do you xref?

I can see where xrefs would be extremely useful, but when I receive a file
from a customer that is 60MB (all 3d, steel, equipment, piping,duct,ect) . &
contains dozens of xrefs of which many are nestled & there are well over 100
layers & I need to make changes (field verifications)
the original drawing is almost worthless, Bind & insert do not work.
anyone else have similar issues with xref?
Reply to
Loading thread data ...
I work on complex architectural projects and xreffing is absolutely necessary for the work we do. I could not imagine doing it any other way. Adherence to good layer standards makes the xreffing effort easy to work with. Our xreffing is very discipline oriented. There is a separate file for each independent system. For example:
first floor plan second floor plan third floor plan first, second and third reflected ceiling plan first, second and third mechanical piping plan first, second and third mechanical duct plan first, second and third electrical plan first, second and third plumbing plan and so on...
This is our method for sections, elevations, details and all other drawings as well. I am currently working with a team on plans for a new 11 story hospital. Just off the top of my head, I can think of 7 other people that are working with this same file set for the same project. I am sure that there are many more that I am unwaware of.
You could make the argument that there is an economy of scale for using xrefs but I am also doing drawings to remodel about half of my mom's 1500 sf house and still using the same xref and layer scheme.
What kind of work do you do? How large is your office? Is your staff willing to work with standards? Do you use consultants? Are you a consultant? These are the kind of questions that would determine what kind of issues you will face using xrefs. As for me, I could not live without them.
Reply to
suppose you have a 60 mb file with 100's of layers & xrefs ( & nestled xrefs) & you need to move one wall 6" in elevation & 4" to the north , & it effected a small piece of every xref. without xrefs I could use a stretch command & change everything in seconds. with xrefs, maybe days, & if something is missed...maybe very expensive errors? are you drawing in 2d?
I work in industrial processing plants (mainly grain), laying out multi million dollar projects, many times I am the only one working the file, other times there are up to 5 people. The main problems that arise are when the customer gives us a file to do the field verification of existing steel & equipment & it is polluted to death with blocks & xrefs, I have lots of trouble with blocks not exploding or xrefs not able to insert or bind.. ( I assume paths get confused upon transfer. ) 95% of all work is done 3d (except sections & details). in most cases we are the consultants, the plants have engineers, all designs & drawings go through them, but we get the job of making it fit & work. ultimately my job is to issue drawings to the shop & field hands of projects that don't come with fabrication prints, usually I get a sketch or a cad file that is more like a picture than a blueprint.
clear as mud? Rob
Reply to
clear as mud - -
When I get to this stage - - making a change that causes me to make another small change that causes... - - I usually have several of these drawings open at once and cycle through them with [ctrl + tab]. I also have a shortcut to reload xrefs by a pick or all of them with [enter]. I am drawing in 2-D.
I have always thought that xreffing is worth the effort. For me, the one time that all 5 of you worked on the same project would make up for all the times you worked alone and still used xrefs.
Having never really worked with a 3D model in a cooperative effort, I'm not too sure how I would need to share the information - I guess it could be broken into disciplines just as easily [structure, equipment, piping, or whatever] - what do you think? Working with someone else's understanding of xrefs is a whole nother story. All bets are off on this one. I guess it depends on how demanding you can get away with being to get them to follow your standards. I have worked on some jobs before where going in to it, you know if you did not follow the published standards, you would get the files back in order to make them right - - and at your own expense. But it was worth it to be able to work with these guys...
It sounds like you don't have much control of what the CUSTOMER gives you - I mean, you can't demand that he get his sh*t together, can you? If you had control of your own drawing files and not the use of someone else's, it would be much easier to deal with. And, for what it's worth, nested xrefs ARE a drag!
Reply to
Have you tried to clean up the set of drawings before binding them?
Using some combination of purge, audit, recover, wblock drawing, and manusoft's Superpurge I have gotten files that refused to bind working. This is no guarentee of course your files may just be to large??
Here is a link to SuperPurge
formatting link
If you are the only one working on the project and you have a set of X'ref'd files that you did not create and are not completly familiar with I think it might make sense to bind the whole mess up and work on the one file. As for the number of layers I can't feel bad for you there, I've had architectural site plans go over 1800 layers before. That is where scripts/lisp and good layer name standards come in handy.
Reply to
Have you tried REFEDIT?
Reply to
Randy Jones
You don't need to explode blocks. You can use refedit to edit blocks or find a routine (like mine) to edit blocks, if they are mirrored or rotated, use insert to insert a normal scale block and edit it, is faster as exploding and recreating (and getting wrong insertion point). For xref's, when looking at plan's (not 3d) there should only be a wall visible in one xref not multi. For the plans editing one xref should be sufficient. If you are on 3d, try refedit. (reference editor)
Reply to

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.