Revisions and Revision Clouds Best Practice

[terankmitch550394]

I'm new to the forum and see a variety of great threads and responses to questions. I'm excited to get feedback from such a wellspring of knowledge. My question is as follows: I have been trying to better track of changes to my Revit model and corresponding sheets from initial submittal to contractors throughout construction. I'll admit that I have been a little sloppy in tracking these changes and have allowed my consultants and contractors to do the same. I simply lump several changes together into one addendum and call it Addendum 1, 2, 3, etc. With that said, I'm curious as to how others deal with Addenda, RFIs, ASIs, and tweaks to the plans? Admittedly, I'm a little foggy on what might be the best tried and true method and would appreciate any and all suggestions. Thanks for the help. Teran

[dkoch]

I'm new to the forum and see a variety of great threads and responses to questions. I'm excited to get feedback from such a wellspring of knowledge. My question is as follows: I have been trying to better track of changes to my Revit model and corresponding sheets from initial submittal to contractors throughout construction. I'll admit that I have been a little sloppy in tracking these changes and have allowed my consultants and contractors to do the same. I simply lump several changes together into one addendum and call it Addendum 1, 2, 3, etc. With that said, I'm curious as to how others deal with Addenda, RFIs, ASIs, and tweaks to the plans? Admittedly, I'm a little foggy on what might be the best tried and true method and would appreciate any and all suggestions. Thanks for the help. Teran

Welcome to the AUGI Forums.

I have handled some projects differently, at the direction of the Owner, GC/CM, Project Manager or some combination of all three, but in general I try to track revisions (once the drawings are released for bidding) by Addenda (before bids are received) or by ASI (after the contract is awarded). On some projects, drawings or sketches issued in response to an RFI are considered as having been issued via the RFI response, in which case the RFI response would also trigger a revision. On other projects, or in the case of field sketches or sketches issued in response to less formal inquiries, I may send the sketches out under the next ASI number, but not issue the ASI until I have to issue full-size drawings or have a significant number of sketches accumulated. I find that with Revit, it is often easier to reissue an entire sheet than to issue sketches and have had CMs on many of those projects that preferred the entire sheet to be reissued, rather than a small-format sketch, as the latter often get "lost" on their way to the field, or, if they make it, become detached from the field drawing sets shortly after arriving.

[MikeJarosz]

My advice is to use the built-in Revit revision manager. It maintains an issue/revision database. Each sheet can then specify which issues from the central DB apply to that specific sheet. This way every sheet has its own history. It is a fallacy to think that every sheet has the same history.

Consider this scenario. I issue all my sheets on March 15th for construction. Every sheet gets "issued for construction" and the date on the titleblock. On June 1, I have addendum #1, with 3 new sheets. They cannot get the March 15th issue, because they didn't exist back then. The three new sheets will have a different history than the rest of the set. If the job is big, over time each sheet in the set will acquire a unique history. It takes a certain amount of experience (and a few lawsuits) to learn how project issues/revisions/addendums really work.

The Revit revision manager can handle this and more. Use it! And don't put plain text on your border. You will regret it.

[Pedro C]

My advice is to use the built-in Revit revision manager. It maintains an issue/revision database. Each sheet can then specify which issues from the central DB apply to that specific sheet. This way every sheet has its own history. It is a fallacy to think that every sheet has the same history.

Consider this scenario. I issue all my sheets on March 15th for construction. Every sheet gets "issued for construction" and the date on the titleblock. On June 1, I have addendum #1, with 3 new sheets. They cannot get the March 15th issue, because they didn't exist back then. The three new sheets will have a different history than the rest of the set. If the job is big, over time each sheet in the set will acquire a unique history. It takes a certain amount of experience (and a few lawsuits) to learn how project issues/revisions/addendums really work.

The Revit revision manager can handle this and more. Use it! And don't put plain text on your border. You will regret it.

I am new to Revit and I am trying to figure out a method to adopt in a small office environment; I am using Revit 2018.

@MikeJarosz, my understanding is that the Revit built-in Revision Manager is pretty much an annotation tool; Autodesk should call it "Revision Clouds Manager" :)

How do you keep the IFC (R0), R1 and R2 in the same Revit model/file?

I am really struggling with this. I even tried to workaround using "Design Options" :)

[david_peterson]

Hi Pedro,
I'm not sure if I follow you. What are you trying to accomplish? Multiple packages in one model? How is your process supposed to work?