Producing Scale Drawings On the Computer.

G'day all,

Just out of curiosity, who here uses their computer to create scale drawings for their modelling? Indeed, does anybody else?

What sort of software do you use, and on what platform?

I use a G3 iMac, and a positively ancient vector drawing application, FreeHand 3.1. Yes, it's nearly as old as I am!

At the moment I'm working on drawings of the Kintetsu 30" gauge electric multiple unit stock, and some NSWGR freight vehicles in 7mm/O scale. The latter are for a friend who has become a cottage industry kit producer.

Just wondering.

Mark.

Reply to
Mark Newton
Loading thread data ...

Hi Mark, I use AutoCAD LT ( a "light"version of AutoCAD) on a Pentium 4 PC. It may be a bit pricey for some but it was what I was used to using at work. There are some other capable CAD programs out there for less but I am unfamiliar with them so will not attempt to compare with AutoCAD. Lynn

electric

producer.

Reply to
Lynn Caron

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 18:09:20 UTC, Mark Newton wrote: 2000

I do.

I use Generic Cadd, a DOS program on a PC. It is a full-fledged 2-D CAD program. The nice part is that I can input data in 12" to the foot format and when done scale by 1/87.09 and have an HO drawing. Very handy.

Reply to
Ernie Fisch

=>What sort of software do you use, and on what platform?

DC2, a CAD program very like Autocad, running in DOS. I've also used miscellaneous bit-map drawing programs that come "free" with Windows. Those ar nearly useless IMO.

Some general observations:

a) If you can't draw with paper and pencil plus the usual tools (triangle, scale, etc), you can't draw with a computer either. That's the most important single fact about drawing programs.

b) For simple quick and dirty jobs, paper and pencil is faster than a computer. A computer is good when you have a lot of repetitious stuff, such as 36 windows on the side of low rise building; and it's good for complex drawings of complex machinery, etc.

c) For most people, the learning curve for a CAD program is steep - so steep that unless you will do a lot of drawing with it (ie, a drawing a week or more), you will be relearning the program every time you start it.

d) The printer will produce a nice, clean copy of the drawing - cleaner and neater than I can do it with paper and pencil, anyhow. So the CAD program is sometimes worth using even for simple drawings.

Reply to
Wolf Kirchmeir

I use Autocad 2000 on a very ancient Pentium 1--200 mmx running Windows 95. It is a terrific program and I found it to be somewhat intuitive once I understood that learning a CAD program is like learning a new language. You cannot "freeze up" when reading the instructions.

(Autocad light is the same for what we are undertaking)

It will not draw for you--you must have all the skills associated with mechanical drawing and understand the processes for generating drawings.

Learning the program became manditory when I decided to have the parts for my next kit laser cut--a small carpenter gothic church. Most laser cutters use autocad files.

As a bonus, the program is being used more and more in my line of work-drawing sets for films and TV. So learning the program will become doubly benificial.

Bruce West Main Street Heritage Models

formatting link
Toss "wospam" to e-mail

Reply to
MainStHtge

Lynn, like you my initial experience of CAD was through work, and that influenced my choice of a system and software for home use. I reckon a lot of people probably start out the same way.

All the best,

Mark.

Reply to
Mark Newton

That sounds like a very useful feature. I can do something "sort-of" similar with FreeHand, but only up to a certain size limit, after which it's back to the calculator!

I take it that 1/87.09 is the exact ratio for HO? I've been a bit lazy, and simply used 1/87.

Gotta go, the prototype police are knocking my door down!

All the best,

Mark

Reply to
Mark Newton

It's interesting you mention that, Bruce - a lot of the local live steam blokes get parts like engine frames laser cut now, by the same means. Also, some have had spoked wheels cut from plate using a high-pressure water/abrasive particle machine, and it also use autocad files. It's all amazing stuff.

All the best,

Mark.

Reply to
Mark Newton

You're not wrong. Presumably that's why they are given away. :-)

Again, you're not wrong - it never ceases to amaze me the number of people who think that the computer will somehow "do the drawing" itself.

I've been fortunate, in that my dad started his engineering career in the drawing office, and my mum was an accomplished watercolor artist. Under their combined tutelage and guidance I have developed into a reasonably competent draftsman/illustrator.

This is what we have found while preparing drawings for the wagon kits. The ability to draw something only once, and then duplicate it as required, is a godsend when dealing with wagons like ours.

Reckon! When I first started, I wondered if I'd ever get the hang of using computers to draw with. But, as the old saying goes, practice makes perfect. The fact that there is so much commonality between applications for the Mac is also a great help.

It certainly will. We recently replaced our rather ancient laser printer with a small, inexpensive HP inkjet model, and the quality of the output is bloody brilliant.

All the best,

Mark.

Reply to
Mark Newton

Yup

It's also useful when you are actually designing anything, rather than inputting date from another medium - drawing, scale, whatever. Plus correcting things - see below.

Serendipity to the rescue! I was given a copy of 3D RR Concept and Design by a friend who asked me to design a layout for him. No arguements about which is best, this or 3D Trainz or whatever, I wouldn't know, i've only ever used this one.

I first learned to use it to design layouts (gee whiz!!) but then I started using the drawing tools to design other things for the layout

- double deck benchwork cross sections, etc. Since then I have used this for all sorts of stuff. Last job was to design a sub-woofer enclosure my son is building for his home theatre. This took a lot of corrections, etc, from drawing to drawing. Making corrections is MUCH, MUCH easier on CAD!!

And as per the story above re sub-woofer, the joinery works were much more appreciative of a neat, clearly laid out drawing done to scale!! To misquote Telly Savalas, "who loves it, baby!!"

Steve Newcastle NSW Oz

Reply to
Steve Magee

I now use AutoCAD 2000. You can download some of my drawings in zipped dxf at

formatting link
(sorry, Danish text only).

Reply to
Erik Olsen

You're not wrong! Particularly if you are nine-tenths of the way towards completing a drawing, only to discover some new information that was previously unknown to you. Say, for example, features of the bogie tenders coupled beind a 19 class... I've scanned all my photos of that one at Thirlmere if you're interested, Steve.

All the best,

Mark.

Reply to
Mark Newton

Hello,

Virtually all the CAD work for my turnout assembly fixtures is done in full

3D modelling using SolidEDGE modelling software. Solid modelling is quickly replacing 2 dimentional CAD software in the manufacturing world. The diffenence between working with 3D over 2D is hard to overstate! When a 3D part model is coupled with a good CAM package, like Mastercam and a CNC mill/lathe, just about anything can be done. The learing curve for 3D drawing is steep, takes a good year to get onto to it, but the payoff if well worth it. I can draw at the same speed, of faster in 3D then I could in 2D.

I am in the process of drawing a substancial library of turnout templates which are available to download from my website,

formatting link
All these drawings were produced from a full 3D model, actually when the working drawing is what you want, the 3D model is a by-product of this process. I found it hard to believe at first that this could be a more efficiant way of drawing but it is. Once the 3D model is made, the software will produce the working drawings from it, section views are as easy as placing the section line, the software will figure out the rest, hatching lines and all. So its starting to get to the point where you don't have to do the drawing!

Reply to
Tim

mandatory. Think "mandate" benificial

Think "benEfit". < Italian "bene" < Latin "bona" - good or well..

separate - always remember there is "a rat" in the middle of separate.

My worst one that I always have to look up: occurrence. Or is it occurance? Anyone have a good mnemonic for that one? I can never remember which is correct.

Jay "misspell" is most misspelled word in English.

Reply to
JCunington

Absolutely! I used several tools, depending on what I'm doing. CADRail is a perfectly competent little CAD program for doing many things other than track planning. A product, like CADRail, that allows the use of protoype units of measure, then scales the printed output, is extremely useful. I print the output onto full page, removable adhesive stock, stick it to styrene of the appropriate gauge, and start cutting. I also use Adobe Illustrator and Paint Shop Pro for some things, but scaling is not quite as convenient in these kinds of tools. The advantage they have is that it is easier to create signs and interior partition details that can be printed and then directly incorporated into a building.

Mark Alan Miller

Reply to
Mark Alan Miller

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 23:35:13 UTC, "Wolf Kirchmeir" wrote: 2000

This comment is made so often that people believe it to be true. It is for beginners. For the experienced it is not. I can do a quick sketch in CAD faster than I can round up the drawing tools. When I finish a CAD drawing I know everything fits. Can't say the same for paper and pencil.

This is very true. I learned my drafting 50 years ago and thanked my lucky stars when computer aided drafting came along. Has anybody else drawn in ink on cloth? Anyway I started ahead and it still took me quite a while to get proficient but it was worth the effort, to me. When I supervised a group of engineers I convinced them to use a spread sheet for some of the data entry stuff we had to do. The first time around it took longer on the computer, the first revision was a breakeven and after that it was all gravy.

I have used Generic Cadd for years. Some years back I was offered AutoCad Lite at an attractive price. I bought it and discovered that I would have a whole new learning curve to traverse. Actually more like two since I would have to unlearn Generic. It also suffered from the Windows problem, so many bells and whistles that it was unneccesarily complex. I gave it away.

Reply to
Ernie Fisch

On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 10:23:30 UTC, Mark Newton wrote: 2000

Actually it is 87.086 to the nearest three places. Only an engineer would give an RA. 1/87 works quite well, being less than .1% off.

The really nice part is that once the drawing is scaled it can be dimensioned in the actual HO dimensions, all done by the computer. Very handy.

Reply to
Ernie Fisch

Jay Cunington writ: My worst one that I always have to look up: occurrence. Or is it occurance? Anyone have a good mnemonic for that one? I can never remember which is correct.

----------------------------------------------- If it occurred, it's an occurrence. If it occurad . . . well, then you'll know it's wrong!

Bill Bill's Railroad Empire N Scale Model Railroad:

formatting link
History of N Scale:
formatting link
Links to over 500 helpful sites:
formatting link
formatting link

Reply to
Bill

1:87 is correct everywhere but in the US and Britain. 3.5mm:1 foot is correct in Britain. 1:87.1 is incorrect in the USA. ;-)
Reply to
Gregory Procter

Thanks, Bill. I'll remember that. I think.

Jay CNS&M Wireheads of the world, unite!

Reply to
JCunington

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.