I have never used 2005 so couldn't comment on it but if it's 3D tools you
want, switch to something other than AutoCAD. I once spend a few months were
I had to use AutoCAD, doing 3D. This, after using serious modelers for
years. I can't see why anyone would waste their time with it if 3D was a
serious part of their work. Autodesk has serious modeling software
available. Why would they bother developing modeling capabilities in
AutoCAD? Of course, there are the people that will say they can model
anything in AutoCAD. You can excavate a foundation with a tablespoon too but
would you? The last version of AC that I did any modeling with was 2002. It
was using ACIS 4 for it's modeling kernel. That was four or five version
obsolete. I bet they are still using it.
"designer" schreef in bericht
| > You can't afford to not upgrade.
| > It ties 2D drawings to 3d drawings, so that when
| > you make changes it 3D they automatically change 2D and Vice versa.
| Of course that assumes you draw in 3D.
| Significant numbers still draw only in 2D.
Can you elaborate on that ? I'm curious to know what applications would be 2D
only. I can imagine that in land survey, for instance drawing the route for a
pipeline through the country, 2D might be the simpliest way to go, but whenever
you're dealing with real life objects you start with 3D. At least that's what
I'm thinking of it.
Thousands and thousands of engineering companies still use 2D only. After
all, engineering and architectural drawing survived quite well for 100s of
years without 3D.
There is no doubt (to my mind) that a 3D representation is very useful to
show the nature of a design to someone not used to relating plan views and
elevations, but it is not essential. A lot of that could be done using
simple isometric views.
Apart from that, 3D drawing in Acad is, I find, a long-winded process. I
think there are better systems out there for doing it!
Buildings tend to be built from paper copies, which are 2D. For the
types of projects I work on (electrical) the fees I can charge won't
allow for the extra time drawing in 3D would take, and the architects
don't provide 3D drawings for backgrounds. Even if they did, the 3D
would only have value if it was assured that the structure would be
built exactly as drawn. They never are. If I was designing an airplane
I'd want to use 3D, but I don't see much value for most architectural
The Importance of 2D CAD
And the decline in standards and quality of information provided in
computer generated drawings from both Architects and Engineers alike!
Below is a link to a letter I sent in to the verulam pages of ?the
structural engineer? the journal of the Institution of Structural
Engineers. It was published in the 5th June 2002 : Volume 90 : Number
The response to this article was quite staggering, Indeed it was an
email from a member in France that alerted me that it had been
I see others have already responded.
My pennyworth is that I see hundreds of companies in mechanical engineering
that only use 2D.
Drawings used to MAKE things are 2D.
3D models can make pretty pictures but to date in my sphere of mechanical
engineering there is NO productivity gain in 3D.
2D drawings produced from 3D are almost always inferior to those produced
straight in 2D, not least because 2D draughting is a skill in its own right
and 3D designers aren't 2D draughtsmen (we might have an argument over
Once had a subbie who spent 2 weeks doing some 3D drawings. They were
wrong, so a good 2D CAD draughtsman redrew them from scratch in 3 days!
AutoCAD is not the best 3D CAD system (or even the best 2D CAD system ??).
Why use AutoCAD, "people use AutoCAD because people use AutoCAD"
Only if that is the only thing available.
You need to get out of the office and into the shop. If you have parts
machined, send them a 2D print and the first thing they will do is redraw it
in 3D so they can use it to program their machines. You are paying for this.
You assume that any given individual has only the capacity to handle one or
the other. Not the case though many (most) do one or the other. Some 2D
prints made from 3D models are quite bad but others may appear to be and be
quite adequate. You have to know the intended purpose. Many designs these
days are drawn directly in 3D, testing being done directly on the model.
This model is then sent to the machine shop for manufacture. As it is
already a 3D model, there is no need for the programmer to redraw it. He can
generate a program directly. This model can also be used to program the
coordinate measuring machine to inspect the part. In a system such as this,
2D drawings of the part are generally supplied with basic views and
dimensions only, lacking the detail that would be needed if the part were to
be manufactured from it. Great detail in the 2D print is not necessary and
just wastes time. To someone not familiar with
this type of process, the 2D drawing would seem rather badly done but, in
fact, it is quite suited to it's purpose.
I'm sure you realize that the guy was lousy at 3D.
Yes, and some of us like it (for 2D only).
I am very interested in this thread, I draw shopfits where I work, and
normally draw the existng building in 2D.
Cabinets and the like that go in the shop are all drawn in 3D, but this was
primarily to give good perspective views for the client, who generally
couldn't picture a box from the 2D drawings. This has enabled me in turn to
produce working drawings for the lads on the shop floor from my oroiginal
drawings, as I now draw them as built, including part drawings.
This makes the specifier quite happy, as I involve him from the very
If there are any amendments, then I find them not that hard to do, but then
I may be the only person using Acad that finds the 3d environment quite
fluid and easy to use.
BTW, I also have a background in engineering, seven years spent programming
CNC milling machines, as well as the manual side, milling, turning, setting
autos, surface grinding, wleding arc & mig) site installations of
structural steel, and digging holes. Lots of holes.
I never really did any drawing back then, but it was here I used my first
cad program. Easymill from bridgeport, and that put me on the road to
learning Acad. I still go back every now and again to sort some littl
eproblem thay have, and they are still using the same version of Easymill,
on the same 286, with Windows 286 Plus. :)
Nobody has ever asked for a 3D model, only 2D drawings
Not so, what they actually do is give them to a guy to make the parts and
being skilled he can read 2D drawings
It appears your sphere of work is quite different to mine. 15% of drawings
go to machine shops ALL of which employ skilled machinists. The remainder
go to sheet metal fabricators and steelwork fabricators. The comon thread
is all the guys can read 2D drawings and 3D models would not help them.
He was just lousy then, full stop.