help in isometric view

[kuwait]

helloooooooooooooo:)

please check my isometric view

and the second picture check the right view

i really did my best

autocadtutor.dwgFetching info...

autocad2.dwgFetching info...

[Cad64]

Your dashed lines are incorrect in the side view and the holes are not displayed correctly in the isometric view. Take a good long look at the hole and counterbore in your front view and I think you will see the problem.

[kuwait]

:)okay

now did i miss something?

by the way thank you soooooo much

autocadtutor.dwgFetching info...

[Cad64]

That's better, but your dashed lines in the side view are still incorrect. Look at where the hole breaks through the bottom of the part on the front view and then look at your dashed lines in the side view.

[kencaz]

  Cad64 said:

Your dashed lines are incorrect in the side view and the holes are not displayed correctly in the isometric view. Take a good long look at the hole and counterbore in your front view and I think you will see the problem.

 

I still don't understand why this is taught anymore...

 

KC

[kuwait]

  kencaz said:

I still don't understand why this is taught anymore...

 

KC

what do you mean?!!

[kuwait]

now see it

there is something wrong or not

i tried but i couldnt find out where i did wrong

autocadtutor.dwgFetching info...

[kencaz]

  kuwait said:

what do you mean?!!

 

You should be studying 3D. 2D ISO is dead and buried already.

 

KC

[Cad64]

  kuwait said:

now see it

there is something wrong or not

 

Nope, still not right. There are now two problems where before there was only one problem.

 

Study the front view and look at where the hole breaks through the bottom of the part.

[kuwait]

  kencaz said:

You should be studying 3D. 2D ISO is dead and buried already.

 

KC

you are right

but this is has nothing to do with my major (mechanical engineers take more than that)

i just took this course to learn more (extra)

[ReMark]

2D iso is dead and buried? I'm willing to bet there are still a lot of people making them whether we agree with the technique or not.

[nukecad]

  kencaz said:

You should be studying 3D. 2D ISO is dead and buried already.

 

KC

 

Try telling that to the nuclear industry.

We draw very long pipe runs on our nuclear site (2 or 3 miles total pipe length). The best way to show them is with a 2D isometric for the long runs and an engineering detail when it gest a bit more complicated.

 

The marketing people like to see 3D for presentations but the guys who have to machine the parts want a 2D drawing with dimensions.

[ReMark]

kuwait: The hidden lines in your side view should more or less be the same as you're seeing in the front view with one minor adjustment. As Cad64 tried to point out it is simply a matter of really "looking" at the two views.

[kencaz]

  nukecad said:

Try telling that to the nuclear industry.

We draw very long pipe runs on our nuclear site (2 or 3 miles total pipe length). The best way to show them is with a 2D isometric for the long runs and an engineering detail when it gest a bit more complicated.

 

The marketing people like to see 3D for presentations but the guys who have to machine the parts want a 2D drawing with dimensions.

 

But that is double the work!

 

You can get both ISO and PLAN views from a single 3D model.

 

 

Sorry for Hijacking your thread Kuwait...

 

KC

[JD Mather]

The hole is the same whether in the front view or the side view. I teach my students to simply copy with basepoint from one view to the other.

 

Think of it like this - if you were rotating the real part around the axis of the hole the hidden line view of the hole would not change in any view. It is what it is.

[Tankman]

  nukecad said:

The marketing people like to see 3D for presentations but the guys who have to machine the parts want a 2D drawing with dimensions.

 

You've got that right! Try supplying an up to date pipe fitting when the spec'd fitting is no longer in production...........anywhere! Drawings were all 2D as requested.

 

I had this problem, Saran™ lined pipe in Vermont. Vermont insisted.

Saran™ lined pipe is long out of production, replaced by newer, improved, better than was originally supplied.

 

Darn near an Act of Congress to supply replacement lined steel although the new "stuff" was far superior to Saran™ lined pipe 'n fittings. Service was ambient temp, I proposed PPL (polypropylene) lined steel pipe, ductile iron fittings. Finally, the facility changed the spec. Or, updated their out-of-date specification.

[Wilbri]

You are absolutely right.

The marketing person wants to see pretty pictures, whilst the guy on the shop floor actually producing the goods requires information and the simpler the better.

So nothing wrong with a comprehensive isometric drawing especially when it comes to piping.

I realize that 3D is more advanced and agree with J D Mather that simple mistakes in other views can be overcome by using 3D.

Won't comment further regarding 3D, as I am still becoming acquainted with it.

[Wilbri]

Having considered my previous submission and realizing that my comment has nothing to do with the subject matter, I do however feel it necessary add some comments before being subjected to a barrage from the 3D advocates.

Yes I have seen some very good 3D piping details and look forward to being able to produce them in the future.

I believe the best by far to be a demonstration of CADWORX some years ago, in which I was amazed to see how fast a basic process plant layout drawing could be produced in 3D and from which detailed piping ISO's with completed bill of materials could be extracted.

The price of the software exceeded my departmental budget so that was that.

[kuwait]

thank you guys

 

 

[MikeScott]

I'm missing something here.. what is it you can do with the isometric drawing that you can't do with 3d? If your guys want iso, give them a view of the 3d.

 

Unless you're referring to making piping symbols?

 

I mean, I used to use the HELL out of isometric before I learned 3d, but aside from quick little one-offs, I don't use it anymore.

 

However, I think it SHOULD be taught, because in creating isometrics, you're also learning to read 3d diagrams. You get the connection between what is supposed to be there, and what isn't.

 

This question we're posting-in is evidence that not everyone can automatically read those. If that were the case, this thread wouldn't exist, because anyone familiar with drawing views would have spotted the two issues at a glance.

 

Of course, I still support teaching elementary math as opposed to allowing calculators in grade school, so maybe I'm just old fashioned.