How to tell if drawings came from Revit

[joe.williams]

Does anyone know if there is a list of things to look for on a set of drawings to determine if a project was modeled in Revit? I know a few things like the "house-shaped" elevation marks, "something.rvt" printed in the margin (that's the easiest one), Arial text, 3D iso views.

I am putting together a training document for our people so they can identify Revit when it pops up and wanted to include a few more indicators. If anyone knows of a place where this info has been collected, I'd appreciate it; otherwise we could start the list here.

Thanks

[patricks]

Does anyone know if there is a list of things to look for on a set of drawings to determine if a project was modeled in Revit? I know a few things like the "house-shaped" elevation marks, "something.rvt" printed in the margin (that's the easiest one), Arial text, 3D iso views.

I am putting together a training document for our people so they can identify Revit when it pops up and wanted to include a few more indicators. If anyone knows of a place where this info has been collected, I'd appreciate it; otherwise we could start the list here.

Thanks

Before 2011, I think elevation marks were really the only dead giveaway to a set of documents from Revit (either round or square, we never use the square ones). Unless someone decided to replicate Revit's elevation marks in another program :lol:

Any program can use Arial text (we don't), and not everyone has the file name shown on the title block (we don't).

But now that you can create custom elevation marks in Revit, I don't think there's any sure-fire method of spotting a Revit drawing.

[eric.piotrowicz]

Just out of curiousity, why would you need to be able to spot a Revit drawing?

[joe.williams]

Thanks for your feedback Patrick. Even though there may be no definitive signs, I'm still looking for clues. Obviously if someone does choose to use one of those little "house" elevation marks, or puts the filename in the margin, then you can tell. Thats what I'm looking for.

As for why I'm trying to determine if a drawing set came from Revit... I am a contractor, and its not uncommon for us to work on a project, even complete it without ever knowing a Revit model existed. A 3D model is always helpful, especially when you're trying to build one in the real world. So... knowing one exists can be very helpful, and if my guys see a little house or *.rvt, maybe they'll remember to ask.:)

[BIMTom]

There's a really neat new invention called a question. If you "ask" it, the person hearing it might "answer" you.

Asking the person who gave you the drawings is the best way to know if a Revit model exists or not. Whether they will share it with you is another story, but at least you will know.

[eric.piotrowicz]

Its probably just a case of not having needed to ask before. Hand drawings are distinctly recognizable from CAD produced drawings and contractors could ask if the CAD file was available to them. If a Revit model is available it is certainly worth asking about, whether or not they share it is another story. I can't actually recall any time I was asked if we used Revit or CAD but I can't think of a reason that I wouldn't answer that question if asked.

[patricks]

Around here, many people ask for CAD files, but no one asks for the Revit file. We did provide a Revit file on one project where we were working for a design-build contractor, and they were just starting to get into Revit. We were contracted to produce the CD's of a building, and we also provided the Revit file to them at the end.

[ron.sanpedro]

Does anyone know if there is a list of things to look for on a set of drawings to determine if a project was modeled in Revit? I know a few things like the "house-shaped" elevation marks, "something.rvt" printed in the margin (that's the easiest one), Arial text, 3D iso views.

I am putting together a training document for our people so they can identify Revit when it pops up and wanted to include a few more indicators. If anyone knows of a place where this info has been collected, I'd appreciate it; otherwise we could start the list here.

Thanks

Interesting topic. Sadly I have been explaining a lot of the "bad ones" at the bottom to PMs lately. But starting with the good stuff...

The absence of dimensions that are totally wrong? ;)
Very consistent matching between sheet index and actual sheets. Inconsistent disciplines might indicate AutoCAD using disciplines.
Very consistent drawing references, especially non Detail drawings.
More sections that usual?
3D details, 3D axon cutaway stairs, etc.
Two plans on the same sheet, at different scales, with different line weights.
Shadows in Construction Document elevations.

Nothing definitive, but all are things that where hard or time consuming in a CAD workflow, and easy/fast in a BIM workflow.

And now for the "bad stuff" ;)
Multiline text with leaders that always come from the middle of the text, especially when the content of that text is very consistent. Even in Revit 2011, this is the only option when using Keynotes or Material Tags, which is the only way to get really consistent info.
Callouts that are always rectangular.
Wall Types where most of the leaders are consistent (Material Tags) but the ones pointing to insulation or membranes are different (not smart taggable in Revit).
Notes where part of the note doesn't align exactly with the rest (because part of the note is a keynote or material tag, with some text added below for embellishment. For example, "Waterproof membrane" and below it, and not quite aligned it says "lap flashing as shown".
The complete absence of the traditional plywood graphic in details (the plys as lines parallel with the material, and a series of diagonal slashes along the length). In Revit you will see the very busy (and traditionally only for Finish Plywood) zigzag hatch for all plywood.
Plywood and Rigid Insulation hatches that are not aligned with items that are angled (Revit still can't do this). Usually in details and the like. A canted plywood front to a reception desk, in section, is an example.


Gordon

[DaveP]

There's a really neat new invention called a question. If you "ask" it, the person hearing it might "answer" you.

Asking the person who gave you the drawings is the best way to know if a Revit model exists or not. Whether they will share it with you is another story, but at least you will know.

I'd say go ahead and ask for if even if you know it doesn't exist. The more your Architects hear people asking for Revit models, the more likely they are to think "Hey, I'd better get with the program here." And the better off we'll all be.

[cdatechguy]

I'd say the easiest if finding a lot of lines on layer g-anno-nplt

[harlan.brumm]

One way you can tell is by looking for the RegApp IDs within the AutoCAD DWG file. This is a way to tell programatically if the DWG came from somewhere else. Check out this blog post explaining RegApps and manageing them: http://withoutanet.typepad.com/without_a_net/2010/03/managing-regapp-ids.html

You need to run a lisp routine within AutoCAD to see them:

(defun c:ListRegappIDs (/ appname)
(if (setq appname (tblnext "appid" T))
(princ "\nRegistered application IDs in drawing:")
)
(while appname
(princ (strcat "\n" (cdr (assoc 2 appname))))
(setq appname (tblnext "appid"))
)
(princ)
)

For a DWG created by Revit, you will see a "REVIT" Registered application in the AutoCAD command line after running the lisp.

Hope this helps,

Harlan Brumm
Autodesk Product Support

[sarah.auffet]

i would look at the graphics for stairs and ramps if they exist in the project. the cut line angle cannot be modified.

i would also look at the revision schedule on the titleblock, which doesn't have many options for altering.

revision clouds are very different from autocad (no consistent arc sizes).

callouts for sections and details always stack the detail number over the sheet number (can't rotate 90-deg).

dimensions that are pulled away from the string have a curved leader.

but to reiterate other posts, just make it a habit to ask?

[truevis]

Grid lines agree with each other in plan AND elevation.;)

[ford347]

I am a contractor and we bid and draw from others plans all the time. For me, because I've been on Revit for 5-6 years now, it's pretty easy to spot a Revit set. For one, most in our area who begin using Revit, they are generally using canned items, i.e. windows, doors, etc., something I think we all recognize pretty quickly.

Out of the box tags, such as the keynote tag, or standard elevation markers, room tags, window/door tags, etc. These are pretty obvious to me since these are the first tags most people will use when learning the software.

The biggest dead giveaway are the schedules. The schedules and keynote schedules done in Revit are very easy to spot, especially because you can't use symbols in them, which is something a lot of AutoCad users do. Revit schedules just have a way about them.

You can also look at level heads, those are easy to spot if they haven't modified them. The stock level heads are much larger than most.

Spot elevation markers with text. Unlike a level in Revit, the spot elevation cannot have text below (which is lame btw), only prefix or suffix to the elevation.

Dimension leaders on text. That curvy little leader used to pull the dimension text off to the side. This is in most cases a 'Revit thing'.

Wall layers. Since Revit always shows every wall layer (with the exception of course view), this could be an indicator. Most plans we bid from just show the core dimension of the walls if they were drawing in a CAD program. Occasionally you see the layers in drawings that were done in another program, but it could be an indicator since it is less common to see they layers on floor plans that we work with anyway.

Structural plans are a good indicator as well, since creating your first structural plan is kind of tricky if you want it to look good (especially in wood framing). Finding a way to get cuts in the right places in plan view, show beams below, items above, over-build framing, structural elements that may or may not be modeled, straps, column tags, holdown markers, etc. are all something that takes some getting used to when beginning to use Revit. I've had to create many tags and families to get what I want out of my structural or field drawings over the years. This is more of a feel thing, but a good indicator that drawings were done in Revit for me.

There is more, but those are the first things I thought of.
Hope that helps.
Josh

[r.grandmaison]

....As for why I'm trying to determine if a drawing set came from Revit... I am a contractor, and its not uncommon for us to work on a project, even complete it without ever knowing a Revit model existed. A 3D model is always helpful, especially when you're trying to build one in the real world. So... knowing one exists can be very helpful, and if my guys see a little house or *.rvt, maybe they'll remember to ask.:)

Though the architect/designer might be reluctant to give to you the BIM (liability and data security issues...) you MIGHT ask for a DWFX in 3D of the model. That would give you the ability to study the project in 3D and be a good solution to having access to the 3D info without having to either have Revit or the entire BIM. The 3d DWFX can be made from AutoCAD or Revit, so you might just askf or it anyway in all situations IF they are creating 3D data.

[Scott Womack]

Though the architect/designer might be reluctant to give to you the BIM (liability and data security issues...) you MIGHT ask for a DWFX in 3D of the model. That would give you the ability to study the project in 3D and be a good solution to having access to the 3D info without having to either have Revit or the entire BIM. The 3d DWFX can be made from AutoCAD or Revit, so you might just askf or it anyway in all situations IF they are creating 3D data.

The other option, although
MUCH more expensive is to look into Navisworks. Although the Architect may not give you a BIM model, there should be no objection to giving you a NWC file, which is what Revit exports to for Navisworks. This also makes Bently based, and Archicad models available to you in addition to Revit. Navisworks will let you query the model, do take-offs, animate the construction sequence, and render the model as well.

[Cory.Killpack]

Mechanical flex duct is a dead give away.

[Damo]

I'm aware of one contractor-client who wants to reduce architect's fees if they use Revit as they believe there is less work for the Architects to do (don't have to draw up sections from scratch, don't have to spend time producing schedules or checking for co-ordinated cross-references etc). They fail to accept that there is still work involved and the liability is still the same if we get something wrong.

Whilst we agreed to provide a full set of AutoCAD *.DWG drawings to one contractor after we secured a planning approval for them, they wanted the Revit file when he knew it existed, so they could give the draughtsperson that was going to do their CD's a great head start (and pay him less as he'd be able to extract a lot of CD information from the Revit file).

For these reasons forgive me for being wary of Contractors indirectly enquiring about the software and not the programme time for delivery of the info, or their preferred method of construction etc.

I like to focus on the quality of information we provide to our clients, and not get drawn into how we are going to do it. We suggest that the experience and number of people on the team is more important than the software we use.

[bearden383]

One dead giveaway is the tags and text almost always have a background mask in the drawing.

[cliff collins]

Ask for a rendering, and see if it has a Yellow New Beetle in it.
Dead Revit give-away.........

[cdatechguy]

Gonna start adding little dots on views so it looks AutoCAD-Like.....

[m20roxxers]

Ask for a rendering, and see if it has a Yellow New Beetle in it.
Dead Revit give-away.........

lol So true!!!!

The best is when they try and put them on all different angles and views and just show the front or back in a scene to try and give it a few different looks. Always looks abit dusty for a new car though.

The real guru's throw in the CAD Porsche to spice things up :)

[cliff collins]

Yeah--the old-school air-cooled 3.2 Carerra--for that "retro" look.
(I'll admit, I have one of those sitting in my garage, and my grilfriend has a New Beetle...)
LOL

cheers

[barrie.sharp]

Ask for a rendering, and see if it has a Yellow New Beetle in it.
Dead Revit give-away.........
LMAO!:lol: