CAD Managers

Reply
Active Contributor
jlpeterson
Posts: 28
Registered: ‎08-16-2007
Message 11 of 18 (941 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-13-2009 02:40 PM in reply to: mcoffman
I'm a big believer that a revision number is universal across a project, but only affected sheets should be marked and reprinted. We do it for a number of reasons.

First, many times we will require a cost proposal for a revision prior to actually proceeding with the change. In these cases especially, keeping the same revision number across the multitude of affected disciplines helps reduce confusion with the design team and contractors. Plus, if a decision is made not to proceed, we only need nullify one revision number. This rarely happens, but it has occurred.

Second, two or more revision can be in the design stages concurrently. If revision 2, 3, and 4 are all started around the same time, and revision 2 gets held up for discussion, revision 3 and 4 can still go out the door. Obviously, we try best not to have this occur, but nothing in the universal system precludes it. Not so when using sheet independent revision records.

Lastly, when reviewing the set in the future, universal numbering just make it easier to make sense of a set of drawings. Say a revised toilet room arrangement causes changes across architectural, plumbing, and electrical sheets. Universal numbering allows us to see clearly how this one change affected all these disciplines. You don't have to go hunting through the set to understand the impact.

Jason
*Dean Saadallah
Message 12 of 18 (941 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-14-2009 05:02 AM in reply to: mcoffman
Noooooooooooooo!

CG needs to stay in that little dark room so as not to self-destruct :smileyhappy:)

--
Dean Saadallah
http://LTisACAD.blogspot.com
--
*Matt Dillon
Message 13 of 18 (941 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-16-2009 06:17 PM in reply to: mcoffman
No. Don't tell him to do that.

He's probably been living in his parents' basement for the last 20 years.

His head could explode.

That would be messy...

--

"K" wrote in message
news:6270847@discussion.autodesk.com...
clintonG wrote:
>
> As opposed to the licensed frauds that pose as architects, a genuine
> professional would impose a zero tolerance for slop; quality beng the most
> persued objective.

you need to venture out into the real world...
Valued Mentor
Randy_Culp
Posts: 1,257
Registered: ‎08-17-2007
Message 14 of 18 (941 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-19-2009 03:35 PM in reply to: mcoffman
> {quote:title=jlpeterson wrote:}{quote}
> I'm a big believer that a revision number is universal across a project, ....

depends on the project and industry ... we may have 3,000-20,000 drawings on a project, maintaining a constant revision numbers across those projects would just be silly, and VERY expensive.
New Member
kwood
Posts: 1
Registered: ‎10-12-2013
Message 15 of 18 (383 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

03-05-2014 11:40 AM in reply to: mcoffman

This indicision on each of the comments is basically rediculous. Catchup, the world is moving. You must go back to the days (And I've been there) of drawing on vellum with rapidigraph pins in ink. The reason we had a sheet activated revision control is simple... we did not want to reprint every d size vellum format to each subscribers. Therefore, we revised only the sheets with changes and sent out only the sheets we changed. Today, of course, we can send drawings to a plotter fast and easier than we did during the Ammonia days.

Get up to date, the drawing revision for every sheet as one is the way to go, why make it complicated.

I try to insure we stay abrest of top of the line software. The ASME standard calls for both.

 

*Expert Elite*
JGerth
Posts: 1,951
Registered: ‎12-05-2005
Message 16 of 18 (344 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

03-11-2014 10:16 AM in reply to: kwood

Thread necromancy -- ressurecting a zombie that's been dead for half a decade.

 

Noting that it's easier to plot out a fresh sheet from CAD than draw a new one on mylar, the cost of a plotted set of drawings (110 sheets, 24x36) - going to a half dozen recipients because one item on one sheet has been revised is substantially higher than the running a half dozen bluelines on that sheet used to be.  for that matter, running 6 plots of that one changed sheet is sheaper and simpler than doing a halfdozen copies of the set.

 

so the economics haven't changed since 2009

Distinguished Contributor
ScottHodges
Posts: 123
Registered: ‎10-15-2009
Message 17 of 18 (87 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

06-23-2014 10:18 PM in reply to: mcoffman
Updating the revision of every drawing, each time a minor change is made to one seems ridiculous. For those of us who often have hundreds of drawings in a set, the man hours required would be enough to send the company broke. We make revisions numerical, but the description describes the stage of the issue. For example, drawings in a set may have different numerical revisions, but the description next to the revision would be For Client Review, For Information, For Tender, For Contract, For Construction. Intermediate issues would be Revised as per Client Comments etc.
Distinguished Contributor
jest2525
Posts: 103
Registered: ‎10-22-2003
Message 18 of 18 (69 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

06-24-2014 10:34 AM in reply to: mcoffman

Most people in the industry don't understand Document Control 101.  I've seen many ideas of what "proper" document control should be.  What seems to be considered "proper" is what the P/A or P/M on a specific project thinks it should be.  That is THE worst reason to choose one reason over another.

 

Old school methodologies have always tracked drawings on an sheet-by-sheet basis.  This was a simple system that has worked for decades.  If it ain't broke...

 

A drawing's revision number should NOT change simply because another drawing in the set has changed.  That could conceivably imply that a specific sheet has been revised over and over when in actuality it has never been touched.

 

The method of "set" revisions leaves the ultimate end user, the contractor standing out in the field wondering why a drawing has been "revised" umphteen different times yet no obvious changes have occured.  That leaves them scratching their heads as they must now scrutinize each sheet to figure out what actually changed.

 

Never forget that the time the contractor spends scrutinizing drawing sets is far more valuable and expensive than the extra time the design team spends managing sheet-by-sheet revisions.  Anyone who chooses set revisions over sheet revisions is simply lazy.

You are not logged in.

Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register

Announcements
Manufacturing CAD & IT Manager Resource
Additional information for installing, licensing & deploying Inventor, the Product Design Suites and Factory Design Suites.

Need installation help?

Start with some of our most frequented solutions to get help installing your software.

Ask the Community


Up & Ready Blog

Boldly Install, Configure and Deploy Autodesk Software.

AutodeskHelp Blog

Your one-stop shop for the latest solutions, breaking news, and behind the scenes access to the world of Autodesk support.

Connect with Us

Twitter

Pinterest

Blog

Youtube