My .02....
I have heard the buzz "drawingless environments" for 20 years or more. Many keep trying to make it all "cool and 22nd century" butfolks, remember, just because we "can do it" does not mean we "should do it" or it is the "best way to do it". Tim Knier has thecorrect thoughts on this thread in my opinion. This is not a technology question as much as it is a Human Being question. We simply do not operate well by interrogatingmanufacturing info on the screen when the rubber hits the road. It's really difficult to garner all the correct info in that manner. That is not how we operate or disseminate information in an optimum manner. We are not machines and we make mistakes.
The big (eternal)issue is noteveryone "models" their parts in the exact same way those parts and assembliesmight bemanufactured or inspected. Ask yourself this question: Do you ALWAYS, 100% of the time, model your parts with the manufacturing AND inspection processin mind? Or better yet, once you know how the parts are going to be manufactured/inspected, do you go back and remodel your parts to mimic that methodology if your parts were not modeled that way in the first place? If you do not, then this thread is essentially pointless. In other words, you can't have it both ways. You cannot be lazy in modeling and then simply let the manufacturer figure it out.
The reason we have "Arms length transactions" in things like real estate and legal matters is because we absolutely "need" the human element in the process to mitigate error. Sure, one could argue that the manufacturing/inspection process needs to usethe 3Dmodel to be correct because that is the "master". But, I submit it is better to create the 2D that explicitly states your intent as the product developer. For me, I choose to do the 2D when it ismission critical ensuring they get the full picture with less opportunity to get it wrong.
Being an old timer, I consider the 3D only asthe lazy way to product. Too risky in my opinion.
