"AutoCad is Easier for detailing, and CD's" I am getting tired of hearing this!

[cosmickingpin]

Around the office I work at the detailers are whining like little girls (no offense to little girls everywhere, God bless ya) about Revit. So when I started in this office I heard, "Revit is good for conceptual modeling and schematic presentations but for DD work we need to go to 2d cad." Now I am working on a project and am completing a DD Pack end of this week, (Three story cultural art's center with a 20,000sf foot print) all by myself with an insane amount of design changes. I have kept pace and have sucessfully produced drawings down to the wall sections. Now the buzz is, "Ok, but for CD's revit is so much harder than 2d cad, sure dd wall sections, but what about details and key noting" No matter how far up the mountain I push that boulder..." Ok there are key noting options that do work better in AutoCad, but I can come fairly close to approximating that in Revit. "Revit faith," at what point can I expect to see it?

It doesn't help that the whole IT department is all Cad gung ho and so much of their knowlege is made obsolete by Revit, so I got them to fight too.

Any experienced detailers have two cents they could lend me? As experienced 2d detailers, how long did it take to make the revit transition and what kinds of issues did you have? This will help me in my fight by giving me some much needed head start space.
I wonder if others have had similar experiences of fighting to win every single battle?

[Martin P]

In my office I (nor any of us) would do CDS in Autocad at any time, by this I mean detailed plans sections elevations etc, Revit every time for these. The details we do go sometimes to Autocad for are usually 1:5 details, users choice how to draw them though, Revit or Autocad - we always link into revit files anyway if done in Autocad

We have some users who prefer to use Autocad to detail and others who prefer to use Revit. It doesnt present any problems for us which is used to be honest as the results look the same. Our attitude is whatever you prefer and are quickest with, use it. I can do details in either, depends on the detail which I will use - if most of its already there in Revit I will use Revit - if its a start from scratch detail I use Autocad (sometimes - sometimes not). If its a project specific detail I use Revit - if it will be used again aind again I will use Autocad - we tend to see the details as separate files (ie DWG) being a slight advantage as they are easy to link into new projects and keep things up to date with regards to changes, so details that we use again and again we generally do in autocad.

Site plans - again some prefer Revit, some prefer Autocad. Doesnt make a great deal of difference on paper. But more often the surveys etc are in Autocad, so they tend to be finished in Autocad.

Revit does not need Autocad to produce CD's - OR details. And you could not do them easier/faster/better with Autocad alone, that is rubbish - I use both but would never prefer just Autocad - that applies to any stage of the drawing production whether early stage or late - Revit just is not an inception only tool. That said, Autocad does still have regular use on my PC - If I didnt know how to use Autocad though, that would be an entirely different story I would not want to learn it just to do the odd detail!!!! I could quite happily get by without Autocad too, but as I have it - I use it.

[Scott D Davis]

For me, it's all about content! Just as with other aspects of Revit, where the content you have created/obtained/borrowed/etc. can make a project fly, the same is true for detailing. The time you spend up front creating your 2D detailing library of parts, the faster you will be at detailing in Revit.

A BIG help, would be to take ADT's detail module, and use those 2D DWG components and make Revit detail components.

We should start a list of those itmes that should be in everyone's detail component library.

[Tom Weir]

Hi Scott,
I am in total agreement about the need for something in Revit akin to the ADT Details module, and I have suggested it to Revit on several occasions.

We have used it for years. Now I am in the unenviable situation of having to purchase ADT jsut to get the Details module.

My suggestion to Autodesk is to put it into the Revit Building Series. That way you could get Revit, and basic Autocad with the Details module. I think it can stand alone without ADT.

Have agreat day....

Tom Weir
Los Angeles

[aaronrumple]

We don't need the detail module from ADT.
Just the equivelent content for Revit.
We need metal deck, joist etc. as repeating and parametric details. This would put Revit far ahead of ADT.

That's one of those perpetual things on my to-do list which will never get done. Sift through ADT and create Revit parametric details based on that information.

[tjk0225]

I agree with Scott - having a good kit of parts is key to being able to detail effeceintly.

The first project I did in Revit was started in our Austin office. I worked on the design development and CD's as my Revit 'pilot project'. I used the basic drafting tools and filled regions a lot. Every project I have done since then I have added to our library of detail components, and everyone goes together faster than the one before. It really pays off to take the time to create/modify all of the details components that you use.

[Scott D Davis]

We don't need the detail module from ADT....Sift through ADT and create Revit parametric details based on that information.
This was more my thought, too. We don't need the 'module', just the content. We can make them parametric.

Does anyone have a list of all the catagories of components that come with the ADT Detailer? I think this should be provided as base content for Revit. Someone at Autodesk has taken the time to create all of this 2D DWG content....someone at Autodesk should be tasked with converting it all to RFA detail components.

Revit Building will come with the 'architectural' detail components. Revit Structure will come with structural detailing components, and Revit Systems will have MEP componenents. As it's offered as a part of ADT, it should also in some form be a part of Revit Building at a minimum.

[sbrown]

I feel your pain, I heard that for 4 years straight, one guy just ignored the fact I was kicking out 3 or 4 cdsets left and right that took far less time to detail then in dwg. Another guy who had been turned off from revit based on a bad release 2.0 experience took a look at a project I was doing in 4 and the level of detail that was in it once it was done and had a moment of clarity and switched instantly not to look back again. It takes time, just remember it has nothing to do with the software, it has everything to do with motivation. Why would this person want the brain damage of changing the way they work? Is there a benefit to them? Do they feel threatened in some way?

[Tom Weir]

The more detailing I have done in Revit the more I see how efficient it is. I have also slowly progressed so all my wall sections and elevations are in Revit, and now we are doing final section detailing as we have developed our own component families.

And now I have a job on my desk where the architect wants the job to be 100% on Revit, so I have to go the whole nine yards....

But Autocad still lurks in the background and isn't going away yet....

Tom Weir
Los Angeles

[J. Grouchy]

If anything, details should be last thing to convert to Revit...not sections and elevations. Doing sections and elevations in ACAD is almost completely wasting the original intent of Revit.

I've gotten to the point where I'd rather draw a detail from scratch in Revit than even just import it from ACAD (I'm a neat freak and can't stand all the misc. linestyles and fill regions that come in with an ACAD import...and how dimensions and leaders are exploded and text is all screwy) - that is, unless I'm just in a big rush to get it out. Sometimes I will import an ACAD detail then explode it and work it over until it is completely Revit-ized...then purge all that other ACAD junk.

[Lashers]

I only AutoCAD now for importing things like OS Maps, manufacturers details and the like - wot I can't get in Revit form in the first place and to exchange data with un-enlightened folks!

No offense to ACAD users, but I find it easier and more intuitive in Revit, facts is facts!

[Scott Hopkins]

I detailed in AutoCAD for many, many years. I now do 100% of my details in Revit. Once you get your detail components set up, Revit runs circles around Autocad. Particularly with respect to fine details, I appreciate that Revit's display is "what you see is what you get" as opposed to AutoCAD's outdated method of line thickness by layer and color.

[Martin P]

I think that the one thing that really put me off detailing with Revit was the lack of ability to take something I had detailed in a model - or callout view - then paste it into a detail family - it made creating detail families a pain....("cant copy between project & family" message)

EDITED
-error on my part, Revit still doesnt do this.-

We need Revit to get rid of the really annoying habit of saying "element too small on screen" I cant explode some DWG details because of this (to edit or add to them) - I then go to Autocad to detail. Though it could be argued this down to bad detailing in Autocad, but its often somebody elses detail I am importing.Linework working on DWG would also help.

these may convice me to shelve autocad completely if addressed.

Detail groups could now be used to allow updating of details to be made easy - and has the advantage over linking DWGS in that only the files you want updated will change - ie you will have to open and reload the groups.

[rhys]

I think that the one thing that really put me off detailing with Revit was the lack of ability to take something I had detailed in a model - or callout view - then paste it into a detail family - it made creating detail families a pain....("cant copy between project & family" message)

Having just checked to see if this was still the case, it appears that it has now been slipped in at some point and I can now paste from a model into a detail family. So I will look a bit more seriously at detailing with Revit now that that I can do this.

We need Revit to get rid of the really annoying habit of saying "element too small on screen" I cant explode some DWG details because of this (to edit or add to them) - I then go to Autocad to detail. Though it could be argued this down to bad detailing in Autocad, but its often somebody elses detail I am importing.Linework working on DWG would also help.

Detail groups could now be used to allow updating of details to be made easy - and has the advantage over linking DWGS in that only the files you want updated will change - ie you will have to open and reload the groups.

Martin
How and what did you manage to paste from a model to a family? I still get the "can't paste between Project and Family " message
Rhys

[Martin P]

Ummmm... tried again and it didnt!! I must have pasted into another project not into the new family. Sorry for confusion!!

This really, really needs sorted.It is such a simple thing. I cant even do it via saving/loading detail groups. Makes detail familes a real pain to create........ they arent easy to draw completely isolated from the views you want to load them into. You have export dwgs and mess about to create simple families, very annoying, and not very intuitive.

Apologies for sounding Revits biggest critic in this thread, but I have been asking for this simple function for over 3 years now!!

[Les Therrien]

Scott,

Nice detail.
How long would you say it took you to "draw" that.

[cosmickingpin]

But if they elected me God tomorrow I would wipe Cad off everyone's machine and "tough love" them into Revit. I do appreciate the way some people have restored and maintained Commodore 64' S and Atari game systems, the trade Colieco game cartridges on Ebay, that's all nice, kind of a Antiques Road show meets wired magazine, But this AutoCAD fetish has just got to stop. All I hear, "Revit is so hard, Revit is too hard for us to learn." bunch of (what can I compare them to without being offensive) Jelly-fish (no offense to higher invertebrates everywhere, including, starfish, squids and octopi [excluding members of monera and protista sub kingdoms and all unicellular creatures, crustations and mullosks and anything else generally considered "Souless" and or lacking a developed central nervous system] god bless you all!) Just a bunch of AutoCAD Jelly-Fish, Thanks for letting me rant. I guess I may have to suffer for a while longer while out producing their best 2d efforts. The biggest whiner is being transfered out of state this week, I am hoping that will break their wills, or I mean open them to a parametric modeling approach. I am counting the days till next years AU, that will be a life saver to me. After the company pays to send them down to that next fall, I know that will help a great deal, perhaps generate some buzz.
But you all know the types, the old fashioned Cadders, with no Icons at all, all typed commands, and they are just so proud of that too, not that they could ever 3D model in Autocad without some heavy icon usage. Well thanks for the input, I will try to be open to a hybrid approach for now like many suggested.

[Martin P]

But if they elected me God tomorrow I would wipe Cad off everyone's machine and "tough love" them into Revit.
But you all know the types, the old fashioned Cadders, with no Icons at all, all typed commands, and they are just so proud of that too, not that they could ever 3D model in Autocad without some heavy icon usage. Well thanks for the input, I will try to be open to a hybrid approach for now like many suggested.

LOL, yes - I think I was on the path to becoming that guy :) Maybe slighlty further down it than I'd care to admit ;)...... one day I will stop using it. (even if you dont become God!!) - You forgot about knowing ALL of the obscure system variables that screw up drawings too and being really bothered when they cant remember the one you need!!........

Ps what was the cartoon called that your Avatar is from... I remember it well, just not the name!!

Seem to remember there was a fat one, a female one, a tiny one and I think a blue one?

[J. Grouchy]

AutoCAD Jelly-Fish, Thanks for letting me rant

Somebody had to say it...just be careful...Mike.Perry likes to remind people of the "forum etiquette"...frequently and often. :roll:

[cosmickingpin]

Your recall is good, those were the characters. The original cartoon was a produced and aired in Japan in the late 70's. Titled "gatchaman" or "Scientific Ninja Force" You no doubt remember the American dubbed over and edited (some scenes were too graphic for American censors) version "battle of the planets", or "G-force" in its later incarnations. The particular character was named Jason and played the recalcitrant iconoclast to the straight alter ego of the "blue one" or Mark (the Mainstream hero). There is some "duality of essence stuff there no doubt."



Ps what was the cartoon called that your Avatar is from... I remember it well, just not the name!!

Seem to remember there was a fat one, a female one, a tiny one and I think a blue one?

[Les Therrien]

Not to sabotage your thread, I use to watch that then run to school because it was making me late.
Oh, to be young again!

[cosmickingpin]

No Sweat, We are all Alpha Nerds here anyways... It was on the afternoons where I grew up there in Southern California, so I used to run home from school to catch it.


Not to sabotage your thread, I use to watch that then run to school because it was making me late.
Oh, to be young again!

[Wes Macaulay]

No Sweat, We are all Alpha Nerds here anyways... It was on the afternoons where I grew up there in Southern California, so I used to run home from school to catch it.I grew up in Saskatchewan and still managed to catch it on the tube there. Even the bought the model kit that had all the vehicles that plugged into the ship. I believe Jason's plane was at the top centre at the back. Was my favourite show / toy for a couple of years growing up, much to my mother's chagrin. Even found a link to the ships!

http://www.chronicsite.com/gatchaman/mechs.html

Who knew that it was called "Gatchaman"? Goofy handle for a cool show!

[Scott Hopkins]

Scott,
Nice detail.
How long would you say it took you to "draw" that.
Thanks Les. Everything in the drawing is a parametric Revit detail component. I could recreate any variation of that detail in 15 minutes. The key is spending the time investment up front to create your standard detail component library. I use a callout view as an underlay, place all of my components, add some heavier outlines and then note it. I turn off all the background geometry when done. Fussing with the background model elements always seems to slow things down.

[Wes Macaulay]

Thanks Les. Everything in the drawing is a parametric Revit detail component. I could recreate any variation of that detail in 15 minutes. The key is spending the time investment up front to create your standard detail component library. I use a callout view as an underlay, place all of my components, add some heavier outlines and then note it. I turn off all the background geometry when done. Fussing with the background model elements always seems to slow things down.This thread has hit the nail on the head. The model is often not great for the details, and once you've got detail components everywhere with double-arrow controls on them, well Bob's your uncle.

[cosmickingpin]

I take it these are separate components assembled in a callout view, not some "uber"component with all elements nested and a "parametric jig" controlling relationships. something like the latter seems somewhat difficult to use each time, trying to remember what line controls what, so I assume you are assembling these in views with all elements as separate things in the standard fashion?


Thanks Les. Everything in the drawing is a parametric Revit detail component. I could recreate any variation of that detail in 15 minutes. The key is spending the time investment up front to create your standard detail component library. I use a callout view as an underlay, place all of my components, add some heavier outlines and then note it. I turn off all the background geometry when done. Fussing with the background model elements always seems to slow things down.

[Scott Hopkins]

I take it these are separate components assembled in a callout view, not some "uber"component with all elements nested and a "parametric jig" controlling relationships. something like the latter seems somewhat difficult to use each time, trying to remember what line controls what, so I assume you are assembling these in views with all elements as separate things in the standard fashion?
Yes that is right. All I am doing is assembling individual parametric detail components in a callout view. It goes pretty fast.

[bowlingbrad]

Could you guys post some examples of your details? It would be nice to see a visual description of the techniques. Are there other threads showing these techniques?

TIA

[Kevin Janik]

For me, it's all about content! Just as with other aspects of Revit, where the content you have created/obtained/borrowed/etc. can make a project fly, the same is true for detailing. The time you spend up front creating your 2D detailing library of parts, the faster you will be at detailing in Revit.

A BIG help, would be to take ADT's detail module, and use those 2D DWG components and make Revit detail components.

We should start a list of those itmes that should be in everyone's detail component library.

As Scott noted above and others have said, creating and assembling the content is what needs to be done. As Scott also noted above, does anyone have a list of the detail components library in ADT's detail module or can get it? Then we could assemble a great kit of components to facilitate everyone's work.

I would be willing to copy them down and catalog them if people are willing to post them and then we could upload them to the Exchange area as a packet with directories, possibly.

Any takers?

This would help everyone and Revit in general get past the "AutoCAD is Easier for Detailing " mindset!

Lets start with the ADT Library list and those components in the Revit library right now and then add to it.

Kevin

[k.armstrong]

how you want the list - screenshots in a MS word doc?

[ejburrell67787]

Scott - that detail looks very good! When you say parametric components, do you mean each element is parametric? Eg plasterboard has variable for thickness length etc, timber profiles have a range of sizes

It doesn't sound like too onerous a process to create each detail element as & when you need it and save it back to a library.

I do 100% detailing in Revit and use the model as much as possible with cut profiles, detail components drafting lines etc. The only drawback I find with this is not quite having enough control of line weights - eg in wall buildups

Elrond

[bowlingbrad]

Any takers?

I'm in.

I'd be more than willing to help. This is exactly why this forum rocks!

[Kevin Janik]

how you want the list - screenshots in a MS word doc?

That would probably work to start.

Thanks for the help!

Kevin

[Kevin Janik]

I'm in.

I'd be more than willing to help. This is exactly why this forum rocks!

After we get the ADT stuff would you have a few minutes to get the information into Work so that people can review it and we could also post it in text format here for easier use and comment?

From there we could probably would like to create a directory structure that people can agree on for organization of the components that people have and will contribute. Right now Revit's Detail Components directory only has subdirectories of Architectural and Structural. With what people are talking about that will be a bit cumbersome to use.

I know people have bantered around structures for families what would work here, CSI numbered and named folders?

Kevin

[david.kingham]

I have started to put the detail components in revit, don't have much yet...rebar and other various items. Hopefully I will have some more free time to do more!

[Kevin Janik]

I have started to put the detail components in revit, don't have much yet...rebar and other various items. Hopefully I will have some more free time to do more!

If everyone shares a few of their components and then we identify what should be created those can be delegated out to all of us making the work load easlier.

At this point I am wondering about some standards for creating these so that they work well together since we all create things differently especially when it comes to naming standards within the family.

Any great ideas from people or some guidelines from the "Factory" as we affectionately call them? This would really help down the road.

Kevin

[cosmickingpin]

I am thinking an Online Petition with every Revit users asking (politely demanding) this be produced from the factory, they know the whole library, they know in which direction it will be expanding, they have the manpower and motivation to produce a homogenized and coordinated product as well as the distribution infrastructure. if we come up with it, they have no support liability, they have no responsibility to maintain it and distribute as well as parallel future enhancements. They may already have future design that actually outperform the current setup, so we may be wasting our time building the better dinosaur How about somebody who earns a paycheck from our user fees step forward and commit to at least beginning a dialog, and perhaps weigh in on this one. How about on online petition that EVERY SINGLE Revit user will sign demanding this feature in future library releases, as well as it be maintained and updated by autodesk?

Not only all of that but how much better will Revit sond to current ADT user's if the whole ADT library, the one they are familiar with will be there waiting for them in Revit? Smells like oney to be made to me. Otherwise I say we form a profit venture hacking their adt content to Revit and charge them for it? Let them pay us for our time and work making their product more marketable



If everyone shares a few of their components and then we identify what should be created those can be delegated out to all of us making the work load easlier.

At this point I am wondering about some standards for creating these so that they work well together since we all create things differently especially when it comes to naming standards within the family.

Any great ideas from people or some guidelines from the "Factory" as we affectionately call them? This would really help down the road.

Kevin

[Chris DiSunno]

We've pretty much let ACAD go. detailing is so much better when you finally comit to Revit and just go with it. The only time we open ACAD anymore is to look at old projects.

I think the only thing I miss at this point is polylines for drafting. I hate groups, with the hidden green lines outside the edge.

[ejburrell67787]

I use filled regions where I would have used polylines in AutoCad - set them to transparent for exactly the same effect but Much Much better editing capabilities 8)

(...and pretty much never use groups at all!)


Elrond

[cosmickingpin]

I mean you are "supposed" to be able to update a hatch, but who ever manages to do that regularly, Object and island selection and detection..., an afternoon of that and I am hacking at my wrist with a rusty spoon...


I use filled regions where I would have used polylines in AutoCad - set them to transparent for exactly the same effect but Much Much better editing capabilities 8)

(...and pretty much never use groups at all!)


Elrond

[Scott Hopkins]

Scott - that detail looks very good! When you say parametric components, do you mean each element is parametric? Eg plasterboard has variable for thickness length etc, timber profiles have a range of sizes.

It doesn't sound like too onerous a process to create each detail element as & when you need it and save it back to a library.

I do 100% detailing in Revit and use the model as much as possible with cut profiles, detail components drafting lines etc. The only drawback I find with this is not quite having enough control of line weights - eg in wall buildupsThat's right Elrond, everything including plasterboard is a parametric detail component. I would love it if all my details were parametrically tied back to the model but I have found that using views with model elements, cut profiles and linework slows me down too much. I am kind of persnickety when it comes to the look of my drawings and fussing around with views with model elements can get really slow and tedious. I am not sure if this is the absolute best way to detail in Revit but it works well for the residential and retail work that I do. If both methods look the same when done - why not choose the faster method? Besides, if you go the modeling detail route and design revisions are made, your details will probably not adjust perfectly to the changes. With both methods you are still going to have to go over your details and clean things up. For larger wall sections I'll will detail with model elements turned on.

Also remember that complicated flashing details will never work well as details pulled directly from the model. In order to get them to read correctly you will always have to separate your linework in ways that don’t match reality.

I am curious how other people are approaching Revit detailing.

[ejburrell67787]

Yeah I agree about flashings - same with DPC / DPM / Membrane lines - details become much more about graphic representation at that point than snapshots of the model. And doing it your way I s'pose you can always switch on the callout of the model to re-align the detail elements if the model gets updated.

I like your attitude to making details look good and proper... I just don't always have the time to produce them to that standard...! (I can imagine you are now going to say that if I did it your way I would have the time...!!!) :razz:

Elrond

[k.armstrong]

Here are the screenshots through US database up to near the end of structural concrete
ken

edit
Its a BIG job

what say the factory?? - perhaps the factory have limitations on the use (copyright) of the details from ADT even though they are owned by the same company?

If we the users are going to do this then there definately needs to be guidelines or else it will be a mess and take twice the time to get it sorted.

It would also need its own interface - perhaps AUGI could set up a new page for us - sort of database of all the proposed details and then some way of identifying ones that are underway so we don't get too many multiples

When its done perhaps the factory could take it over - or as someone suggested - set it up as with registration of the contributors and sell it - distribute the income to the contributors? on a percentage contributed basis?

If the factory takes it over - perhaps a discount on subscription or a bonus product? VIZ?

[bowlingbrad]

Shouldn't there be a way (VBA) to get into ADT and extract the info we need? Or maybe the Revit guys could call the ADT guys and ask for the info :)

[Haden]

Martin
How and what did you manage to paste from a model to a family? I still get the "can't paste between Project and Family " message
Rhys
It seems like a roundabout process but it really is pretty simple: just export from family to dwg, then import back into the project, or vice versa.

And as for dwg in general, I went "cold turkey" when I got my current laptop last November, and decided I wouldn't even install AutoCAD on this machine. I have NEVER looked back! My projects have all been 100% Revit, and the projects we do in our office, although all residential, are very detailed. Oh sure, there has been the occasional need for updating a drawing or two from an old project built in ADT/AutoCAD, and I just pass that on to others in our office. And, we do have 1 project in the office which will probably not be done for another couple of months which is all AutoCAD, with 2 people working on it, but one of the 2 is enough of a Revit user now that he grumbles about what he is doing in AutoCAD almost as bad as I would.

I agree with several of the other comments about fully Revit-built detail component-based content needed - I have been building what I need as I go, and that tends to slow my work in Revit in these early days, but it starts to pay off the minute you re-use the content again, just like it did back in the days of building ACAD block libraries -- only better, because this is parametric, but not as clunky and convoluted as ADT content.

[khomburg]

There are DWGs of all the detail content in the following directory:

C:/Documents and Settings/All UsersApplication Data/AutodeskABS 2005/enu/Details/Details (US)

This is from a Building Systems install but should be similar for ADT. I am still pretty new to Revit but couldn't these be imported to Revit and "traced" and then add the parametric part?

[Lashers]

Why wait for the Factory? We want it more than they do, I would be more than happy to do some, even though I would have to UK'ise them after anyway!

It would be helpful if the Factory advised us on how to maintain a consistent standard of production and perhaps give us access to the ACAD/ADT database of details to crib from . . . and if they are feeling really good about, it they should offer a subscription free (per license) year for every 5 detail components per user that they wish to incorporate in Revit . . hmmm food for?

[cosmickingpin]

It would be noce were the factory to step up, but not all that likely. I will put in a few Saturdays if I can help. I thinh you are right, input from the factory might more helpful than we know at this point.

[Martin P]

It seems like a roundabout process but it really is pretty simple: just export from family to dwg, then import back into the project, or vice versa.

.

I realise there is this workaround to get the information across, but it once it becomes a DWG it is not really the same, its still a big flaw really.

[Kevin Janik]

Here are the screenshots through US database up to near the end of structural concrete
ken

edit
Its a BIG job

what say the factory?? - perhaps the factory have limitations on the use (copyright) of the details from ADT even though they are owned by the same company?

If we the users are going to do this then there definately needs to be guidelines or else it will be a mess and take twice the time to get it sorted.

It would also need its own interface - perhaps AUGI could set up a new page for us - sort of database of all the proposed details and then some way of identifying ones that are underway so we don't get too many multiples

When its done perhaps the factory could take it over - or as someone suggested - set it up as with registration of the contributors and sell it - distribute the income to the contributors? on a percentage contributed basis?

If the factory takes it over - perhaps a discount on subscription or a bonus product? VIZ?


Thanks for the screen shots. Does someone have time to make a basic list of these items or elements needed from these or perhaps different people could take a CSI section like section 06000 and then post it for everyone's review?. From this people can start telling us what they have for a sections and we can add the stuff from Revit.

Kevin

[Kevin Janik]

Its pretty quiet now. <i>Is this something people want to invest in or not? We do need some input from someone like Steven Campbell.

To make detailing better, someone or each of us individually has to put in some effort except for those who have it already created. Chime in if that is your condition.

Kevin

[Steven Campbell]

:Oops:...Me, I will talk to Bob and Larry about it... j/k

[Kevin Janik]

:Oops:...Me, I will talk to Bob and Larry about it... j/k

Thanks for the help!

I hope you are not talking about the Bob and Larry related to my Avatar. They might not be much help! They have other abilities.

Kevin

[luigi]

Isn't that "Junior"???

[Kevin Janik]

Isn't that "Junior"???

Yes it is from "Lyle the Kindly Viking". Thanks for noticing!

Kevin

[sbrown]

If you like to waltz with tomatoes, if a squash can make you smile...

[Wes Macaulay]

And I thought only Bible thumpers knew who these guys were...

[luigi]

Who knows who is a Bible Thumper???


BTW, what is a Bible Thumper?

In His peace,

[cosmickingpin]

From the Book of Alien Anthropology:
Bible Thumper- anyone even slightly more religious than yourself.
Heathen/ pagan- anyone even slightly less religious than yourself...


Who knows who is a Bible Thumper???


BTW, what is a Bible Thumper?

In His peace,

[Steven Campbell]

Ok to get back on subject there is about 612 families that the ADT Detailer translates too. Some are already included in the default content, I don't have a number for that... but a project of that size requires very good standards and coordination even in house. To attempt in an open forum would be very difficult.

It would require a couple groups to accomplish...
1. one to establish the standards and mange the content, progress and issues
2. small core group to make the families
3. another to test and report back the issues to be fixed...

starting to sound like work... :shock:

Have a predefined test procedure related to the project and test make sure to test in the use case of that family. Always have someone other then the content creator to check the files.

Just a few thoughts from experience...

[Steve_Stafford]

Nice distillation Steven, thanks for the effort to do that! Nice Plate!

[Scott D Davis]

So, Steven, you'll let us know when you get those detail families all wrapped up? mmmmm...K, Thanks!

[Kevin Janik]

Ok to get back on subject there is about 612 families that the ADT Detailer translates too. Some are already included in the default content, I don't have a number for that... but a project of that size requires very good standards and coordination even in house. To attempt in an open forum would be very difficult.

It would require a couple groups to accomplish...
1. one to establish the standards and mange the content, progress and issues
2. small core group to make the families
3. another to test and report back the issues to be fixed...

starting to sound like work... :shock:

Have a predefined test procedure related to the project and test make sure to test in the use case of that family. Always have someone other then the content creator to check the files.

Just a few thoughts from experience...

This is sounding like a job pretty big job. I am assuming you are already using some standards to create the detail components we already have with Revit? If that is true, can the standards be shared?

I am sure that many people have components already created for items everyone might be able to use. Could we collect them and standardize them first and then move on to new families we do not have. If we get some help it will work for us and perhap AutoDesk in the long run.

We need to start with small portions first and not the entire 612 or more families. That could be the long term goal but if we look only at that nothing will happen. Also, there is probably a 1/4 of the 612 families that most people would use regularly. There is always going to be the need to make another detail component

There is alot of good content sitting on lots of peoples computers that would be a great benefit to most others right now.

[Kevin Janik]

Ok to get back on subject there is about 612 families that the ADT Detailer translates too. Some are already included in the default content, I don't have a number for that... but a project of that size requires very good standards and coordination even in house. To attempt in an open forum would be very difficult.

It would require a couple groups to accomplish...
1. one to establish the standards and mange the content, progress and issues
2. small core group to make the families
3. another to test and report back the issues to be fixed...

starting to sound like work... :shock:

Have a predefined test procedure related to the project and test make sure to test in the use case of that family. Always have someone other then the content creator to check the files.

Just a few thoughts from experience...

Steve, I forgot to ask, do you have the ADT list of 612 details items or the file from ADT that creates the tree structure on the screen shots. Revit has the UniformatClassifications.txt file and ADT probably has a similar one, Maybe!

Kevin

[aaronrumple]

Ok... we just need 612 Revit users to do 1 each.

[david.kingham]

I just need specific guidelines and I'll crank some out

[Scott D Davis]

I'll do some!

We really just need the DWG's to start...we can import them into RFA's.

[aaronrumple]

Really need the data more than the DWG's. The detailer in ADT is catalog based and creates achorbolt and such on the fly using XML I think.

[david.kingham]

I have adt so I'm ready to go...

[cadkiller]

So it sounds like maybe it's true, that Autocad and ADT are much easier to do details and construction documents with. From the amount of responses and interest regarding this, that is the feeling I'm getting. The lack of Revit content with regards to detail components seems like a much needed feature.

Autodesk is best suited to create such a thing. The detail component in ADT is compiled of dwg, xml & mdb files. Not an easy task to convert without some programming and database knowledge.

The 600 plus detail families would be way too much for the browser. The tree would be huge, time consuming and difficult to use. It would overload projects and eat up system resources. The need for a detail component manager for Revit, that is similar in nature would be the best thing.

[Steve_Stafford]

...So it sounds like maybe it's true, that Autocad and ADT are much easier to do details and construction documents with....not necessarily...I've used the detail manager part of Softdesk 8 and ADT's versions of it up to ADT 2004. I might never need a large portion of the stuff tucked away in there. Does a tilt up construction design firm need 50 types of screw fasteners in the detail library? Maybe? Maybe not?

It would be wrong to stuff a project full of that much symbology if it's isn't going to get used. You are much better off identifying your needs and deciding whether you should have project templates based on building type, project type etc... Adding detail to the project when needed.

Now having the full library for everything that might be missing now, just in case? Great!

[Scott D Davis]

So it sounds like maybe it's true, that Autocad and ADT are much easier to do details and construction documents with. From the amount of responses and interest regarding this, that is the feeling I'm getting. The lack of Revit content with regards to detail components seems like a much needed feature.

We need content, but it doesn't mean that detailing is easier in ADT or AutoCAD. Construction Documnets are definately NOT easier with ACAD/ADT. There is a good amount of content that comes with Revit for detailing, but this thread shows that there is always room for more. The same could be said for any content; doors, windows, lights, furniture, etc.


The 600 plus detail families would be way too much for the browser. The tree would be huge, time consuming and difficult to use. It would overload projects and eat up system resources. The need for a detail component manager for Revit, that is similar in nature would be the best thing.

600 plus detail components don't all have to be loaded into a project. Just as your 'template' file now has only those components you need pre-loaded into it, the detail components could be limited to what you typically need. The others just reside in a library, and can be loaded or drag-n-dropped into a project from Windows Explorer as needed.

[sbrown]

While free content is a great thing, I have rebuilt most of the stock content to suit the graphic requirements of the firm I had worked for. For example, the stock diag crosshatch on all the cmu was too large, they didn't have plan views, with various corner conditions, I needed bond beams, I also wanted solid fills anywhere there was white so I could hide my revit generated walls. So I just build as I need. My guess is most firms like things to look in a similiar fashion, but not exact. Even the 2x4's needed to be rebuilt out of 4 solid filled triangles so they would mask the model behind it. The beauty of making your own content is you learn, understand and can really get creative. If you rely on ADSK or someone else for your content, well its like being on wellfare, what happens if you need more. Your stuck.

[cadkiller]

I'm not looking for a free handout. I paid for my license and continue to pay for the yearly subscription. Everyone wants more tools and more options and so on. Just look at the many wishes that people ask for in the wish list forum. So why not wish for more content out of the box from Autodesk.

I understand about modifying details to your liking or needs and learning as you create stuff; but not all of us have all that time that is needed to create everything. I for one barely have enough time to learn all the features the program has to offer. Maybe if I was as lucky as some to have worked for a big company, that would pay me to create all of this stuff for them than I would have time. I'm a one man show and have to produce work to earn a living.

ADT has so much more content out of the box and they continue to create more content. Autocad & ADT also has programming capabilities to create details and content automatically. There are so many third party programs that take Autocad & ADT to the next level, so how can an average Revit user compete with someone that has all these add on programs?

I read a post at AUGI about wishing for the ability to copyright families that one creates. Many people don't want to share their content and if they did, many people would just take it without contributing.

PS: Just imagine how wonderful the world would be if we all shared!!!!!!!!!