Currently reworking our formats and templates. Debating between filling the paper electronically and then printing scaled to fit (based on the printer) vs. leaving a border electronically and then printing full scale. There seems to be pros and cons to each method, not to mention the intricacies of printers, plotters, PDF viewers, etc. Curious what other's are doing, and why.
Border (A Size):
No Border (C Size):
I guess it is a matter of personal preference. We use the "No Border" approch here. Leaves more room for the CAD data. We print our drawings to scale so we don't use any printer scaling. Not that scale is needed for most of our drawings but, we do have some punch templates where it is helpful.
We use the "No Border" approach here. ... We print our drawings to scale so we don't use any printer scaling.
So if you have no border (extra white space), and you print full scale, doesn't the title block, zones, and anything else near the edge get clipped by the printer?
The border is thick enough that part of it shows up in the printable aria. The screenshot below shows this. Every time we change plotters it takes a bit of work to get everything setup correctly again. I set a zero margin in the printer settings and the print driver settings. I also had to set the printer not to scale (It was automatically scaling drawings down to fit by default). Most lazer plotters can almost print to the edge of the paper now so I don't have any problem seeing the zones on prints but the outer border seen in the PDF does get clipped when plotting.
When paper was cut sized for drafting there was no outer border separately drawn; just the inner border surrounded by zone markings. It was when pen plotters came about that people started adding the outer border so that there was an indication where to trim the page; plotter pens would be damaged if they ran off the page and were still down when they came back, so the page was always larger than the format. Then came laser and other printers that could not print to the edge of the sheets, so not only was there an outer border, but an additional blank margin beyond that.
I'd go with a return to no outer border and set the format to match the standard page size; there's no value in trying to anticipate future developments in printing and there is value in keeping a long term consistency. Nothing more awkward than C-size formats shrunk to A-size output on the generation end, and then mixed with C-size published as C-size. Printed side-by-by side they will look much different (thanks PTC plotter guys for not scaling line widths when you scaled the output.)
In my ancient drafting book, it clearly notes a 1/4" inset border where the tables are attached.
Larger formats have a 1/2" inset border where the tables are attached.
Any surrounding space is for zones or other marking.
My preference is having as much white space as possible on my drawings.
in my drafting board days, we always had pre-printed formats on velum or Mylar and it would have marking to the edge and the 1/2" inset border.
When we started plotting, we would plot on these preprinted formats. After a while, the formats were created in CAD and used for printing.
...and the game began!
Most companies did not want to change their formats so they made up for it by printing on roll stock with a paper trimmer nearby... printed on oversized sheets... or, as a last resort, redefined their borders to allow for the plotter grippers. Use of roll stock plotters was by far the most favored solution.
In the end, when a drawing says scale 1:1, it should be 1:1 at 100%. Anyone that plots scaled-to-fit does so knowingly.
I think I need to clarify. If I draw the outer border the exact same size as the paper, when printing at 1:1, the outer border and most of the zone marks will be clipped off by the printer. That seems to defeat the point of showing the zones. From the comments above it seems that the preference is to fill the paper but also print at 1:1. This will necessarily clip the borders. Maybe this should be a poll instead. Which option do you prefer (1, 2, or 3):
Outer Border Matches Paper Size
1.) Print 1:1 = Most, if not all of zone marks will get clipped but scale will match
2.) Print scaled to fit = Both borders and all zone marks will be visible but scale won't match
Outer Border Is Offset In From Paper Size (1/4" to 1/2")
3.) Print 1:1 = Everything is visible, and the scale will match, but there is more wasted space (especially noticeable on electronic copies)
By the way, the first picture above ('A' size) is option 3. The second picture ('C' size) could be used for options 1 or 2. (Don't let the gray confuse you. I'm only talking about the white areas in both pictures and the border's relationship to the white edges.)
Do what you did in the C-size.
This is my justification:
Most master drawings are now kept as datasets. A "full size" PDF is scaled 100% giving anyone the opportunity to plot at 1:1 on oversized paper or roll stock. Reference prints can be sent to A, B, or Ledger size printers, printing the 100% PDF scaled to fit.
I don't see a reason to draw or even plot the paper size border. Maybe some corner tick marks for the rotary trimmer guide.
This is more convoluted than it may seem.
1.) Usage (estimated)
2.) Unprintable Area
3.) Printing Output (1:1, Full Plot)
Example: plotter_hardclip_is top 0.500 bottom 0.500 left 0.500 right 0.500 in
This means that even though the postscript output will cover the entire paper, the print preview will limit this to what Creo thinks in the printable area.
* This is supposed to be resolved in Creo 3 M040.
So, what's the point?
** Using scaled output is not a good solution since there is only one plotter config file for each paper size. These are "plotter" configs, not "format size" configs.