I was in split minds as of where to put this post. Either 'The Technical Forum' or 'The Lounge'. I chose the technical forum as the answers I seek would probably in this category. I'll put it across without any more delay. Some part I'm guessing and some part I know from hands on experience.

In the good old days, all the drafting would be done on board and by hand. Those hands were skillful hands and they knew exactly what they would create on the empty sheet. The mind of draftsman would think long and hard before touching the sheet. There would be a lot of thought as to what he'd prepare as the Rework would mean lots of hard work would be wasted. So they got into the habit of thinking soundly first and then preparing it. The model would be in their minds. The plan would be prepared and where necessary, details & isometrics would be sketched.

Then came, softwares such as ACAD, Microstation which started replacing the drafting board. The rework part became easier and perhaps, the men working on it became a little careless as it'd simply meant: ERASE, REDRAW and UNDO. What a wonderful command! We can UNDO and REDO everything except reality. Still, the designer had to keep visualizing the actual model in his mind. That meant he'd look over and over his design and will worry about the smallest dimension.

At last came 3D softwares. You no longer had to imagine about reality. Here was your chance at virtual reality. Then came specialized jobs:
Administrator (software needs one).
CATS and SPECS guy who would know the specification and materials.
Designer did not have to worry about dimensions. The parts were ready to be assembled.
3D Coordinator who maintained status and communicated.
Clash manager (Funny enough, 3D should have circumvented this problem. Thats what they're for)
Reviewers who used new reviewing softwares. These are other than modeling softwares.
Still we are not better off as we continue to have problems.

Perhaps, it has got to do with: less imagination, less thinking (you can always rework) as we got a chance to UNDO and REDO. Perhaps, all the softwares are taking us away from the human part: involvement. Of course, I'm not blaming software. But, where does it go wrong?

Only three years experience! For someone so "Young" in the business you are very wise.
Everything you said is absolutely true.

You know what I find interesting about this profession, no matter how you “bent, fold, or change it” …it’s till WORK! ...AND it keeps getting harder to do!!!

Shri...
I agree with you what you said.
But you should think from another perspective also
There was a time when man used to walk for miles. Capacity of a man was very much in that era he was very stong also.
Then an era came when he used cattles or animal for transportation. In that time You were quicker than earlier one.
Now this is era of motors, cars several new vehicles which made our life so easy. the time of travelling reduced.
But no. of accidents increased, Strength of man reduced,. Now we can walk for a single mile also.
No. of accidents is similar to your funny thing you called "Clash". Strength and capicitance is similar to "Imagination".
So what I meant to say that there are two faces of coin.
In the era of handdrafting the time taken for completion of project was around 5yrs. which now reduced to 3 yrs.
Earlier it used to take lot of time in gaining experience of different equipments and different aspects, which is not now.(I may be wrong at this point). But I know some people who finished their life in working with towers only the don't know anything about exchanger or pump piping.
So what do you think now...?

Thanks
Siddharth Jain

Thank you for your kind comments.

We strive to make life better by introducing innovations and still we fail to better things as we intended them to. All of the above were invented to improve designer's life. Siddharth, you have a point. However, there will be different answers based on the criterion you set. For example,



Now the question is: has the life in London improved? Yes, technologically and No, if your basis is average speed.

My question is: All the softwares are introduced to make design better. However, the more they are introduced to these softwares the more detached and unrealistic the user becomes from the design. You'll cringe but still get to hear a comment from Stress Engineer (who uses stress software) like put a guide at 4541 mm from the elbow and the line would pass. You can imagine what he has done here. He created a guide and jockeyed through the whole length of pipe until he found a suitable location for acceptable stress and moment. Whereas, the olden man would think first: why the stress is getting created and then he'll suggest a combination to counter the stress. My point is: Are we mixing things disproportionately? The softwares are just the means but we need to think about our piping first!

Yes I agree with the example given by you, fro stress engineering.
But at the same time you should think that in the handdrafting era it was much difficult to synchronize things unless everything was being done by one person. i.e. if one person is doing structural work, one is working with raceways, and one is in piping. and letus say all are working on the same structure than it would have been difficult for them to cooperate. (JOP and other experienced guys pl correct me if I am wrong.) Now this became very easy with reviewing softwares as we are able to see from where raceways are travelling where are bracings and beams.
For stress guys also they used to do lots of calculations for the different loads and stresses which used to take a lot of time( I have seen some samples of those calculations), but because of that the general understanding of those engineers increased also and they created some thumb rules for stress engineering. eg. distance between two guides.
You are right that now we are not using our common sense and just depend on softwares.
I agree that one should depend on its confidence and experience more instead of softwares.
I will say that softwares made life easy. It depends on user how he treats it like master or servent.

Thank You
Siddharth Jain

You wrote:
"But at the same time you should think that in the hand drafting era it was much difficult to synchronize things unless everything was being done by one person. i.e. if one person is doing structural work, one is working with raceways, and one is in piping. and let us say all are working on the same structure than it would have been difficult for them to cooperate. (JOP and other experienced guys pl correct me if I am wrong.) Now this became very easy with reviewing software as we are able to see from where raceways are traveling where are bracing and beams."

You said to please correct you if you were wrong. Well you are wrong. Piping designers in the mid 1950's when I started did not have "much difficulty" coordinating the design with other disciplines. We were ALL trained that someone was the lead discipline for certain types of facilities. If it was a Bridge then the Structural discipline was the natural lead group. If it was an Electrical Sub-Station then it was the Electrical discipline that was the lead group. However, if it was a process plant with complex process equipment and piping then the Piping Designer was the lead group.
One senior level "Area Piping Designer" was assigned to the area with responsibility to take the design of that area from Plot Plan concept to "ready for Check". This included not only coordination with all the other disciplines but also the initial conceptual design for the equipment structures and pipe racks. It included the orientation of all the nozzle locations on all the vessels and tanks. It included the initial conceptual routing space for electrical and instrument race ways.
That was the true meaning and execution of Plant Design. That "Area" piping designer had a "3D" mentality. He or she could "See" the area from all sides and not run into bracing or beam because he or she put them there to begin with. If the structural member of the team needed to move a brace for some reason then it was communicated to the piping designer and "noted" in the mental picture.
I know this concept is hard for many to understand today. Bur I was there. I saw how these experts work and they were truly impressive. I was trained by many of them. I was taught to visualize the whole design. This meant, first what it would look like as a finished product then work to make that picture come alive.

There is much more I could say on this subject but it would be a waste. We cannot turn the clock back. Management has been sold a bill-of-goods that "3D" is the only way to go and that you do not need to spend money on training. Compounding that is the fact that the type of Piping Designers I am talking about either have died or are dieing off and are not available to do the kind of training it would take to go back.

For those who are interested, I will continue to teach or advise via this and other "Piping" related web sites.

This part that I'm writing is purely fiction as I have very little knowledge of the past and I did not have a chance to interact with people who did that. Here it goes:


No matter what software we work at, the land is the commodity that we have to work at and 'Plan' is the best way to utilize it to the maximum as was in the past.

This I say despite being an administrator of a 3D software

Please consider this as the end of this subject.
Thank you,
Jop, Technical Forum Moderator