Insert model items

I had the same habit, but recently tried to dimension a complex shaped bottle on a drawing, and I couldn't get dims to attach on it. Then I inserted the model's dimensions and turned off the unneeded ones to get what I wanted. It worked well. Now I'm going to use this method, with a refinement: uncheck "marked for drawing" on the dims in the model I will not want on drawing to save the time turning them off in the drawing.

JEB

I use it some. It all depends on how well they are in place for what I want, how well the part was created relative to how it will be dimensioned (I know, shoud be the same thing, but isn't always), etc. One thing to keep in mind is that if you import model ordinate dimensions, you can't add to them in the drawing.

WT

Our company standard is that (with rare exceptions) all dims in drawings should be inserted from the model Once you get used to the discipline of doing it that way it's as fast or faster that dropping in reference dimensions, and tends to create a more robust drawing/model interaction. It also forces the designer to dimension the model in a way that conveys his intent--which is always a good thing

Dimonte group had a good tutorial on the subject, but their website seems to be down right at the moment... ferretting out the proper link is, as they say, left as an exercise for the reader.

Part of it depend on what you are actually doing...

I do mold design. I am like you in that I manually dimension with ref. dimensions, except for hole callouts. But, in my case, there is no other choice. Mold design uses in-context features (i.e.. cavity feature), as well as lots of base parts. Neither of these supports using inserted model item dimensions. These dimensions simply don't exist in order to import them to the drawing.

IMHO if the model isn't dimensioned in a way that you can bring it in with Insert Model Items then the model doesn't really capture design intent. There will be exceptions, but that is my broad rule of thumb.

For what I do, design intent dimensions are rarely appropriate for manufacturing efficiency. So I have to add reference dimensions for almost everything.

I normally model the parts and assemblies to hold together well if I anticipate design changes, and to make the assemblies easy to build and hold together. The drawings are made for manufacturing ease. We do not use gtol for our own designs, only for customers designs, if they do. So in house design intent comes thru on the assembly/weldment drawings.

One thing nice about inserting model items is being able to shift-drag them from view to view as needed.

It is true that if you import model dimensions you cannot add to them. However if you start another series with the same zero then you can align them (Tools --> Dimensions --> Align Collinear/Radial). Unfortunately occasionally, for no apparent reason (yay SW!) it randomly does not work. If you are feeling particularly organised you can set up a separate layer just for inserted model items so you can turn them off/change the colour etc. Another annoyance is that (at least in 2004) if you tick "Marked for Drawing" you cannot also tick "Hole Wizard Locations". So you still have to delete unwanted items if you use the hole wizard even if you untick "Mark for Drawing"

I'm going to disagree with most folks on this topic and agree with TOP. I know there are cases or product types that make it difficult to use design dimensions for manufacturing, however, many designs should be created with manufacturing in mind. Design intent is one consideration, while Design For Manufacture (DFM) must be included also. For that matter, Design For Assembly (DFA) deserves its share of consideration as well. Where I work, we strive to limit the number of reference dimensions on every drawing. Model Items are used as extensively as possible and in some case, exclusively. Again, this methodology will not work for all designs but I do know this: There has been and in many cases still is a wall between Design Engineering & Manufacturing Engineering. One of the most common manufacturing mantra is, "They may know how to design stuff but they sure as hell don't know how to manufacture anything." In some cases this is true in others it's just a stubborn mentality that has existed in both departments forever. Our thinking is that if you don't consider manufacturing processes & capabilities, you really cannot design a cost effective product. Eddie

I like to address this by having both the "intent" and the "manufacturing" dimension in the model. Typically I make the "intent" dimension driving, but set it so that it is not "marked for drawing". I then add a driven "manufacturing" dimension that is marked for the drawing.