Harvesting CAD Details - Best Practice?

[arb]

I know that there is information out there on the best practice for working with AutoCAD libraries within Revit, but after several searches and many, many posts and articles I am still lost. I posted the same question on Autodesk's Discussion Group, but I've had better luck lately finding solutions here.

I've read Autodesk's Technical Bulletin on Revit 2010 file performance, so I believe that importing DWGs and exploding them will most likely destroy the universe (or atleast our files.) I even tried a little experiment with a clean Revit project file and watching the file size inflate as I imported a DWG, and then exploded it. I also tried exploding it in a separate file, grouping the information, and THEN pasting the group into my test file, and the least file growth was caused by simply importing a DWG (which doesn't give us much flexibility when we need to edit it.)

So, are all you experts out there really importing/linking into separate files and placing detail lines/model lines/walls/etc. over the imported/linked components? There's a wealth of DWGs on manufacturer's websites that we use to plug into our details, but how can we work with their DWG's without killing our file sizes?

Are there any improvements to RAC 2011 that affect how users are working with imported content?

Thanks.

- Alex
.

[twiceroadsfool]

If we have a detail in DWG that we absolutely HAVE to have, we take the time to convert it to native Revit. We import it... NOT in to our project, in to a blank file. Then we explode it. Then we select every pice of text, and change it back to a native Revit Text. We convert the single lines of text to normal notes in Revit, and we delete the exploded arrow heads and line segments, and switch them to leaders from the text. We delete the lines from exploded dimensions (and tick marks, and the dim text), and we redim in Revit. We take the Filled region styles that are now present, and swap them out for native Revit stuff. then we select all the lines, and convert them to our normal drafting lines from Revit.

THEN, we copy and paste it in to a library files Drafting View, with reference planes for sheet alignment, etc.

THEN it gets Insert > Insert from file > Views, in to the project.

Basically, it gets redone. No shortcuts, no import/link (with or without explode). It just doesnt take that long to do it right.

[Alfredo Medina]

It just doesnt take that long to do it right.

Unless you have hundreds of drawings and not hundreds of hours available to do that. It depends on the resources available. If you have people to dedicate to that task, is fine, but think of a professional detailer, who is migrating to Revit after having worked in AutoCAD for 20 years, and has an extensive and excellent library of CAD details; linking is the choice for him. He can continue developing the details in AutoCAD while using the modeling and scheduling capabilities of Revit.

[twiceroadsfool]

We agree to disagree. :shrug:

It always *takes time* to get up and running in a new platform. The only difference being most of us were in AutoCAD for a very long time. if you want to be doing it half baked, and get half baked results, then rock on Linking in CAd details in to views. Heres what you can look forward to:

1. Having to go back to AutoCAd to make any and all alterations to those details (or exploding them and dealing with the eternal headaches that brings on).
2*. Any .shx fonts printing like absolute garbage, in terms of lineweights.
3*. Any .shx fonts that utilized special characters for things like stacked fractions, symbology, or whatever, not displaying properly in the Revit environment at all, including- but not limited to- any font narrow and font justifications that arent supported by the Link.
4*. Dimension Styles not displaying properly in some cases, including- but not limited to- lineweights, font types, etc.
5. Hatches not displaying at the proper densities, and some hatches "bleeding" depending on how they were bounded in the AutoCAd environment.
6. Annotative items in the AutoCAD / ACA environment not always displaying properly when Linked, depending on their Annotative Scales in AutoCAd or ACA.

Those are the ones that come to mind off the cuff, but if i dig out my notes from the Implementation stuff back when i had an office that was 50/50 ACA/Revit, there was more that im certain im forgetting.

On top of that, heres some more:

The ones in Asteriks' above may not apply. If were talking about pretty savvy AutoCAD users, as you claim, then chances are by 2010 the .shx stuff is gone, in lieu of nice TTF font styles and Dim styles. Which alleviates those problems, but then begets you the Annotative Problems, including but not limited to all of the text, dims, and hatching, and various scales of those details.

Also, the OP mentioned .dwg's from websites, which makes me THINK this isnt a library of thousands of details waiting to be converted.

But the bottom line is: We ALL had TONS of stuff to convert. Rome wasnt built in a day. You need that Hot Pipe Flashing Detail today? Convert it today. Need it tomorrow? Convert it tomorrow. Sure, youll have a few projects where the deadline will creep up, and maybe youll only get 65% of them done in time. So youll link the rest. You have to do what you have to do.

But PLANNING on doing it that way, just for the sake of an existing library that was done "the way we always done it" is shortsighted, and i wouldnt recommend it. But thats just my two cents. :)

[eric.piotrowicz]

Absolutely side with Aaron. Way back in the hand drafting days we had typical details in form of sticky-backs that got slapped on sheets as needed. How many folks are still plotting entire sets and then manually placing stick-backs for typical details just cuz that what we always did before?
Of course there will be those crunch times that Aaron mentioned when things just have to get done by whatever means possible. The important part is to recognize those down and dirty shortcuts as temporary band-aids and not standard operating procedure.

[Alfredo Medina]

As I said, it depends on the situation. I see Aaron's points very reasonable. If I was in charge of a production department and I had to establish a policy about this, I would surely follow his approach. But the software provides options for different scenarios, and for the case of the seasoned professional detailer I was mentioning as an example in my previous post, I don't see him spending time re-drawing all his extensive library of CAD details in Revit if the linking option is there and works fine for him, even if he has to do some editing in his details before linking them.

[eric.piotrowicz]

I definitely understand your point because we have a couple of those types in our firm. The trouble is that its creating more problems than its supposedly eliminating. I say supposedly because they believe they are saving time and therefore doing things correctly. However they aren't listening to any the problems its creating and won't acknowledge the time it takes for others to fix those problems.
There are some good reasons for bringing in CAD files, like site and grading or consultants who havn't made the leap yet. Using this function for major portions of the project is not why the functionality is there.

[twiceroadsfool]

As I said, it depends on the situation. I see Aaron's points very reasonable. If I was in charge of a production department and I had to establish a policy about this, I would surely follow his approach. But the software provides options for different scenarios, and for the case of the seasoned professional detailer I was mentioning as an example in my previous post, I don't see him spending time re-drawing all his extensive library of CAD details in Revit if the linking option is there and works fine for him, even if he has to do some editing in his details before linking them.

And in an eleventh-hour hail mary to get a job at the door, i could justify it. But even for a "professional detailer" its a shortsighted strategy, to PLAN on linking all of your details, "just because" you have an extensive library.

I mean, arent we all professional detailers? Isnt that what architecture is?

EDIT: And thats what im talking about, Eric. its NOT efficient, monkeying around with all the problems imported and Linked CAD details provide. Youre going to have to make some serious changes to the CAD details to get them to look even halfway respectable (in my opinion, anyway...), unless youve been working in AutoCAD a particular way, with particular standards. And if you havent, youre going to be partially redoing them anyway. Might as well take the extra ten minutes and do it in the right platform. :)

[Alfredo Medina]

I mean, arent we all professional detailers? Isnt that what architecture is?


Not exactly. By professional detailer I mean just that, a person who earns his living detailing specific portions of a building, for fabrication and construction, such as in the field of curtain walls. It's a different profession altogether, not necessarily performed by an architect.

[twiceroadsfool]

Okay, i think you missed my point, lol. People DO detail in Revit. So someone "in his case," is still just someone who has existing details in "Platform X," which happens to be AutoCAD.

Theres no time like the present to start converting details.

[Alfredo Medina]

Okay, i think you missed my point, lol. People DO detail in Revit. ...

No, I'm not missing your point. I've understood all you have said. But now you are missing mine. I've never said in this thread that people don't do detail in Revit. Of course they do, and I have never mentioned anything to suggest they don't. That was not my point in this discussion.

But let's move on to other threads. :)

[twiceroadsfool]

No, I'm not missing your point. I've understood all you have said. But now you are missing mine. I've never said in this thread that people don't do detail in Revit. Of course they do, and I have never mentioned anything to suggest they don't. That was not my point in this discussion.

But let's move on to other threads. :)

Exactly. Then the fact that *this poster* is a professional detail is moot, since detailign in Revit is just like detailing elsewhere. I stand by my original assertion. Linking in CAD because its the way youve always done it, is shortsighted.

[Alfredo Medina]

No, I did not say that linking CAD details was a good option in the case I am using as an example "just because" that's the way the detailer has been doing things all the time; therefore that doesn't make me "shortsighted". Can we move to another thread? :)

[iru69]

Arb, this is what I'd take out of this:

Revit is great for detailing. It's much preferable to detail in Revit from the start.

Time permitting, it makes much more sense in the long term to convert an AutoCAD detail to a Revit detail using the steps Aaron provided.

It often makes sense in the short term depending on how old-school the AutoCAD detail is.

But when you have to use AutoCAD details as they are, you pretty much link them and hope for the best.

The discussion got caught up in a bit of semantics, but the key point is that if you have to go back into AutoCAD to "fix" something after linking an AutoCAD detail, you're almost always best served by converting the detail to native Revit. I'm guessing Aaron has seen this a million times before... you think you're saving time in the short-term, but you end up spending just as much time futzing around with it in AutoCAD so it will look right in Revit as it would have taken to just convert it to a native Revit detail.

Once you get a work-flow down, it's possible to convert details quite fast. And if you already have a bunch of AutoCAD details lined up, do the conversion all at once - similar to what Aaron already described, import a bunch of them (as many as you and your computer can manage at once) into a single drafting view (in a new file of course). Explode them. Then use the filter (funnel) tool to change AutoCAD linetypes, text styles, etc. in mass. Make a bunch of filled region boxes for all the various hatches and copy them around to the respective details and just edit the sketches as necessary. I'm sure there are lots of similar tricks. I bet someone could convert dozens of details in a single day using a well-developed work-flow.

[Dave Jones]

Okay, i think you missed my point, lol. People DO detail in Revit. So someone "in his case," is still just someone who has existing details in "Platform X," which happens to be AutoCAD.

Theres no time like the present to start converting details.

OK, so I'm a curtain wall detailer and have been since 1969. Attached is a simple detail done in AutoCAD. How long would it take you to convert this to Revit? The project that this detail came from has 322 D size sheets of details similar this one, 4 to 6 details to a sheet. How long would that take you? Now consider the fact that probably 60 t0 70% of these details will not be used again without some alteration. You make some fine points but I'm in a different world than you are. Frankly, in my short stint with Revit I don't see it being able to provide detail content with the degree of accuracy that I (and my customers) require. So, for the time being I'm going to link Acad details into Revit.

There's two sides (at least) to every story

[twiceroadsfool]

OK, so I'm a curtain wall detailer and have been since 1969. Attached is a simple detail done in AutoCAD. How long would it take you to convert this to Revit? The project that this detail came from has 322 D size sheets of details similar this one, 4 to 6 details to a sheet. How long would that take you? Now consider the fact that probably 60 t0 70% of these details will not be used again without some alteration. You make some fine points but I'm in a different world than you are. Frankly, in my short stint with Revit I don't see it being able to provide detail content with the degree of accuracy that I (and my customers) require. So, for the time being I'm going to link Acad details into Revit.

There's two sides (at least) to every story

The complexity of the detail doesnt change how long it takes to convert it to Revit. So, sorry. And who cares if there going to get used again "without alteration?"

That just proves my stance some more. Once you have the detail converted ONCE, editing it and making ALTERATIONS for job specific changes, is much faster. Its basically just like editing them in AutoCAD, without the hassle of the Link, the Cross platform management, and so on.

And time investment to change that detail ON THE FIRST JOB? Id say... 5 or 6 minutes. "But theres so many sheets!" Well, like i said... Theres doing it this way as a short term *get through this job* strategy, and then theres long term strategy for the LONG HAUL.

EDIT: BTW, im also saying 5 or 6 minutes because i really like to set them up in a layed out detail box, tailored for the details scale and size on sheet. With AutoCAD details, the level of complexity of the DETAIL has northing to do with lead time. Its more: Text with leaders and Dims, that take longer to convert than the detail itself. That detail has very little text and dims. It would go even faster.

[Dave Jones]

ok, so this morning I'm playing around with a clean project file. Have AutoCAD open on one side and Revit on the other. I copy/paste a typical storefront detail out of a library drawing into a clean Acad dwg. Delete all hatches, leaders, dimensions and explode the rest to death and change it all to layer 0. I then do a Import CAD to get the detail into Revit and when I explode it 20 to 30% of the lines are missing. To short for Revit to see I guess. So now I'm down to basically starting from scratch and ending up with a detail that is not accurate enough for my purposes. How will my Engineer take a Revit detail and determine extrusion section properties for structural calculations from a detail that can't have lines shorter than 3/64" long? Do I need to keep a separate AutoCAD detail for that purpose? Doesn't make much sense to me.

I know that you will never see my side of this issue but you need to know that there are a lot of people who use CAD for detailing to 4 or 5 decimal points of accuracy. It's mandatory for us. Architects don't have to worry about such things and so you have your opinion about details in Revit. Until I can create an accurate aluminum extrusion die drawing in Revit I can't detail there.

[twiceroadsfool]

LOL, i love how you make it out like i blindy cant see your side of the argument. Hey buddy, its not my fault working with Linked in CAD files in Revit works like hell and flat out ISNT faster, but i guess i must be refusing to see your side, just because thats the way it is.

Having said that, i DID forget about the stupid "line is too short" thing. That IS a problem, at the finite level if detail youre having to show. THAT being said, if i had to resort to keeping a DWG file present for those little pieces, what i would PERSONALLY do, is IMPORT those DWG's (of the tiny pieces specifically and only), in to individual detail components, to be placed in the native revit details.

Itll add a few more minutes for making the detail components to shove in the details, but i go through the same thing making our detail components that get nested in to our curtain wall Mullion Profiles. Theres generally 5 detail components in each mullion.

[Dave Jones]

LOL, i love how you make it out like i blindy cant see your side of the argument. Hey buddy, its not my fault working with Linked in CAD files in Revit works like hell and flat out ISNT faster, but i guess i must be refusing to see your side, just because thats the way it is.

Having said that, i DID forget about the stupid "line is too short" thing. That IS a problem, at the finite level if detail youre having to show. THAT being said, if i had to resort to keeping a DWG file present for those little pieces, what i would PERSONALLY do, is IMPORT those DWG's (of the tiny pieces specifically and only), in to individual detail components, to be placed in the native revit details.

Itll add a few more minutes for making the detail components to shove in the details, but i go through the same thing making our detail components that get nested in to our curtain wall Mullion Profiles. Theres generally 5 detail components in each mullion.

Firstly, I'm not arguing, I'm having an intelligent (I hope) conversation with you :) What I'm trying to do here is learn the best way for me to make use of the tools at my disposal to get my job done and provide a product that my customers have come to expect. When I first cross graded to Revit my idea was to, at some point, dump AutoCAD and detail 100% in Revit. Now, after an admittedly short period of time using Revit, I can't see how that's going to be possible. At least not without making a major change to how things get done around here. And I'm not adverse to change as I've changed plenty in my 40+ years in this business (I started with ink on mylar). I just need to see the light down there at the end of the tunnel before I head in that direction. I appreciate your input and thoughts. When I can figure out how to schedule an area or a centroid and thus an Ixx from an aluminum extrusion part in Revit then that will be a big part of the puzzle solved. Maybe design criteria has to stay on the Acad side? Maybe details have to get converted to Revit one project at a time and 3/64" geometry has to be ignored in that process? It's all a blur to me at this point

[twiceroadsfool]

Firstly, I'm not arguing, I'm having an intelligent (I hope) conversation with you :) What I'm trying to do here is learn the best way for me to make use of the tools at my disposal to get my job done and provide a product that my customers have come to expect. When I first cross graded to Revit my idea was to, at some point, dump AutoCAD and detail 100% in Revit. Now, after an admittedly short period of time using Revit, I can't see how that's going to be possible. At least not without making a major change to how things get done around here. And I'm not adverse to change as I've changed plenty in my 40+ years in this business (I started with ink on mylar). I just need to see the light down there at the end of the tunnel before I head in that direction. I appreciate your input and thoughts. When I can figure out how to schedule an area or a centroid and thus an Ixx from an aluminum extrusion part in Revit then that will be a big part of the puzzle solved. Maybe design criteria has to stay on the Acad side? Maybe details have to get converted to Revit one project at a time and 3/64" geometry has to be ignored in that process? It's all a blur to me at this point

My Personal HOPE, is that Reporting Parameters (new to 2011) take a LOT of the leg work out of the type of work that you have to do. They were just created, and are currently limited to Length, but i continually hope that as the program moves forward, we get reporting parameters for Area, Volume, Material, whatever else we can make a parameter for. That would go a long way in to what youre describing.

The 3/64" or 1/32" is a giant pain in the rear. Its workabot with detail components and imported DWG, but yeah. At that point, youre not getting out of AutoCAD, which isnt a great solution. I would still do it, over doing everything in AutoCAD and linking it in, but its not ideal. But its a better middle ground than importing. All of the other probems i listed above WILL catch you with a ot of imported CAD stuff. At that point id kludge with detail components or stay in native CAD, sadly.

[Dave Jones]

My Personal HOPE, is that Reporting Parameters (new to 2011) take a LOT of the leg work out of the type of work that you have to do. They were just created, and are currently limited to Length, but i continually hope that as the program moves forward, we get reporting parameters for Area, Volume, Material, whatever else we can make a parameter for. That would go a long way in to what youre describing.

The 3/64" or 1/32" is a giant pain in the rear. Its workabot with detail components and imported DWG, but yeah. At that point, youre not getting out of AutoCAD, which isnt a great solution. I would still do it, over doing everything in AutoCAD and linking it in, but its not ideal. But its a better middle ground than importing. All of the other probems i listed above WILL catch you with a ot of imported CAD stuff. At that point id kludge with detail components or stay in native CAD, sadly.

I always get a chuckle out of the folks that complain that Revit won't deal with projects bigger than 2 sq miles in size. I guess it's not much different than complaining about not being able to create a 3/64" long line, just at the other end of the tunnel. Thanks for the input! Here's hoping for more reporting parameters in 2012!

[Scott Womack]

I always get a chuckle out of the folks that complain that Revit won't deal with projects bigger than 2 sq miles in size. I guess it's not much different than complaining about not being able to create a 3/64" long line, just at the other end of the tunnel. Thanks for the input! Here's hoping for more reporting parameters in 2012!

This has been a reasonable good dialog. Dave, in your position, there is a certain amount of your work that in all practicality may have to stay in AutoCAD for the time being, and take the severe hit if it all goes into Revit.

There is a flip side to converting a majority of your details to Revit. Doing so would mean you'd have a marketable commodity then. Also, we have begun running into RFP's where the design team has to deliver the entire project in BIM, and the Contractors have to deliver their shop drawings in BIM as well. Each of the BIM platforms has it's own set of current "limitations". No software "out of the box" is perfect, including AutoCAD.

I can understand your need for precision dimensioning/drawing on the extrusions. Other then those manufacturers/subcontractors that try to craftily substitute products in the shop drawings by showing, and numbering the extrusions without mentioning that it is a different brand or product line from what was specified, I believe that the accuracy of those drawn extrusion parts does not add to the actual construct-ability of the components once they reach the project site.

[Dave Jones]

This has been a reasonable good dialog. Dave, in your position, there is a certain amount of your work that in all practicality may have to stay in AutoCAD for the time being, and take the severe hit if it all goes into Revit.

There is a flip side to converting a majority of your details to Revit. Doing so would mean you'd have a marketable commodity then. Also, we have begun running into RFP's where the design team has to deliver the entire project in BIM, and the Contractors have to deliver their shop drawings in BIM as well. Each of the BIM platforms has it's own set of current "limitations". No software "out of the box" is perfect, including AutoCAD.

I can understand your need for precision dimensioning/drawing on the extrusions. Other then those manufacturers/subcontractors that try to craftily substitute products in the shop drawings by showing, and numbering the extrusions without mentioning that it is a different brand or product line from what was specified, I believe that the accuracy of those drawn extrusion parts does not add to the actual construct-ability of the components once they reach the project site.

thanks for the input Scott. The direction that I'm heading in now after some thought process is to convert all detailing to Revit with the exception of aluminum extrusion shapes which will remain in AutoCAD format and be linked into Revit for drafting views. All substrates, annotations, dimensions etc will be recreated in Revit. Since the extrusions in .dwg format don't have any of the problems noted by Aaron above I'm hoping that they will behave and not bite me somehow down the line. Now if I can figure out how to get reasonable, schedulable (sic) curtain wall corners and curtain panels at corners I'll be whizzing towards my first completed project in Revit!

[twiceroadsfool]

Do yourself a favor... Import the CAD extrusions in to a detail component. Then (as far as revits concerned) there wont be 30 instances of the same DWG in the revit file. Itll also make placing the extrusions faster. And if you break it in to several smaller dwg's for pieces of the extrusion, you can then make a parametric extrusion that still has the tiny lines.

Thats how our mullions are, but i didnt use DWGs for them, i just vaporized the small lines.

[Dave Jones]

Do yourself a favor... Import the CAD extrusions in to a detail component. Then (as far as revits concerned) there wont be 30 instances of the same DWG in the revit file. Itll also make placing the extrusions faster. And if you break it in to several smaller dwg's for pieces of the extrusion, you can then make a parametric extrusion that still has the tiny lines.

Thats how our mullions are, but i didnt use DWGs for them, i just vaporized the small lines.

Do you always get your way 100%?
:p

[Scott Womack]

Do you always get your way 100%?
:p

Aaron is actually not a bad guy once you meet him!:p

He does raise a very good point though. If you "link" the same extrusion into your details, it will store x number of instances of the link. if the link is 10k in size, and it is in a project 20 times, you're storing a lot more information, than if you import them into an otherwise blank detail component. As a detail component, it stores the data once, and then an insertion point. Linked in may times can be storing a lot more data, due to the way links are accessed/stored.:wink:

[Dave Jones]

Aaron is actually not a bad guy once you meet him!:p

I'd look forward to that! I will be at AU this year after many years off. I attended the 1st AU in SF some years ago and haven't been back but look forward to meeting in person a lot of those that I've "met" in the forums over the years.

He does raise a very good point though. If you "link" the same extrusion into your details, it will store x number of instances of the link. if the link is 10k in size, and it is in a project 20 times, you're storing a lot more information, than if you import them into an otherwise blank detail component. As a detail component, it stores the data once, and then an insertion point. Linked in may times can be storing a lot more data, due to the way links are accessed/stored.:wink:

the "good point" is well taken. Now just figuring out how to get it done. This is all second nature for you guys. I'm a Revit beginner and am still trying to get my head around simple procedures. Every day, another step in the right direction!

[Dave Jones]

oops, a beginner at web based forums also. I thought that my posting in the middle of your quoted reply would separate itself. Obviously not...another thing to figure out.

[twiceroadsfool]

Ill be there in December. Im going to try to organize a few gatherings either the day of arrival, or at night, to throw back a few beers.

I may come off harsh here, but its really not that im out to get my way 100% of the time. its just that, ive MADE all of the possible mistakes already. And i want to save others from doing it too.

But do i always get my way? Usually. :)

[Dave Jones]

Ill be there in December. Im going to try to organize a few gatherings either the day of arrival, or at night, to throw back a few beers.

I may come off harsh here, but its really not that im out to get my way 100% of the time. its just that, ive MADE all of the possible mistakes already. And i want to save others from doing it too.

But do i always get my way? Usually. :)

heh, well, we'll have a beer in Dec and hash over all of the mistakes that I've made between now and then :)

thanks again for the input! I'm working on the extrusions as detail components now

[twiceroadsfool]

heh, well, we'll have a beer in Dec and hash over all of the mistakes that I've made between now and then :)

thanks again for the input! I'm working on the extrusions as detail components now

Here is one that i was talking about as an example. Its different in execution- in the sense that there are no DWGs in it, because i removed some of the erroneous (for us) detailing. But you can do the same thing with Imported DWG's that i did with the Nested detail components, without having to explode them. Have 4 (one for each side, or whatever) then connect them with native revit pieces where your extrusions can change size. Then you can make a parametric detail out of the DWG's...

If youre familiar with CAD and ACA, its exactly how Dynamic Blocks worked (in principle).

[Dave Jones]

Here is one that i was talking about as an example. Its different in execution- in the sense that there are no DWGs in it, because i removed some of the erroneous (for us) detailing. But you can do the same thing with Imported DWG's that i did with the Nested detail components, without having to explode them. Have 4 (one for each side, or whatever) then connect them with native revit pieces where your extrusions can change size. Then you can make a parametric detail out of the DWG's...

If youre familiar with CAD and ACA, its exactly how Dynamic Blocks worked (in principle).

Argh!! yer killin' me...it's lopsided!! :p

seriously, the difference in what you're using detail components for and what I need to use detail components for are on opposite ends of the spectrum. My customers use my details to order and/or fabricate every little part and piece of a window/curtain wall via details with part numbers, annotations, dimensions, etc and I have no room to chance an error (operator input error) due to having a parametric detail. I know how to make them, in AutoCAD and Revit and I know how to make them work for me in AutoCAD. I haven't figured out yet how to get the output I need from detail components in Revit. Attached is a pic of a simple jamb detail. The curtain wall frame that requires this detail is 27' high and there are 7 different jamb details (for the same jamb) as the frame runs up the building. How do I do that in Revit? That's what I'm trying to get to.

[twiceroadsfool]

Im not suggesting a NATIVE detail component for Revit the way mine is. Im saying, i wouldnt Link/Import your extrusion shapes in to your details directly. Your file is going to get heavy, and slow, and irritable that way, since EVERY extrusion will be treated as ANOTHER instance of that CAD file. Im saying, IMPORT the DWG for "Extrusion 2984" in to a detail component called "Exrtusion 2984," so (as far as your Revit model is concerned) its only defined once. The model will care, i promise. LOL.

As for parametrics.... I was suggesting it to make it easier for you to make new parts. That green mullion in your detail: Its ALWAYS that exact size? With no variations? If so, then just make it a dead static Detail Component and keep using Save As to make the different ones, with different DWG imports. But where youre using different products that are just variations in size, id be using parametrics, regardless of platforms.

And theres ALWAYS a chance for operator error. I wouldnt use that as a reason to not leverage parametrics, even in ACA or AutoCAD. heck, all of our door parametrics are INSTANCE. Its even EASIER for someone to FtK9 it up. We still do it, and dont have problems. :)

[Dave Jones]

Im not suggesting a NATIVE detail component for Revit the way mine is. Im saying, i wouldnt Link/Import your extrusion shapes in to your details directly. Your file is going to get heavy, and slow, and irritable that way, since EVERY extrusion will be treated as ANOTHER instance of that CAD file. Im saying, IMPORT the DWG for "Extrusion 2984" in to a detail component called "Exrtusion 2984," so (as far as your Revit model is concerned) its only defined once. The model will care, i promise. LOL.

As for parametrics.... I was suggesting it to make it easier for you to make new parts. That green mullion in your detail: Its ALWAYS that exact size? With no variations? If so, then just make it a dead static Detail Component and keep using Save As to make the different ones, with different DWG imports. But where youre using different products that are just variations in size, id be using parametrics, regardless of platforms.

And theres ALWAYS a chance for operator error. I wouldnt use that as a reason to not leverage parametrics, even in ACA or AutoCAD. heck, all of our door parametrics are INSTANCE. Its even EASIER for someone to FtK9 it up. We still do it, and dont have problems. :)

I now understand what you were trying to communicate. I guess just getting it done one project at a time is the only way to go at this. Just out of curiosity I just went through my extrusion parts libraries for my four major suppliers (Kawneer, Oldcastle/Vistawall, U.S. Aluminum, and Arcadia). The total extrusion part count for all four is 43,602. I guess I'd better get to work. I'll be needing a beer by the time AU rolls around!

[twiceroadsfool]

I now understand what you were trying to communicate. I guess just getting it done one project at a time is the only way to go at this. Just out of curiosity I just went through my extrusion parts libraries for my four major suppliers (Kawneer, Oldcastle/Vistawall, U.S. Aluminum, and Arcadia). The total extrusion part count for all four is 43,602. I guess I'd better get to work. I'll be needing a beer by the time AU rolls around!

Kawneer has Revit Profiles built, but theyre pretty poor in execution. But it might be a good place to start. (Then again, maybe not. I dont bother using their stuff). I hear one or two of the others have stuff potentially on deck, but time will tell.

Out of curiousity, ever look at Inventor? Im curious how you landed in Revit for Manufacturing Detailing...

[Dave Jones]

Kawneer has Revit Profiles built, but theyre pretty poor in execution. But it might be a good place to start. (Then again, maybe not. I dont bother using their stuff). I hear one or two of the others have stuff potentially on deck, but time will tell.

Out of curiousity, ever look at Inventor? Im curious how you landed in Revit for Manufacturing Detailing...

Projects done with Revit rather than AutoCAD (or Inventor) are becoming a requirement that my customers (commercial glass contractors) are seeing more and more. I lost a large project last Aug because I wasn't using Revit and that sent me on the path that I'm on today. Funny thing is, my competitor who "did" the job in Revit provided a 4 sheet 3D of a typical curtain wall and 400 sheets of AutoCAD drawings for submittal and got away with it. Grrrr

As for Kawneer's Revit Profiles...I learned long ago to trust only myself to produce output. I started as an extrusion die draftsman and even though I now get die dwgs in CAD from manufacturers I still check them for accuracy, snap fits, etc. before ever putting them into my library of assemblies. Just the way I was taught to do things.

[twiceroadsfool]

Agreed. Im seeing a lot of stuff coming from the manufacturers that is just a "lesser than" quality. We have a standing rule here that nothing downloaded from a website or manufacturer goes in to a project until ive seen it for review, because a lot of it is just that terrible.

Im not surprised at people requiring Revit over AutoCAD, but i am surprised at them excluding Inventor...

[ddenton]

Are there any improvements to RAC 2011 that affect how users are working with imported content?

Thanks.

- Alex
.

Hi Alex,

You may want to check out this AutoCAD detail manager for Revit.

www.adept-dev.com
www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRUQI6xSAFA