Manual drawing list--to do or not to do???

[petervanko]

I am setting up standard titleblocks for my firm and am making a conscious decision not to use the automatic, scheduled drawing list on our titleblock for the following reasons:

1. customizing the list to make sure sheet order comes out as you would like is a real pain...sheet ordering such as CS100 followed by the "C", "L", and <finally> "A" series seems tough.

2. adding intermediate discipline headings cannot be part of the schedule.

3. splitting the schedule into two or more parts (to keep it from running off of the sheet) is not possible???

3. getting consultant drawings into the list demands setting up false sheets.

Anyone out there willing to try and convince me otherwise? Please send some examples...

[greg.mcdowell]

Sounds like you've made your decision... and if it's the right one for your situation then more power to you... I'm not sure I'll be using this much myself though for different reasons none of which are technical (if you can't get your consultants to give you a list of drawings prior to submission it makes it real hard to plan ahead).

[aaronrumple]

1. False - setting up the fields needed is no more trouble than filling out any titleblock.
2. False - with the right fields you can have intermediate headings. Ours are set up that way.
3. False - you can duplicate the schedule and place the need portions on each of several sheets. All you have to deal with this the wrapping and cutoff location of the list. You can also do filtered discipline specific lists if you like - which takes care of #2 and then allows you to span multiple sheets.
4. True - so what?

I think the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.

[patricks]

For us it's much less of a hassle to just go through the entire set at the very end of the project and type all the sheet numbers and names in a drafting view. But then again our CD sets rarely go over 50 sheets, around 100 sheets maybe on 3 or 4 projects since I started working here over 2 years ago.

[petervanko]

Thanks for the great responses! Aaron, saying that "setting up the fields needed is no more trouble than filling out any titleblock" is absurd. If that was true, it would be done and I wouldn't be posting...LOL

[dhurtubise]

I totally agree with Aaron, it's definitely worth the little trouble compare to the waste of time, and possible error, that the manual method brings.
All you need is a few SharedParameters

[Steve_Stafford]

Define simple...a series of basic steps? or I don't have to do anything and it looks the way I want it? It is simple, if you know what to do :smile:

Type the list manually when I've already got sheet's names and numbers entered in? "Nope, not gonna do it, wouldn't be pruuudent" :smile:

There are at least three tutorials covering this subject here in our tutorials forum.

ONE (http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=20480) ... TWO (http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=25878) ... THREE (http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=30376)

[ford347]

If it is possible to do this in Revit, then I would say do it in Revit. It keeps everything real time like it's suppose to be. The other way there is way too much room for error. So either you deal with creating what you are creating now, and deal with changes as they occur, or mistakes that could be made, etc., all of which are completly possible and more than likely to happen, or you take a little time to do some research, learn somthing new and just deal with it. Learn the little workarounds as opposed to making the whole process a workaround. I think sometimes when we encounter a problem(s), that we don't like to deal with, we hastily seek out solutions that create more problems than they solve. Sometimes the most elegant and efficient solution is perfecting what we have. My two cents.

[petervanko]

Thanks again for all of your responses. In the interest of time and energy, I'm going to let this one go until the next job. I will leave scheduling to the doors, windows, etc. which comes more easily (so I can "Learn the little workarounds").

[Scott D Davis]

When my users say "I *have* to create dummy sheets?" I tell them, one way or another, you are going to type in the name of the sheet and the title of the sheet. Creating the actual sheet only takes an extra couple clicks of the mouse! Now in 9.0, since you can import sheets from other jobs, set up a "dummy project" with all of your typical consultants sheets pre-setup. open your new project, import sheets, done!

[aaronrumple]

Our typical template has standard sheets already set up and the drawing list placed on the cover sheet, so most of the work is done. Only the project specific sheets need be added.

[petervanko]

And I would hope to achieve that automation established soon. I am presently building the standard sheets into the template; from a CAD manager's standpoint, we could not ask for a better system.

Thanks again!

[Scott D Davis]

The 'dummy sheets' also then have the ability to become more intelligent. Since they are real sheets, you can reference in your consultants details onto your dummy sheets, and then make your detail callouts intelligent by "pointing" at the correct location on the correct sheet.

[brd]

Now in 9.0, since you can import sheets from other jobs, set up a "dummy project" with all of your typical consultants sheets pre-setup. open your new project, import sheets, done!

We thought about doing that in my office, however we decided against it. We thought about brining in the generic template sheets in the front of all of our project sets (i.e. Wall Types sheet, General Notes, etc.), but didn't because we were worried about the file size. We just leave the dummy sheets in place and when it's time to print, just print out the generic sheets and stick them in the set. The only disadvantage is that you can't batch plot that way, or create a multi-page DWF. In your experience, is the file size issue a reasonable concern, or should I just go ahead and import those couple of sheets?

[greg.mcdowell]

Could you import the file on a Workset and not have it open until print time? I know that we can do that with the model geometry of an external file but I'm not sure about sheets and views since those typically have their own workset by default...

[jeff.95551]

From what I've seen dummy sheets - sheets in general - take up almost no space at all. Once the Sheet family is loaded, a new sheet is just a database record instance and a set of parameters. Should be no more than 2 or 3k. I've got projects with multiple sheet sets with content on the sheets, and I haven't noticed any file size difference. It seems to me that in the long run from a quality control and consistency standpoint, automating and standardizing everything that you can is a good investment. From a new user standpoint where you've got to get to the finish line and the client doesn't care how the information got there, you've got to pick and choose. I think petervanko probably made a good decision just to get it done. Next project, add that to your template.

Good Luck