Elevation as a Drafting View

[s17sharin]

Hi
Is there any way we can get elevations that are already drawn in cad to revit and change the elevation tags on the floor plan of the revit project to suite the elevations on the drafting view.

[twiceroadsfool]

Yeah..... but ew! Dont do it!

In Drafting View: File > Import/Link > DWG > place it somewhere

In Floor plan, delete/hide the elevations, then go to View > Elevation > (option bar) reference other view button > go to the drop down that shows up and select the name of the drafting view > Place the marker.

Then sit back and watch the team have to work twice as hard. :)

[eldad]

twiceroadsfool, i don't understand why not to do this?? it's a very handy feature to have, Referencing to other view, I have used this many times before with no problems :)

[Scott Womack]

I believe that it is because it defeats the purpose of BIM, since changingthe floor plan does NOTHING what so ever to change the elevations, now you have a guarenteed conflict built into your documents. In the commercial end of the profession, this is a potential change order that the architect/engineer cannot adequately defend themselves from.

[twiceroadsfool]

Exactly as Scott said, it defeats the purpose of the Intelligent and coordinated model.

We spend a bunch of time up front building the model, so we can reap the benefits on the back end when were querying the database multiple times (with elevations, schedules, 3d views, etc).

If were going to build the model for plans, and reference in CAD elevations or sections, now you have to update your Model AND your CAD drawings when things in the design change.

Its self defeating...

[rrothwel]

the reference other view is great for sections to do details that are already in cad with all of the annotations and everything already created, if all the variables are right, arrow, text.... Although detailing in Revit with 2d info added to the section created is not bad, it is just a little more creating the detail, more work, but then you can save the view out and have it for the next time you need it.

[twiceroadsfool]

CAD Sections... To each their own, but In all the times ive heard it saves time, ive yet to see a SINGLE job go out that actually benefitted from it in the end... After all the job specific stuff was finished changing...

[patricks]

If you're wanting an elevation marker to point to some product-specific detail/elevation that is in CAD, then that's fine. But if you're wanting to do elevations of building components in CAD, well... that's bad. :p Trust me, it's WAY easier to model it so that the actual Revit elevations look correct.

[eldad]

Exactly as Scott said, it defeats the purpose of the Intelligent and coordinated model.

We spend a bunch of time up front building the model, so we can reap the benefits on the back end when were querying the database multiple times (with elevations, schedules, 3d views, etc).

If were going to build the model for plans, and reference in CAD elevations or sections, now you have to update your Model AND your CAD drawings when things in the design change.

Its self defeating...

I believe you guys are a little confuse about BIM :) (not being condescending here) reference to other view has nothing to do with BIM but rather with housekeeping, it's a great tool and if anything it will make sure that you are pointing to the right place.
The idea is not to over develop your model, but this is another discussion all together :)

[twiceroadsfool]

Uh, im not talking about Reference other View, but the OP's original intent: To use CAD imports to make up their elevations.

i assure you, im not confused about the prospects of BIM, but youd be hard pressed to convince me that modeling a floor plan, and using a fake drafted elevation is a good idea. In fact, im confident youll NEVER sell me on that....

[eldad]

sorry twiceroadsfool,
I thought that s17sharin is trying to reference a detail, drafting view.
I agree about not using a dwg elevation!!! this is silly. but nothing is wrong about referencing to another drafting view, for details. :)

[twiceroadsfool]

I understand the need for it, but i despise the *reference other view* tool alltogether.

Not because of the tool itself, but because of how lazy end users and PM's alike throw it on too early in the design process, and compromise the integrity of the documents theyre producing... I wont let people use it, lol...

But i understand the importance of the tool...

[Scott Womack]

I understand the need for it, but i despise the *reference other view* tool alltogether.

Not because of the tool itself, but because of how lazy end users and PM's alike throw it on too early in the design process, and compromise the integrity of the documents they're producing... I wont let people use it, lol...

But i understand the importance of the tool...

Aaron, As I'm sure you are aware, this tool is the ONLY way to tie a drafting view back into a plan or section. This was the actual reason the tool was created in the first place. They simply made it available to reference info not actually created in Revit originally. I do happen to agree whole heartedly, that the tool is indiscriminately used to avoid actually "learning" to use Revit correctly IMHO.

As to the comment about "over developing" the model, true this is an entirely different discussion. However, after 5 years of use on larger commercial projects, I've personally found, that the more accurate the model, the more benefit derived, especially during the CA phase of the work.

[twiceroadsfool]

Scott, i 100% agree with everything you typed. I dont dislike the tool for the tool itself, as i know it fulfills a need in the project (sort of like overriding dimensions). i dislike the tool for the idiocy it propogates. :)

And youre last paragraph/sentence rings SO true to me.

[peakprecisiondesign]

CAD Sections... To each their own, but In all the times ive heard it saves time, ive yet to see a SINGLE job go out that actually benefitted from it in the end... After all the job specific stuff was finished changing...

One area that CAD sections seem to work really well are in good old single family residential construction where many "typical details" rarely if ever change. I don't mean house sections, I still detail those in revit. I'm just talking about stuff like concrete pier details, soffit and facia details, deck connections blah blah blah.

Cole

[Scott Womack]

One area that CAD sections seem to work really well are in good old single family residential construction where many "typical details" rarely if ever change. I don't mean house sections, I still detail those in revit. I'm just talking about stuff like concrete pier details, soffit and facia details, deck connections blah blah blah

I can't dispute what you are saying, except to say, that it is better to recreate this information, a couple of items per project, until it is all drafting views in Revit. Unless your project files stay really, really, small (25 meg or less) it wil catch up to you. Our files are routinely in the 100 to 250 meg range. AutoCAD based views for detailing are a NO NO in those types of files.

Your project file will repond faster, and have less chance of becoming unstable if you avoid as many autocad drawings as possible. Site, and MEP/ consultant plan drawings can't be avoided entirely. 99% of the time when the file gets "squirrly" the unsatility seems to be traced back to some AutoCAD detail, or plan somewhere in the set.

[s17sharin]

Hi guys
Thanks for all information, i really appreciate them. The only reason i needed to do this was that our architect didnt like the revit internal elevations, so i was asked to put them out in cad, but i was just thinking if i ever want to bring them back in revit and coordinate with the elevation tags how could it be done. Now i know how to do it. Thanks.

[peakprecisiondesign]

I can't dispute what you are saying, except to say, that it is better to recreate this information, a couple of items per project, until it is all drafting views in Revit. Unless your project files stay really, really, small (25 meg or less) it wil catch up to you. Our files are routinely in the 100 to 250 meg range. AutoCAD based views for detailing are a NO NO in those types of files.

Your project file will repond faster, and have less chance of becoming unstable if you avoid as many autocad drawings as possible. Site, and MEP/ consultant plan drawings can't be avoided entirely. 99% of the time when the file gets "squirrly" the unsatility seems to be traced back to some AutoCAD detail, or plan somewhere in the set.

I see what your saying Scott. In all honesty I only use a few cad details (after reading your post I'll slowly start to convert them to revit when time allows). I do however know people that have TONS of these details slapped all over the place on drawings. I'm often surprised there isn't a "How to work a hammer" detail on some plans I've seen.