CAD deliverable from Revit

[annie123]

Dear all,

I need to get CAD deliverables from Revit Model and getting it printed. Will I get graphics as per standard or I need to change some elements of drawing. what shold I do to get same graphics in my exported CAD drawing as my autocad drawing.


Regards,
Annie

[tedg]

Dear all,

I need to get CAD deliverables from Revit Model and getting it printed. Will I get graphics as per standard or I need to change some elements of drawing. what shold I do to get same graphics in my exported CAD drawing as my autocad drawing.


Regards,
Annie
Please clarify: is your situation that you have a REVIT project with views and sheets etc and you need to have these in AutoCAD instead?
I'm not sure if others here in AUGI have a quick, better solution, but I just had to do this exact thing.

It was a project were Arch, Struct and MEP did our work in REVIT and Civil did theirs in AutoCAD, and we need to deliver AutoCAD files. BTW Revit puts everything on NCS/AIA named layers.

What I did for the structural drawings was
(Reader's Digest Version):

Export the sheets and views to AutoCAD (which puts everything in one directory; seperate files for all views (as xrefs) and the sheets dwgs too.
Go into each "sheet dwg" and bind (insert option) all the xrefs and save the files to a proper file name for the project.
Replace the "REVIT-ized" title block with the actual AutoCAD title block that the Civil folks used, just so it was consistant.
Use LAYTRANS to convert all the layers to the specific standard required for this project (can use DWS, DWT, DWG) forcing eveything to proper layers and lineweights.
Clean up any loose-ends like dimension styles, plot layouts, text fonts, etc.
PURGE the **** out the files, including regapps.
Maybe there's a quicker/cleaner way, but this worked well for my situation.

Good Luck!

[patricks]

When exporting your sheets, untick "Export Views on Sheets and Links as Xrefs" on the box where you specify a file name prefix, to save yourself the steps of opening sheet DWG's and binding Xrefs together.

IMHO this should be OFF by default as we pretty much never want views on sheets and links to come in as separate DWG files.

[DaveP]

. BTW Revit puts everything on NCS/AIA named layers.


Not quite true.
Revit defaults to AIA layers, but you can create your own Translation table.
From the Export CAD Formats dialog, (this is in 2011) click on the DWG Properties tab, then click on the icon to the right of the Layers an properties drop-down.
From there, you'll get a dialog listing all of the Revit categories and Sub-categories.
Fill out your own Layer Standards and Save As so you can use it again.

In 2012, these setups can be saved with the project

[tedg]

Not quite true.
Revit defaults to AIA layers, but you can create your own Translation table.
I guess I meant "by default" when I wrote that....

From the Export CAD Formats dialog, (this is in 2011) click on the DWG Properties tab, then click on the icon to the right of the Layers an properties drop-down.
From there, you'll get a dialog listing all of the Revit categories and Sub-categories.
Fill out your own Layer Standards and Save As so you can use it again.

In 2012, these setups can be saved with the project
Sweet! I'm in 2011, I think I'll look into the mapping thing if I run into the need for this again. It would be good to translate everything in one swoop!

[david_peterson]

While you can map whatever you want, 90% of the junk that gets exported from RS (grids, footings, brace symbols......just about everything) comes in as a block set to a unique linetype (not by layer) and is just about useless IMHO.
In other words, if you needed it in cad, you'd most likely want to start and stay in Cad.
You're going to go through a lot of effort "fixing things" or you going to send junk to the client. So if they are checking your drawings for compliance, be aware, they may be coming back

[DaveP]

They are oh, so close to what I'd like to see.
You can do your exports in several fell swoops, but unfortunatley, not one fell swoop.

You can save an Export Setup that points to, say your Floor Plan table, and another Export Setup that points to your RCP Table.
You can also save a Sheet Set that will export your Floor Plans, and another Sheet Set that will export your RCPs.

What you can't do, however, is to connect the two. You can't have one Sheet Set that uses different Export Setups.
'twould be nice if you could specify the Export Setup for each sheet individually within the Shhet Set. Then you really could do it all in one fell swoop. Whatever a fell is.

[david_peterson]

Whatever a fell is.
Per Dictionary.com
Fell
–verb (used with object) 1. to knock, strike, shoot, or cut down; cause to fall (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fall): to fell a moose; to fell a tree.

2. Sewing . to finish (a seam) by sewing the (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/the) edge down flat.


–noun 3. Lumbering . the amount of timber cut down in one season.

4. Sewing . a seam finished by felling.



Origin:
before 900; Middle English fellen, Old English fellan, causative of feallan to fall (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fall); cognate with Gothic falljan to cause to fall

fell


–adjective 1. fierce; cruel; dreadful; savage.

2. destructive; deadly: fell poison; fell disease.


—Idiom 3. at http://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png/ http://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngin one fell swoop. swoop (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/swoop) ( def. 5 ) .


Origin:
1250–1300; Middle English fel < Old French, nominative of felon wicked. See felon (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/felon)
—Related forms fell·ness, noun

[Rustle]

While you can map whatever you want, 90% of the junk that gets exported from RS (grids, footings, brace symbols......just about everything) comes in as a block set to a unique linetype (not by layer) and is just about useless IMHO.
In other words, if you needed it in cad, you'd most likely want to start and stay in Cad.
You're going to go through a lot of effort "fixing things" or you going to send junk to the client. So if they are checking your drawings for compliance, be aware, they may be coming back

So how do we deal with this? We are developing "standards" that will be used for multiple projects so our client actually want's to use the DWG's. They don't just file them away. They need both the Revit and AutoCAD files to be usable. It seems like using the steps outlined above we can make DWG's that look like what they want but if you actually tried to use them you could see they're junk.

[david_peterson]

So how do we deal with this? We are developing "standards" that will be used for multiple projects so our client actually want's to use the DWG's. They don't just file them away. They need both the Revit and AutoCAD files to be usable. It seems like using the steps outlined above we can make DWG's that look like what they want but if you actually tried to use them you could see they're junk.
Well, my first thought is that you need to let the client know and or your boss know that it's not as easy as hitting a button and you're done. We've been in the process of developing autocad routines (programs) to aid is this, but everything needs to be touched and it's a multi step process. Our head programmer spent about 3 weeks trying to get a program to do the whole thing, but was unable do to how things are exported from revit. I'm not sure what you get from the Arch side when you export and maybe there's something new in 2012, but when I export, most of my stuff comes in as blocks, which must first be exploded, then have the linetype, line weight and color all set to by layer. I was able to get my program to write me one for grids, but we were never able to really get beyond that.
Again, I'll go back to my first point (which is the stand we are trying to take), if the client wants revit, they can have it, but what ever gets exported from revit is what it is. If they want Acad drawings, then we draw in acad.
So I guess I would skip the set up for multiple client standards, try to get set up so your revit exports meet (or as close as they can) to you're one standard and then use layer translators in acad to switch. But again, it's going to take time. Then there's the issue with hatching. Revit hatches to not match acad hatches and I forget how they come it. Used to be a block of linework. Point is, it's a bad idea to try to get truly useful drawings from revit IMHO. Good Luck! :beer:

[cliff collins]

I wonder how much longer the "AutoCad" problem will continue.

There are improvements in Revit 2012 for exports to AutoCad.

But the root of the problem is the requirement for AutoCad deliverables from a BIM project.

It's a very backwards mentality. I know the answer is "But that's what the Contract / Owner requires so live with it......blah blah blah.

Revit is used for BIM--not exporting 2D antiquated .dwgs with no INFORMATION in them.

I'm just so tired of this age-old problem--and how much time and $ is wasted debating it and
trying to devise band-aid solutions to a problem which should not exist in the first place.

3 weeks of time by a programmer? Do the math. Not an efficient use of billable hours.

The people at the top need to change the way project are delivered to a 100% BIM solution.

Enough ranting..............LOL

[david_peterson]

I wonder how much longer the "AutoCad" problem will continue.
It's a very backwards mentality. I know the answer is "But that's what the Contract / Owner requires so live with it......blah blah blah.
Revit is used for BIM--not exporting 2D antiquated .dwgs with no INFORMATION in them.

The people at the top need to change the way project are delivered to a 100% BIM solution.

Enough ranting..............LOL
Well that is a shift, but if you remember all the hype about how revit was being used on the freedom tower. Which those drawings were ultimately exported to cad after DD's were complete. The bigger shift needs to be with project scheduling and how Archies and MEP's deal with it. IMHO, when you say you're complete with DD's, nothing should be moving anymore. That's really the only efficient way to work in Revit. If you're not using your model to create your details, what's the point. If you have to re-draw you're details every time a wall moves or a grid shifts, you're wasting time. Since starting to work in revit, I've only used what I could easily and consistently get from revit (plan, and elevation, and schedules). Everything else was done in cad. We've done 2 projects now (on the structural side) that were all done in revit. Details were all linework (since we didn't have any budget to redraw anything) all the details say see plan, see arch or see mep. Not a fan of doing it that way, but when you start with no budget and you design and detail everything only to find out it's all needs to change..........that's not efficient either. Also the VE process needs to take place prior to CD's being issued, not after. But the way I see (as an archie once told me) Structural people think straight lines, Architects think in loops.

[cliff collins]

Take a look at what's going on with the more sophisticated AEC teams, using IPD and BIM.

Owner, Arch/Eng, and Contractor all collaborate using BIM from the very initial meetings all the way thru construction and even in FM. No Cad required--Revit, Navisworks, Tekla, and other BIM apps used by subs and fabricators.

Heath care jobs are way out ahead. Look at what Turner and McCarthy are doing.

Cad is a thing of the past. If you want to stay alive, a move to 100% BIM is the way. As one very famous "archie" once said--"Change or perish."

cheers

[tedg]

I wonder how much longer the "AutoCad" problem will continue.

There are improvements in Revit 2012 for exports to AutoCad.

But the root of the problem is the requirement for AutoCad deliverables from a BIM project.

It's a very backwards mentality. I know the answer is "But that's what the Contract / Owner requires so live with it......blah blah blah.

Revit is used for BIM--not exporting 2D antiquated .dwgs with no INFORMATION in them.

I'm just so tired of this age-old problem--and how much time and $ is wasted debating it and
trying to devise band-aid solutions to a problem which should not exist in the first place.

3 weeks of time by a programmer? Do the math. Not an efficient use of billable hours.

The people at the top need to change the way project are delivered to a 100% BIM solution.

Enough ranting..............LOL
He he he... I guess I understand your thought process on this, and maybe in a perfect world you would be right. (nice rant)

But the hard reality is that not everyone out there is going to have, require or be able to afford BIM in the near future, and will still want AutoCAD drawings.

So why even do it in REVIT then you ask?

Because a progressive company who's keeping up of the rest of the world by designing buildings using REVIT due to all the benefits and timesaving stuff it offers, will still need to kick out 2d AutoCAD files to keep thier customers happy.

Would you rather:
A) model a buiding and then automatically create your sections and elevations (etc.)
or

B) draw everything in 2D including all the elevations, sections and details (and then god forbid the design changes).

If the project scope and budget allows: I would choose option B, especially if you have templates already set up.

I work at a company that is just getting into REVIT, we've done a few projects with it. So we're on that fence where: if we can afford to do it in REVIT (time and budget), even if there's no BIM requirement, we are trying to do it in REVIT becuase of the modeling benefits and experience. And we still want the ability to create AutoCAD files if needed, although it's not as simple as we would like, it's not bad for our purpose, it didn't take 3 weeks by a programmer.

So you have a great vision, a nice dream where everyone wants and can afford BIM, but the reality is that's not going to happen anytime soon, so we need these stupid work-arounds to have the efficiency to model in REVIT and still kick out required AutoCAD files..

Of course that's my opinion.
:beer:

[cliff collins]

Revit came out in 1999. That's going on 12 years. When is the AEC world going to catch up?

The management at the top must direct a change in workflow to 100% BIM.

See my other reply about what the more sophisticated AEC teams are doing with IPD/BIM.

Then show your boss how they are kicking your butt and taking away your work and clients.

Coming from 25 years in the business, having gone from hand-drawing to Autocad, Microstation, ADT/ACA
and Revit Version 1 in 2000. The excuse of "Revit is brand new" no longer is a valid excuse.

The "we can't afford to do BIM" is a real indication of a lack of understanding. It is exactly the opposite:

You can't afford NOT to use BIM--even though you may not realise it yet.

Wait until the Owner's RFP REQUIRES 100% BIM. You won't get the job unless you can provide a 100% BIM deliverable. ( The GSA has already required this for quite some time, and private sector Owners are quickly following.)

Good luck with AutoCad deliverables and all the time and effort required--we can't afford to do THAT!

End of rant. Back to Revit Forum.org. LOL

[gtarch]

My contribution to this rant:

Adesk controls Acad. And Revit.

When I first got started, one of the really biggest suprises about Revit is how badly it works with DWG's. Whether it is as an underlay or an import or export, does not matter.

ADESK CONTROLS BOTH PROGRAMS, so I can't understand the low-level of interoperability.

Although Revit is starting to really bury ACAD, I think the poor integration of DWG's has hurt adoption of Revit - by keeping people in ACAD past when they might want to be, and making it harder for people to migrate their 'stuff' into Revit. As well as making it hard to deal with certain 'client needs'.

[cliff collins]

I have been exporting AutoCad files from Revit since Release 1, set to AIA Layer Standards, and have NEVER received a complaint from any consultant of other end-user.

They just use them for backgrounds, delete/freeze unwwanted content, change everything to halftone or grey,
X-ref it in and away they go.

They are not getting consumed with Dynamic Blocks, Linewights, Colors, ctb files, etc. because it is an inefficient workflow.

The whole point of Revit and BIM is to get away from these problems entirely. Like I said, 1999 was a long time ago. No more "Revit is brand new" excuses!

cheers