Keynote sections don't match Masterspec

[david_spehar]

We finally upgraded to 9 and I just started playing with keynotes. My initial reaction was that of great joy (probably too much but I live a simple life) but I have a big, big, big question. We use the 16 division Masterspec with the most current update (September 2005). I've spot checked several Revit keynotes and have found many to not match Masterspec sections (for example - Masonry Units 04200 vs. 04810, Acoustical Ceilings 09511 vs. 09510). Am I missing something or are they different? If so, does anyone know if there is a plan to update keynote references to match current Masterspec sections? Do I continue to jump up and down with excitement because keynotes are finally integrated or do I have to change hundreds of references in an Excel file and hang my head in dismay?


Andy, where's my bullet?

[greg.mcdowell]

They are different... the Help Menu says they match the 1995 edition... why they choose a standard that's 10 years old I don't know but when you start thinking about how you'll deal with future updates to the CSI numbers you'll find yourself in a bit of a pickle... at least we are.

[david_spehar]

Not the answer I was hoping for, but thanks. That is a tough one. I'm really tempted to use it but I'm not sure it will ultimately be worth the time to update to 2005 (let alone future updates). So you figure it out and let the rest of us know what to do.

[greg.mcdowell]

Gee.. thanks! <grin>

I haven't run it by the rest of the office yet but I think what we'll likely end up doing is update the database to be current (using find/replace in Excel) and to keep it updated as CSI makes changes. We'll copy the keynote file into each project directory and point the project to use this database and then tag materials and elements that are in the project.

I don't think we'll be presetting materials or elements in our templates or library because there's not way that I can think of to update them when the number changes... but within a project that's manageable.

BTW... here's a copy of the XLS file that's better organized...

[GuyR]

. why they choose a standard that's 10 years old I don't know but when you start thinking about how you'll deal with future updates to the CSI numbers you'll find yourself in a bit of a pickle... at least we are.

Yep, Christopher Herr and I did some work on converting. I believe he has headed down a custom format route. Me, I just didn't feel comfortable mapping all the categories for public consumption. IMO mapping to the new format is difficult and I too have headed down the custom route. I can see why the factory didn't use the 05 format.

Anyway, here is the result of Christophers work. The python script is used to generate revit keynote files in the appropriate format, mapping the Revit 95 format notes to csi2004. The majority of the work is in the mapping files. The python script uses this to convert the Revit imperial keynote file. Including the python script the attached zip includes the following:

9361.pdf which is the 05 format categories we based the mapping on.

Missing 05 maps.txt are the 95 Revit categories yet to to be mapped to the new 05 format. This is the where work needs to be done. All the 05 codes are currently dummy codes. As you can see a lot of map and some ambiguous in 05 IMO.

MF95-MF04.txt is the mapping file python uses to map the revit imperial 95 format keynote file.

KN_CSI2004_sc.txt this is a Revit keynote file of the csi2005 basic categories with no data from the Revit imperial file.

basic_csi_2004.txt is the input file of the basic csi2005 categories for the python script.

If you want to use this work, the missing maps in the missing 05 maps.txt file need to be completed. Then append these maps to the MF95-MF04.txt file. Run the python script and you'll have Revit keynote files. If you don't want to download python then email the mapping files to me and I'll generate the keynote files for you.

HTH,

Guy

[Wes Macaulay]

Heh -- I knew this was going to be an issue when the new feature was mentioned back at AU a couple of years back.

We're still mostly using the 16 section format up here anyway, and I haven't checked around to see if anyone's going to migrate. A real source of confusion for everyone, this is.

Thanks Guy and Gregg for the legwork!

[david_spehar]

Thanks for the help. I'm going to chew on it for a while. We were discussing this in the office yesterday and decided that the consistency and better coordination coming from keynotes probably outweighs the periodic hassle of updating the references. Thanks again.

[greg.mcdowell]

Man... I hope my office thinks the same thing... it would be so unfortunate if they choose the "safer" route.

[greg.mcdowell]

I decided to try a different route to make the switch from 1995 to 2004 CSI numbers but I've run into a snag that I don't quite understand and maybe someone can help me...

I pulled the new 2004 numbers off the disc that came with the documentation and ran a series of if/then statements to break apart and then reattach the numbers for the "parent of" column. I'm pretty sure I got the numbers all correct but when I pull this information out to a new sheet and save it as a tab-delimited TXT it doesn't work in Revit. It looks to be formatted correctly but Revit keeps telling me that some of the parent-child relationships aren't valid.

Have a look and tell me if you can see anything that I might have done wrong... I'm close... I'm very, very close...

[edit] Got it! Don't know what the problem was exactly but who cares... it works!

[david_spehar]

I took a look at what you sent and honestly you're a little ahead of me on this one. From what I know so far I couldn't see anything wrong. I've got one for you. Have you ever gotten this error message? I can't seem to locate the duplicate value. Any thoughts?

Maybe this time I'll attach the attachment - what a dope.

[greg.mcdowell]

I had a couple of those errors (the MasterFormat had them so they had to be fixed) but the file I'm using is working fine (attached again just in case).

One thing that I hadn't considered is that this is just the format of the more detailed MasterSpec... we still need to go through and add the grainularity... and that could be a whole lot of work...

[chrisgrimm]

I've been working on cracking this case more recently, let me know if you're still looking for answers, or if you've taken it further since these 2006 postings.

I really am amazed that a platform as incredibly advanced as Revit is STILL using the old 1995 CSI 5-digit spec numbers, EVEN in the new 2008 release of Revit. The new 6-digit standard (developed in 2004, and discussed for several years prior to that), is an essential piece in the puzzle of making BIM work like it is meant to.

David, you recognized correctly that these strange inconsistencies cause great difficulty in making keynoting really work. Many offices have just given up on the idea altogether. Others have developed custom systems or tweaks to bridge the gap, and for those that do, the potential of more consistent terminology in their documents is greatly improved. And with BIM, I believe the potential of finally establishing a specs-drawing connection now exists. I don't think it is found in Revit alone, or at least not yet. Some 3rd party programs are beginning to tap into it. Beware of redundant pieces of data that introduce contradictions, and beware of subsequent manual edits to specs being overwritten by a refresh. One day we will have more of a live, perhaps 2-way link, rather than a specs "copy" of a large amount of data that also exists in the Revit model.

Consistency is the key to linking data from different sources, and with 5 digits there was not room to always use the same numbers anymore after 40 years of using the old system, with the explosion of new construction technologies, codes and standards revisions, sustainable design and life cycle issues now being addressed... I could go on but I won't. Point is, everybody had a different need for their type of work and invented their own way to manage with the now inadequate 5 digits/16 divisions.

Now with 6+ digits/34 active divisions, and an online database to HOPEFULLY get everyone to GET consistent and STAY consistent in how they organize their specs (www.masterformat.com), we should be able to fix this one time and have it last, with minor changes occassionally.

If it will help the Revit developers to finish the keynote conversion, I will share with them what I've done (or anyone else who is interested). It needs a good deal of checking, but I've got a new RevitKeynotesMF04_Imperial.txt file and an Excel source file that has all the granularity, and imports into Revit without warnings.

If interested respond to this post or email me at chrisgrimm@ls3p.com

[david_spehar]

If interested respond to this post or email me at chrisgrimm@ls3p.com

If you're willing to share I am interested. We've been using some that we created based on the 16 divisions but we are starting to migrate to the new format. I'd love to see a copy of what you've done and I really hope the folks at Autodesk take you up on your offer. I don't know how much you've researched eSPECS for Revit but it is a powerful tool for tightly integrating specs. I've also heard rumored that they are working on integrating the keynote feature too - which would be a huge plus. Thanks for sharing.

[Steve_Stafford]

...I really am amazed that a platform as incredibly advanced as Revit is STILL using the old 1995 CSI 5-digit spec numbers, EVEN in the new 2008 release of Revit...I was involved in writing the help docs for the keynoting tools during the rush to release 9.0. The reason that the old version was supported was based on feedback that most of the firms they discussed this with did not use the newer version and didn't intend to in the near future (I think we included an explanation in the help docs?). They decided to stick with that...knowing full well that it would not please everyone. But then they never do please everyone do they? :smile: I imagine as time goes by and the newer format is adopted in greater numbers, or someone sends them the text file they've updated, it'll get incorporated. It is my impression that keynoting was requested loudly but in practice isn't used much yet for a variety of reasons. One of which is the "can of worms" it represents.

[chrisgrimm]

Steve- I hope they get it done for the next release. Most who are using Revit are the more forward thinking crowd, it is a pity to cater to the late adopters at this point. The major product guide systems like Sweets have completely converted and don't even show both the old & new numbers anymore. MASTERSPEC is planning on doing this soon too. It is time to start dropping the old system whenever possible.

Organizations that have Adopted MasterFormat 2004 Edition:
http://www.csinet.org/s_csi/sec.asp?TRACKID=3DB5DKYRF7TTLWXHSEKT5F7QLVT7DFKZ&CID=1377&DID=11705

David- Please email me, and then we can compare notes.

[dgreen.49364]

I don't really understand the complaining over keynoting. The fact that it uses an editable .txt file makes it so easy to do with it whatever you wish. Our company does not use CSI, we use Master spec. We had a gal in our office, who has lighting fingers on the keyboard, put together a master keynote list using the Masterspec format, and we were done. It matches our specifications and everybody loves it.

If we were using the 95 CSI, we would use the standard Revit keynoting. If we were using the more recent CSI, we would have someone sit down and modify the standard Revit keynoting txt file and make it right or we would create it from scratch, whatever works best.

Again, the fact that keynoting makes use of an editable txt file should allow anybody to do whatever they want, so why worry? This is one of those areas where AutoDESK actually did the right thing, IMO, by leaving it in a format that we could edit to suit our purposes. Take some time to create a txt file that suits whatever format you are using and be done.

[aaronrumple]

I don't really understand the complaining over keynoting. The fact that it uses an editable .txt file makes it so easy to do with it whatever you wish.

Not quite. You can't keynote based on NCS 3.1 Sandards. To be able to do tha you need a user based parameter in the keynote. I argued for that early on.

[dgreen.49364]

Aaron, Sorry if you explained it before, but...what is NCS 3.1? And why is it an issue with keynoting?

[chrisgrimm]

dgreen- NCS is the National CAD Standard. for more info see this thread http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=28485 and http://www.nationalcadstandard.org/publications.php. You are right they have given us an editable text file. But the problem is, with over 10,000 cells of data to be modified, when you count both the parent and the keynote items, it is a real issue for users to convert to the new 6-digit system themselves. The new numbers are not simply adding a new zero.

I have used a number of VLOOKUP formulas in Excel to do as much as possible of this conversion, using MASTERSPEC MF04 numbers and titles when a 1:1 match exists, and the CSI MF04 matrix for subjects not clearly addressed in the MASTERSPEC matrix. It still needs a lot of review from human eyes. I just wish the Revit team would take the rest of this on and solve it for all of us.

Aaron - What do you mean you can't keynote by 3.1 standards?

[Steve_Stafford]

...I just wish the Revit team would take the rest of this on and solve it for all of us...How about encouraging the folks that create the standard to make it easier to use in Revit by providing the file based on their standard?

[chrisgrimm]

Standard-producing organizations usually leave implementation up to the developers and/or users. The organization defines the problem, develops consensus, and issues the standard. But there could be any number of software platforms out there that use these numbers and titles, so it is not usually effective for the standard-producing organization to delve into that territory. CSI for one is an entirely volunteer organization with only a few paid positions to my knowledge.

It would be ideal if the Revit development team would take the lead on how their particular program would make use of the standard. Individuals like a few of us who have posted here can certainly dabble and maybe even crack the case, but we have a lot less to gain from it than Autodesk might, and our people resources are scattered in many firms and all trying to get buildings designed while doing this in our so-called spare time.

I want to share what I've done so far on this, but with a broad disclaimer that it is not fully checked yet, and therefore could potentially have errors in it. That is what I felt I needed to make clear by email if anyone had responded.

So here is the attachment, and the disclaimer: No warranty of any kind is expressed or implied, the information is provided without charge under the GNU General Public License which allows you to freely use and copy and modify it; except that you may not sell anything derived from this work without the permission of the original author (that's me).

The files are currently under development and require human beings to verify that the results of the formulas are as expected. So far a significant amount of spot checking has been done, and revisions to resolve warning messages when importing into Revit. I would be happy to help continue this project, along with other interested parties, it is just too much for me to take on alone right now. Let me know if you are interested!

If you do decide to use it as-is, the .txt file should import into Revit just fine. Good luck!

[aaronrumple]

Aaron - What do you mean you can't keynote by 3.1 standards?


NCS 3.1 has very specific ways of keynoting.
They break it down into 5 groups.
General - apply to the entire work - you use a legend for this.
General Discipline - apply to one disciplines' entire work - you use a legend for this.
General Sheet Notes - apply to all work on a particular sheet - you use a drafting view for this.
Sheet Notes - Things that note a process. (Demolish Partition) - you would use a note block for this. However doing note blocks by type for fast global changes to a project really blows in Revit. Too many types to deal with and placing them is slow. So you end up doing instance based, but then you have to manually coordinate.

Reference Keynotes - notes for specific graphic representations.
Reference Keynotes follow a MasterFormat 2004 standard with reference keynote modifier.
So you might have:

07 21 13.13.A01
(R-Value 35)

The first part you can do. This is a reference to a generic product or thing. The second line - (R-Value 35) - you can't do. This would be the type of product. R-19, R-35, etc. Or it might be spacing or some other assembly instruction which is situational specific. You might have a code for 2x4 wood framing, but then you need a second line to call out @16" O.C., Blocking, Continuous, etc. Without the second line - your keynote and material list gets WAY too long to use. You would need a separate material for every type of gyp. bd. known to man.

[chrisgrimm]

Took me a while to get to #5! Now I'm tracking with you, I think.

Hopefully when Revit developers take this on, they will use a relational database instead of a .txt flatfile, so it could be easy to manage and use as many keynotes WITH extensions as people would commonly need.

But for now, any keynoting system that has the new 6-digit numbers, or the option of both 5-digit and 6, is better than one that has only 5-digit. Why does a program that is otherwise way ahead of the crowd still use a standard that is 3 years out of date? (I'm referring to MasterFormat standard, not the NCS).

[arqt49]

I was having exactly the same problem.
I also need the keynote modifier in order to comply with the NCS 3.1
Can only hope to get that in the next revit version
I think the revit developers should look more seriously into the NCS/UDS.
For instance, schedules cannot be reversed in the issue block.

[Gilles L Letourneau]

As an e-SPECS user once stated - wouldn't it be nice if the keynotes came directly from the spec section and matched the terminology?

e-SPECS has a version of it's new Revit plugin tool which allows e-SPECS users to generate a list of keynotes to be used in Revit extracted from the spec sections written for the project. This allows the user to create keynote text files on the fly and illiminate the need for maintaining long TXT documents that always seem out of date.

See www.e-SPECS.com its pretty cool!

[lorne.bourdo.152516]

This is perfect. Thanks so much, do you know where I can find the same, but for metric? We use either one, depending on project location.

Thanks!
Lorne


Standard-producing organizations usually leave implementation up to the developers and/or users. The organization defines the problem, develops consensus, and issues the standard. But there could be any number of software platforms out there that use these numbers and titles, so it is not usually effective for the standard-producing organization to delve into that territory. CSI for one is an entirely volunteer organization with only a few paid positions to my knowledge.

It would be ideal if the Revit development team would take the lead on how their particular program would make use of the standard. Individuals like a few of us who have posted here can certainly dabble and maybe even crack the case, but we have a lot less to gain from it than Autodesk might, and our people resources are scattered in many firms and all trying to get buildings designed while doing this in our so-called spare time.

I want to share what I've done so far on this, but with a broad disclaimer that it is not fully checked yet, and therefore could potentially have errors in it. That is what I felt I needed to make clear by email if anyone had responded.

So here is the attachment, and the disclaimer: No warranty of any kind is expressed or implied, the information is provided without charge under the GNU General Public License which allows you to freely use and copy and modify it; except that you may not sell anything derived from this work without the permission of the original author (that's me).

The files are currently under development and require human beings to verify that the results of the formulas are as expected. So far a significant amount of spot checking has been done, and revisions to resolve warning messages when importing into Revit. I would be happy to help continue this project, along with other interested parties, it is just too much for me to take on alone right now. Let me know if you are interested!

If you do decide to use it as-is, the .txt file should import into Revit just fine. Good luck!

[t1.shep]

I know this is an old post, but it looks like from version 2009 and up they've included the Masterspec 2004 format in the keynote files.