Hi all I am currently reconnecting drawings from a service provider. Beyond his incompetence that I accept, after having helped him in these choices. And his departure after an unequivocal observation on his level, a lie and probably a mythic CV. As I say, I re-point the drawings, and see its level. And I'm surprised by the different problems encountered.
Nomenclature not attached to the model present on the plan, but on a view placed outside the field, from another model.
Fake detail view: let me explain, the man makes a detail view, the circle lines it with a sketch, and produces a detail view outside the frame on another view. Make-up the whole thing so that it coincides. Lucky or not, he uses the same model.
The 126 MB drawings, after 27MB cleanup. The work produced is unreliable. The worst thing is that we help a subcontractor to do their work, we pay them and we work in their place
In short, the list could be exhaustive but I'm tired of repairing the mess created since the beginning of my project by this company.
But I came across a Bone, now I don't understand how he did? One of the views uses a named assembly in the tree, and when opened has a different name??? Any idea? or I wonder if I should take this me...
Hello It is possible that the file name changed between creation and availability without saving by doing a refresh. So it displays the right name when opening and then if you go back to the drawing it has certainly updated. After that, there is the bug depending on the version of SW. For the subject itself, in view of what is exposed, it is clearly incompetence. Unfortunately SW (and CAD tools in general) are so democratized and simplified that anyone can get something out of it without worrying about the logic and someone else taking it back.
I note your answer, I also think of an update that does not want to be done.
But clearly I am dealing with a sneaky person , born of a frustration due to his incompetence. Because the guy tried to make, and I must say that all this energy to do that will always amaze me. After two years of explaining to him how to do it well, the worst thing is that he comes from aeronautics .
If you have examples of bad moves, I'm all for it.
A beautiful one that I identified a long time ago. The function is carried out correctly with the help of its skeleton, it is asked to adjust the part. A normal person does a search for the original constraints to find the sketch and modify it. No, we use the stretch function, I only come across geniuses. " is look I know all the functions of SW " @Sylk tell me at Boeing they used the stretch function to go from Boeing 737 to 747?
drawings, after 27MB 
cleanup. The work produced is unreliable. The worst thing is that we help a subcontractor to do their work, we pay them and we work in their place 
, born of a frustration due to his incompetence.
.
function, I only come across geniuses. " is look I know all the functions of SW "
