Lineweight changes

[ron.sanpedro]

I am trying to rationalize lineweights and categories so our drawings look better OOTB, and require less Linework Tool fussing. To that end, I wonder what others have done along these lines. And specifically, I am wondering about the following issues...

1: Thin is used everywhere. It seems to me that only material designations should be the thinnest possible lineweight. The fact that plumbing and annotation and what not has no differentiation seems crazy. Not to mention major tags like Sections with the same lineweight as materials! So has anyone come up with an approach they like? I am thinking most things should be a lineweight of at least 2 or 3, with material hatches at 1, and cut items at 5.

2: Making lineweight 1 thinner. The default is .003", which is actually pretty thick, but I worry about concrete hatches and such. Has anyone gone to .001" for lineweight 1? How well has it worked for you? And am I right that all fill patterns use lineweight 1?

3: Linestyles: Thin, Medium and Thick are the defaults, but some in my office are big proponents of linestyles of 1, 2, 3, etc. then they sort in correct order and you know exactly what they are. I kind of like 2 - Thin, 3 - Medium, 4 - Thick and 5 - Profile or something similar, with lineweight 1 relegated to material designation duty.

4: Wide lines and Heavy lines? There is a Heavy lines (5) under Detail Items, and a Wide lines (5) as a Line Style. Is this just shoddy QM that the Factory can't be bothered to fix, or is there some rational for this? I see the same in content way too often, where there is just no consistency in naming, and this isn't stuff from RevitCity, it is Factory supplied content!

5: And lastly, 16 lineweights? Really? Given that you can control what lineweights are on a scale by scale basis, and for the most part 5 lineweights is all most people can differentiate in one drawing, what was the logic of 16? My initial reaction is to make everything beyond 5 .001" so if someone uses it it doesn't screw anything up. Then again, maybe I should make them all 1" so people quickly change things back when they use the "wrong" lineweights. Or is this old CAD Manager thoughts?

Thanks all,
Gordon

[aaronrumple]

Yes. Most of my objects start with lineweight 2. Lineweight 1 is reserved for hatch patterns and the things I want really really light.
Revit will not make lineweights thinner than .003" All patterns use lineweight 1.
I don't use the thin/thick/etc. Rather I use the old rapidograph pen set.
Naming consistancy is always an office standard issue. It would be nice if adsk took the lead on this and was more proactive in all their content creation.
Yes, I use all 16 lineweights. The ones on the wide end of the spectrum are too fat out of the box and look bad with the rounded ends. Hence, the rapidograph pen size being used as a standard.

[ron.sanpedro]

Yes. Most of my objects start with lineweight 2. Lineweight 1 is reserved for hatch patterns and the things I want really really light.
Glad to hear this isn't just me. Maybe if enough of us comment we will see the OOTB defaults change.


Revit will not make lineweights thinner than .003" All patterns use lineweight 1.
I just used .001" and it changed on screen, and printed. Too thin for some printers perhaps, but it worked. I wonder if this is a fix that never got mentioned?

I don't use the thin/thick/etc. Rather I use the old rapidograph pen set.
I would have said that would be very intuitive for most people, but then a few weeks ago I asked if anyone knew the RGB value for Non-Photo Blue (I am using it for my guideline color in title blocks and such). Well, no one actually using Revit knew what Non-Photo Blue was, and the people who did didn't know what an RGB value was ;)

Naming consistancy is always an office standard issue. It would be nice if adsk took the lead on this and was more proactive in all their content creation.
Yeah, I am regularly harping on people for their bad naming conventions, only to find they faithfully copied something from OOTB Revit content! Really frustrating when you are trying to establish good habits and the Factory is indirectly thwarting you.

Yes, I use all 16 lineweights. The ones on the wide end of the spectrum are too fat out of the box and look bad with the rounded ends. Hence, the rapidograph pen size being used as a standard.
I would be curious to see that you are doing in Category settings to take advantage of all the lineweights, or do you just use the full gamut for Linework type embellishment, and keep the category settings simple?

Thanks!
Gordon

[aaronrumple]

Revit will not make lineweights thinner than .003" All patterns use lineweight 1.
I just used .001" and it changed on screen, and printed. Too thin for some printers perhaps, but it worked. I wonder if this is a fix that never got mentioned?

That must be a new one. Revit used to issue a warning. I'll have to check what it was in 9.1.

[SCShell]

Hence, the rapidograph pen size being used as a standard.
[/list]

Hey there,
Ahhhh Aaron.....What memories you bring back....

Spending hours taking those little babies apart......trying to get the tips off with that well engineered gear-like key thingy........ lovingly straightening those bent needles......trying to get dried ink out of the cartridge......Soaking them in cleaning solution for hours (or putting them in the Ultra-Sonic cleaner if you were so lucky) ...... filling those now-clean cartridges with fresh ink while not spilling any because you are using that well engineered ink refilling bottle.......putting the cartridge back on the pen and having that first loving "droplet" of ink ooze out from the pen's tip.....shaking those beautiful little pens like a madman just to get that wonderful "clicking" sound reaffirming your KNOWLEDGE that your pen is clean and ready to spread that blacker than black ink .....
Carefully placing your triangle on the sheet (you know, the one that has the 3 pennies taped to it)......
only to be rewarded with a watered down grey, scratchy, skipping little pathetic "line" which disappears into nothingness!

Ahh, what memories......Thank You Aaron and Thank You Revit!!!!!!!
Steve

[cvandevere]

Hi Aaron,
I too am a throw back to radiography generation. Quick question. Did you make all of the line weights the same regardless of scale in the line weight settings?

Craig VanDevere, AIA

[aaronrumple]

Hi Aaron,
I too am a throw back to radiography generation. Quick question. Did you make all of the line weights the same regardless of scale in the line weight settings?

Craig VanDevere, AIA
I did to get our office standards started. But then have been looking at that since to enhance the setup. We rely more on view templates than the automatic lineweight by scale feature to adjust specific view types. This seems to offer a finer degree of control than just doing it by scale. (...and no one has to think - this scale is what pen?)