beards are going to take the piping discipline
and retire with the knowledge, and a few years from
now the good pipe fitters are going to up and quit.
The Cad "drafters" coming out of school have no
knowledge of how to make a functional readable
drawing, and the companies hiring them for $8/hr. are
going to have a big mess in the years to come.
I have learned Autocad and Raster and Imaging
because I had to. I'm self taught to use a new tool.
So be it. But, until anyone can get a PC to go out to
the field, with a hard hat and metatarsal boots, and
take dimensions, weld to weld, and can figure out
centerlines from a sketch, I will always believe in my
experience. And, I will pass on that knowledge to
anybody who wants to learn. A computer will mate a
125# cast iron pump flange to a 150# steel R.F.W.N.,
but I won't.
Pipers rule. Don't tell anyone how easy it is, or
else everyone will want to do it.
Darrel
<a href="/group/PipingDesign/post?postID=ZQjX66g37X3JG990Iyr2l0E7mH2Jy_VoOU0sWQpBlEi30jN8V5h1iqut8RlzZtrfwYfn9QWgHeYQqhPp">piper82072@yahoo.com</a>
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
<a href="
http://auctions.yahoo.com/">
http://auctions.yahoo.com/</a>
Received on Sun May 13 21:17:00 2001