Do you use any computer based tool for doing project layout?

Page 1 of 11  
I have always designed my projects using graph paper, ruler, pencil, and (lots of) eraser. I have a somewhat more complicated job I want to do now. There is a design for an entertainment center in FWW that I want to adapt. I would like to take the measurements from the article, enter them on a computer somehow, and then change the things I want. I have a friend who uses Google Sketchup. He found it awkward to use and not that sophisticated. I don't want to invest the money and a lot of learning time on a CAD program unless I can get a recommendation on this group for a product that one of you likes to use. Should I stick to my paper, pencil, and eraser?
TIA.
Dick Snyder
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/10/2010 6:07 AM, Dick Snyder wrote:

For things that are essentially boxes - like kitchen cabinets and, perhaps, your entertainment center SketchUp has acquired a substantial following.
I happen to do relatively little of that type of work and use an old version of DesignCAD, which lets me draw curves that aren't often seen in traditional woodworking (parabola, hyperbola, catenaries, sine curves, etc) and export those shapes in a format that permits CNC machining.
Some folks are working with TurboCAD and like it best.
But everybody seems to use pencil and paper along with any CAD package they're comfortable with. :)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/10/2010 7:42 AM, Morris Dovey wrote:

Meh ... either a thinly veiled insult, or your ignorance is showing, or both:
http://www.finewoodworking.com/item/17770/making-a-windsor-settee-armcrest-rail
"...essentially boxes...", eh? What a crock!
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/10/2010 8:43 AM, Swingman wrote:

"Note that I did not scoop the seat in the SketchUp model..."
"I was able to trace over a scanned image of a top view of the Settee to quickly achieve the flat face shown below."
So it can be used in conjunction with images produced elsewhere to produce approximate copies of what has already been done with other (circa 1820!) design tools - big deal.

True, as illustrated in this settee example, only if tracing a digitized image produced by other tools provides sufficient accuracy, and if representing 3D curved surfaces (like the seat) as planar meets requirements.
No insult was intended - I was attempting to point out a broad class of design objects (which included the OP's immediate project) where I felt SketchUp worked well for its users. If you interpret that as an insult, perhaps you can explain why...
FWIW, when I /intend/ insult, there's no "thinly veiled" about it. :)
If you maintain that SketchUp is a superior tool for easily producing accurate mathematical curves/surfaces in three dimensions (as is the case in the many of _my_ woodworking projects) adequate for precision production, then I invite you to produce the evidence - or to expand your woodworking horizons.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/10/2010 1:05 PM, Morris Dovey wrote:

Come now, Morris ... you've proven yourself too smart a fellow to _not_ know exactly what you are about.
I recall taking the time to cobble up and post a SU tutorial model showing you how to do something with curves which you were unable to accomplish.
Just because you haven't taken to the time to become proficient with the program, don't insult the program and, by association, those who have, with such ignorant remarks.
Nevertheless, I'll spot you the "insult", but the link posted proves either one of my contentions to be correct, without necessity for further words.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/10/2010 1:31 PM, Swingman wrote:

Whether I was too stupid to grasp SketchUp or SketchUp was insufficiently capable or user friendly was/is a lot less important to me than producing a result that met requirements. I did know what the requirements were, and SketchUp didn't get me there.

You did - and it was appreciated. My next step in that progression was to add a tapped hole using the same technique - which sorta worked but required /way/ too much patchy cleanup. I got the job done, but wasn't satisfied that something so simple required so much time and piddling.

Sorry, but after spending more than a half-century developing software (link in sig), and using CAD packages for more than half of that time, I don't feel as ignorant as you portray. I have to admit, though, that I only started producing actual 3D renderings in wood eight years ago, when I installed my 'Bot. Sadly, the more I've learned the more ignorant I've become.
Since you feel that noticing difficulties with software is an insult to its user, please bypass any and all comments I may ever make about Microsoft's software products (cough) and practices (cough, cough).

Tracing an image and skipping definition of contoured surfaces don't work for me. Whatever you think you proved to me with the example went whoosh - unless it was that a settee isn't a box (Well, duh! I never said SketchUp was /limited/ to boxes.)
I hoped SketchUp would work for me, too - but it simply wasn't worth more than 60 hours of my time when I already had a CAD tool doing what, after all that time, I couldn't get SketchUp to do.
I glad you like it so well for the work you're doing.
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'll see your Spectra 70/45 and raise you an RCA 501 and 301. :o)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/10/2010 9:05 PM, LDosser wrote:

You win - besides, the 70/45 was just a thin film approximation to a 360/30 (same instruction set and I/O devices, but had a sexier front panel) :)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Morris Dovey wrote:

By "thin film", do you mean it also had the cros (capacitance read only memory) instruction set as the 360/30? It was punch card size mylar with copper traces that were punched out on one of four sides of a squeare or some such. The first time I saw the 30 power on and the cros "pump up" to push the cros punch card ros together, I wondered "WTF"?
Then there was the 360/40 with the "tros" micro programmed instruction set...
That's the one I started with in '64.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/10/2010 11:16 PM, Doug Winterburn wrote:

You and nearly everyone else - I've always suspected it was designed by the same madman who designed the 407... :)
I honestly don't know how RCA implemented the instruction set or the internals of IPL. I suspect that they may have used ROMs, because IBM was likely to have the CROS covered every which way with patents.
Thin film refers to (yet another) logic family (like ECL, TTL, MOS, CMOS, etc). RCA claimed it was cheaper, provided higher yields, and was more reliable. Of course, when you asked around you discovered that every company's technology flavor was well above average. :)
You might get a kick out of learning that the floppy disk was originally developed to load the microcode into the ill-fated object-based FS (for Future System) machines.

I was away from computers from 62-65 working for Uncle Sam, but IIRC I was introduced to the 40 (but it could have been a 50) and DEBE at the same time. :)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"Thin film" was a manufacturing process rather than a logic family. IIRC, everything was RTL at that time. IBM's variety was SLT (Solid Logic Technology). It *was* RTL. ECL didn't come along until the 370s and "MST" (Monolithic Solid Technology), which was made by TI.

Nah, floppies were used on the 370/158s to load microcode, well before FS.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/11/2010 11:02 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Are you sure? The 158 was announced in August 2, 1972 about the time Dept 71J in East Fishkill received a bare (no electronics) /Igar/ drive from Boulder, and at that time the folks at Boulder were still having difficulties producing diskettes (something about the jacket lining abrading the oxide).
In 1972, D/71J was working on the UC0 and UC.5 controllers and firmware drivers for not only /Igar/, but also for /Gulliver/ (the new sealed hard drive from Hursley), /Lynx/ (a new band printer to succeed the print-chain 1403), and an SDLC adapter - and all of these were being developed (primarily) as building blocks for FS.
It was the guy across the hall from me who came up with the motor+geneva+leadscrew drive to implement seeks (clack, clack, clack) on /Igar/, which was later replaced with a (quiet) voice coil seek mechanism.
They all underwent final product test at the same time in Kingston during, IIRC, 1974. We worked 12 hours on and twelve hours off with a long commute, through that entire 6-week test process - it was an exhausting experience (I remember waking up one morning on the way back from Kingston - driving down the shoulder of US9 doing 65).
The evolved /Igar/ drive graduated as the 33FD. I still have some of the diskettes. :)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


Ever run into a guy name of Dick Gomez back there?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/12/2010 2:40 AM, LDosser wrote:

If I did, I've forgotten. :(
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm not sure when they were introduced into the 370s, but yeah, they were used for /158 microcode. I remember interviewing at CDC in early '74. They had a /158 with its covers off, with a bunch of people reverse-engineering the floppy drive. The /158 was their pride and joy, which I thought odd. The whole place was "odd" and I told them so before I left (didn't get an offer ;).

I worked on FS for a few months, before it was killed. I started in P'ok in June of '74. IIRC it was killed that fall and the 308x started using the hardware. FS was a *bad* idea and would have killed any other company.

I did a lot of 12/12 projects in my time at IBM. In a department meeting my boss announced that he had good news and bad news. The good news was that starting immediately, we would be working half days. The bad news was that there were 24 hours in a day. I'd already been working 70-hour weeks, for months, so no change.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/12/2010 8:24 AM, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:

You're right - I went digging and found that there had been a /Minnow/ R/O floppy drive with diminished capacity released in 1972. I'm guessing it was an early /Igar/ prototype.
Yuppers on the oddness - my impression was that the CDC management team had never quite been able to decide what they wanted to do when they grew up. At one point they were even in the windmill business. :)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It was R/O (forgotten that detail). The floppy writers were a desk- sized contraption that connected to an internal use only computer (RSTS?) from Rochester, IIRC. It was IUO because it would put shame to the S/7 and there were a *lot* of S/7s, unsold, in the warehouse.

It was obviously run by a bunch of MBA kids, still wet behind the ears. The treated candidates like grade school kids. Just amazing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 11:18:42 -0500, Morris Dovey wrote:

I'm beginning to wonder how many old computer jocks and card pushers there are in this group :-). Is there some mystical connection between computers and woodworking?
BTW, to see the 1st computer I programmed (and helped assemble) go to:
http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL61.html#TOC
and click on Readix. I worked on one at Science Research Associates in the late '50s.
--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/12/2010 12:18 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:

Good call! I've been convinced for a very long time that systems design and woodworking use the same circuits. People who're good at one seem to have a shot at being good at the other.

I like that you don't even have to open the covers to see which board is on fire. :)
I started programming in '59 on a Bendix G-15, but it was definitely _not_ as impressive looking as the one in the BRL Report - and it did require opening the covers to see what was roasting...
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Morris Dovey wrote:

I guess I qualify except I don't consider myself "old"!!! :)
I actually used paper-tape (over a dumb-terminal) before I "graduated" to punch cards.
I fully expect that my post-HS woodworking projects will be better my HS projects of about 30 years ago, but it's hard to explain "why" in words. I'm the same person, but somehow I'm a more learned person--that's one of great things about staying young is you get to keep on learning! :)
Bill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.