Autocad printing needlessly complicated how to#

Sharing dwg files with other departments can lead to major problems.I'm not saying you're wrong, because you're not.

Simply place all files in the same folder and problem solved, if some one needs a copy make a pdf. I run into this all the time where our client's cad person doesn't know anything about autocad and has no understanding of xrefs which have been in use for over 15 years.

Autocad printing needlessly complicated how to#

Learn how to use autocad and you can actually read about xrefs.

I don't know what kinds of files some of you work with but if we bind our xrefs into every drawing we produce, each would be over 40mb and be impossible to just email to someone. It is tough to ask a 'lazy' client to make changes to their drawings based on the fact that one of your co-workers does not know who to use XREFS (this may vary on where you sit in the food chain of the project).ДЇor XREF basics, check out an article I wrote for AUGI world last year:ДЄnd for a plea to architects check out this post. If they need to 'mess' with XREFS, then they need educating. Most engineers do not need to know how to manipulate XREFs other than turning on/off or freezing/thawing layers they do want to see. If your providing drawings for upper-ups or engineers that do not know how to use XREFS, cleanup the basic XREF(s) for them and let them go to work. This make updates far easier when the client only sends the one area that has been modified and not every XREF. The simplest way I have found for anything other than the basic three (see above) is to place all the xrefs in one folder so you avoid pathing issues and run a cleanup script on each one to get it usable (don't change their given names). Next is pathing issues if you change the names to a company standard XREF naming convention, i.e.X-1489-TB and X-1489-BG (or whatever your company standard is) if the client has nested xrefs, which is common. for isolation, and make objects color by layer (for CTBs - STBs have similar issues) so we can control our settings within our working drawings - having a lot of xrefs can be a nightmare. Since we typically have to clean up these drawings to set the right colors for our plotting, make sure furniture is all on the furniture layers, doors are not on the ceiling layer, etc.

In some cases however we may get 20 XREFS that break down to each toilet stall and stairwell as an XREF. In many of the offices that I have worked with we typically get anywhere from one to three drawings to use as XREFS Floor plan, Ceiling plan and Title block. I think a lot of folks would be happy if they focused on the basics of layer naming, colors and linetypes and do less of using layer '0' and 'defpoints' and calling their layers something other than '1' or 'Misc' and then put stuff on that layer because the color is right.ДЄs far a XREFS being bound, I think in most cases it does not work out well except for final archiving. To a point this is understandable - if they had to tweak their drawings for everyone, they could not get their own work done nor would they ever actually create a perfect drawing. Architects, civil engineers and vendors that provide drawings for 'OUR' use set their drawings up for 'THEIR' use, and give little thought to how they are being used by anyone else (sometimes including their coworkers). I have worked on both sides of the fence, so I say that pretty confidently. I think most architectural folks do not realize how their files are used by consultants. As a consultant, we rarely (never) get xrefs that we can attach and start working with (think colors and line weights and layer/object visibility).

I know I am a little late to this party, but I thought I would add a few thoughts on Xrefs from outside companies.