2-D Drawing Techniques

[[email protected]]

How to make a proper 2-Dimensional Drawing

A good engineering drawing doesn't need to be done with expensive software or a drawing board and a t-square. A cleanly executed hand drawing can convey the same amount of information to an engineer, fabricator or machinist as any CAD model can. I would like to put forward some basic steps for those who have ideas about making something but don't necessarily have the means to do it themselves.

1) Label your drawing. You may know what it is but without a label, no one else will. A label should include at a bare minimum the following: name of the creator, name of the part(s), material of the part and date created.

2) Clearly state your units. Space shuttles have crashed because of the difference between an inch and a centimeter. I personally use metric for everything I do. The conversion between metric and standard is straight forward so whatever you chose, just make it clear.

3) Create an origin. This may not seem terribly important for basic 2-d drawings but when you begin to use 2-d views of different planes (the x,y,z planes), stating an origin gives the viewer a reference point.

4) Show enough dimensions so that the intended end shape can be determined immediately. The end viewer shouldn't have to do any calculations or make any assumptions.

5) Show the dimensions between points, lines and surfaces that have a direct relation to each other.

6) Show angular dimensions in degrees.

7) Try to make your drawing to scale. If it is not within reason, clearly state that it is not to scale.

8) Write legibly.

That's about it. Here at RAI, we use SolidWorks 2009. The program's capabilities go far beyond basic 2-d drafting, but it does that just fine as well.

[[email protected]]

Here are some very basic renditions of plates and flanges. For ease of reading, lots of information has been left out to show the basics of dimensions and relations.


Take a look at this circular piece:


First, the dimensions of the overall shape as well as the dimensions of the interior shape.


Now the 2nd take:


Now, the relations of the interior shapes are defined in relation to the outer shape.


Take a look at this flange:



The height and width are defined as is the curvature of the corners. Using the radius to define the curvature is generally easiest. Just make sure it is apparent to the viewer where the center point of the radius is.



Take a look at this drawing:



- The exterior dimensions of the piece are clearly defined

- The radius of the curves are clearly defined

-The dimensions of the interior shape are clearly defined

- The relation of the interior shape to the exterior shape is clearly defined

[AsianA408]

then clearly... solidworks is the way to the future.

[RAI Motorsport]

Solidworks has been around for a while. Awesome program. Pro engineer is also good. We will post up some images of some rai products for you to see.

[flashovermac]

SolidEdge... also pretty good.

[onemoremile]

I've used it since SW99. Good stuff.

[4ringAR]

Solidworks has been around for a while. Awesome program. Pro engineer is also good. We will post up some images of some rai products for you to see.

ugh i hate ProE. They make us use it at my school as an ME student, but everyone ive talked to prefer to use Solidworks(what they get to use in the FSAE program)

There are always issues with the constraints or just generally making it do what you tell it to do in ProE.

[[email protected]]

I went through 5 years of schooling with Pro/E. The capabilities of the program reach pretty far if you have the time to devote to setting everything up properly.

However, for every day use, its pretty clumsy. Solidworks has gotten more and more intuitive over the years and (so far) has had the ability to handle anything we've thrown at it.

I want to see some drawings guys!

Custom pistons, shifter knobs...lets see some cool stuff.

[Deep6ed]

I use Pro/E everyday of my life. It's a fantastic program that does require initial setup because it is designed to be managed for assemblies in production volume. Solidworks & Edge (sheet metal) are quick and easy solutions, but do not lend themselves to a production setting. Good for making 1-10 parts, but will never hold up to Pro/E's documentation and production based results.

[hoganalley]

I use Solidworks every day in the POP industry. It's great for making quick, and quite accurate parts but tough for bigger assemblies. Once I get some parts built up of something interesting I'll post up

[belinko]

Started with AutoCad 13,14,15,16 in highschool, upgraded to Pro/E in college, I've been using SW since '98 and never looked back.

SW can handle 99.999999998234999% of most mechanical engineering tasks, including video simulations, complex surfacing, photo imaging, stress analysis, fluidic simulations and all of the other standard stuff. The only thing I hate is that they just started screwing the users over on how many users you get per CD. The majority of updates are useless and we only upgrade when necessary, other than that it's good.

Justifying the purchase for PRO-E, just doesn't make sense for a smaller company (15k per seat), but overall PRO-E is a more powerful tool.

Sorry for the rant.

I'll post a nice sketch on Monday ;) you're gonna laik it.






I've got a full animation of a breast augmentation procedure, which includes several surgincal tools, moving around, inflation of the breast and other cool things as well. All of the surfaces were generated in solidworks based upon anatomical dimensions

[Feeesh]

i'm also learning pro/e at my school.... it seems more companies are using solidworks with the exception of the defense contractors- they seem to like pro/e.

the dimensioning in those drawings is more redundant than i'm used to, but i like it that way!

[chaldowhiteboy]

i am using autocad and right now and the stuff you have posted seem really simple.. i have yet to make 3-dimensional things... waiting to take the next level, next semester

[Feeesh]

^
it is really simple.

3d stuff gets really fun, i'm not sure if they still call it extrusion in the autocad world, but that's the first part of 3d you'll learn. it just adds the depth to whatever you're building.

then you gotta start thinking about base features and what planes you're extruding on, the order of individual features you add to the base features.. it gets really fun.

and then sweeps and blends and converting stuff to drawings to be able to pass it to the next person for them to build.

[Deep6ed]

with the exception of the defense contractors- they seem to like pro/e.

Yup, thats me. UAV's specifically. Pro/E ftw.

[belinko]

Bumpidty

[Feeesh]

Yup, thats me. UAV's specifically. Pro/E ftw.

general atomics?

[Mike@PureMS]

I've got a full animation of a breast augmentation procedure, which includes several surgincal tools, moving around, inflation of the breast and other cool things as well. All of the surfaces were generated in solidworks based upon anatomical dimensions

Animated .GIF!!!

[[email protected]]

the dimensioning in those drawings is more redundant than i'm used to, but i like it that way!

They are more redundant than I normally use as well.

For most parts that we send out for production runs, I don't have to import dimensions at all. As long as the scale of the part is 1:1, the .DWG file takes care of the relations.

[B6T]

I love these threads. I figure you guys would appreciate these:

Flywheel for my RX-7 I designed and validated in SW2008/Cosmos:



Finished product:


Some other rotary related stuff I made in SW:

[alexza4]

George! Good to see you on here dude!

And great forum guys! Some awesome info!

[seank]

Solidworks for Drawing, Abaqus for validation here.

[pit viper]

I do architecture, rather than ME, so I mainly work in AutoCAD and Revit 10. But the same aspects apply to proper dimensioning and noting.

[CoreyRS]

anybody have an spec drawn spacers? Im trying to mill some and am not yet motivated to bust out the calipers and spec them myself.