CAD Managers

CAD Managers

Reply
Member
mcoffman
Posts: 4
Registered: ‎08-16-2007
Message 1 of 18 (6,525 Views)

Drawing Revision Standard?

6525 Views, 17 Replies
10-07-2009 08:59 AM
Greetings!

My design group is in the midst of a debate regarding drawing revision standards. Some argue that each sheet has an independent revision record (i.e. rev 1 on one drawing may be different than rev 1 on another). Another group argues that a rev is universal across a drawing set, but only affected drawings are marked with the revision. Still another group argues that the entire set should be marked with the revision so that it is known that the whole set is current to that revision.

When I refer to "marked with the revision", I'm referring to placing the revision number, note, and date into the title block (architectural style along the right side), not necessarliy clouding and adding the delta to each drawing area.

What do you all prefer?

Sincerely,
Michael Coffman
*Expert Elite*
JGerth
Posts: 2,050
Registered: ‎12-05-2005
Message 2 of 18 (6,525 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-07-2009 10:24 AM in reply to: mcoffman
Each sheet is revised individually, so Rev 1 on Sh 23 may be in response to Dept of Health comments made in April, and Rev 1 on Sh 54 may be done for Dept of Transportation in August.


seems to work -- but we're also adding an "Issue" chunk to the Title Block, which is uniform between sheets describing what that particular stack of paper was issued for, - Review, Bid, addendum, etc.
*Lance W.
Message 3 of 18 (6,525 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-07-2009 10:36 AM in reply to: mcoffman
Well I have always done "per package", that way there was never more than a
single "revision 1" in a set. Set gets reissued as Bob Subdivision Rev. 1,
instead of reissuing single sheets. Seems to cause less confusion.

Though I know plenty of places that do it per sheet also, as long as you are
consistent company wide and have good processes in place either is fine.

--

Lance W.



wrote in message
news:6267589@discussion.autodesk.com...
> Greetings!
>
> My design group is in the midst of a debate regarding drawing revision
> standards. Some argue that each sheet has an independent revision record
> (i.e. rev 1 on one drawing may be different than rev 1 on another).
> Another group argues that a rev is universal across a drawing set, but
> only affected drawings are marked with the revision. Still another group
> argues that the entire set should be marked with the revision so that it
> is known that the whole set is current to that revision.
>
> When I refer to "marked with the revision", I'm referring to placing the
> revision number, note, and date into the title block (architectural style
> along the right side), not necessarliy clouding and adding the delta to
> each drawing area.
>
> What do you all prefer?
>
> Sincerely,
> Michael Coffman
*larry
Message 4 of 18 (6,525 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-07-2009 11:37 AM in reply to: mcoffman
We do a by sheet, but update on the title sheet every time. By the index we
have a revision column with brief description next to sheets that were
revised.

--
Larry

"Lance W." wrote in message
news:6267669@discussion.autodesk.com...
Well I have always done "per package", that way there was never more than a
single "revision 1" in a set. Set gets reissued as Bob Subdivision Rev. 1,
instead of reissuing single sheets. Seems to cause less confusion.

Though I know plenty of places that do it per sheet also, as long as you are
consistent company wide and have good processes in place either is fine.

--

Lance W.



wrote in message
news:6267589@discussion.autodesk.com...
> Greetings!
>
> My design group is in the midst of a debate regarding drawing revision
> standards. Some argue that each sheet has an independent revision record
> (i.e. rev 1 on one drawing may be different than rev 1 on another).
> Another group argues that a rev is universal across a drawing set, but
> only affected drawings are marked with the revision. Still another group
> argues that the entire set should be marked with the revision so that it
> is known that the whole set is current to that revision.
>
> When I refer to "marked with the revision", I'm referring to placing the
> revision number, note, and date into the title block (architectural style
> along the right side), not necessarliy clouding and adding the delta to
> each drawing area.
>
> What do you all prefer?
>
> Sincerely,
> Michael Coffman
Valued Contributor
J.A.Mounteer
Posts: 100
Registered: ‎04-15-2009
Message 5 of 18 (6,525 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-07-2009 12:59 PM in reply to: mcoffman
In relation to architectural drafting vs technical. Since you said design group, I'm assuming you're coming from the same realm.

I've seen all three but have seen the universal number with the revision number only on the sheets that changed the most often.

The argument I've heard against this method and for numbering each sheet in the set with the current revision number is the same as the one against tracking each sheet individually. You simply don't know if R5 of A2.10 is concurrent with R6 of 2.11 or if you're missing R6 of 2.1, so you should place the number on every sheet. The counter argument is that you're not going to be printing a full set each time you reissue a drawing - unless perhaps the set is very small - so this method falls down in the end. The field will have R5 and R6 in their hands anyway, so you may as well only number the sheets that changed.

The argument I've heard for tracking each sheet individually never made much sense to me, which probably explains why I've only seen one guy advocating for it in the last 15 years. His argument was that it keeps the revision numbers for the set lower. However, if you're up to R12 on a single sheet, you've still issued 12 revisions even if it is only for one sheet.

Perhaps it's something that comes from parts drawings and technical drafting rather than architectural so it makes more sense there. In the architectural realm, tracking of this method makes sense for Disciplines, IMO, but not individual sheets.
Distinguished Contributor
strodeb
Posts: 205
Registered: ‎04-21-2008
Message 6 of 18 (6,525 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-08-2009 04:34 AM in reply to: mcoffman
In UK architecture the most used method is to change the revision only on the sheets that have changed.

You run an issue sheet for the project so it contains what the current revision should be for each drawing. Some issue sheets show all project drawings & highlights the ones you have sent for the recipient, this helps to identify if there is a new version of a layout & that you haven’t sent it to them. Others only show the drawings sent on that issue.

When you get to the end of the project you will have different layouts at different revisions. What you then do is check the last revision of each layout against the building that was built (there’s always a discrepancy somewhere). After correcting the layouts you revise every one of them to "AsBuilt" & then issue them as the final version ready for the O&M manuals, any ongoing FM, etc.
----------------------------------------------
Time is an illusion, lunchtime doubly so
*clintonG
Message 7 of 18 (6,525 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-08-2009 11:40 AM in reply to: mcoffman
This is a perfect use of RSS web feeds which update in near real-time and
recent developments supporting actual real time updates. Furthermore, the
updates should appear on the cover sheet which functions like the index in a
book.

Can you imagine any reliable and trustworthy publishing resource that
refused to provide an index to their product?

The problem as I've seen it is as you point out Michael. Fundamentally,
architects are idiots and cannot manage much of anything efficiently as they
are always too concerned with what they think is best when the rest of us
have already figured it out.

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. Thus every page in a drawing set must contain notation
regarding revisions whether such are present on that particular page or not
and each page must be linked or notated to master index which in this
context exists on the so-called cover page.


wrote in message
news:6267589@discussion.autodesk.com...
Greetings!

My design group is in the midst of a debate regarding drawing revision
standards. Some argue that each sheet has an independent revision record
(i.e. rev 1 on one drawing may be different than rev 1 on another). Another
group argues that a rev is universal across a drawing set, but only affected
drawings are marked with the revision. Still another group argues that the
entire set should be marked with the revision so that it is known that the
whole set is current to that revision.

When I refer to "marked with the revision", I'm referring to placing the
revision number, note, and date into the title block (architectural style
along the right side), not necessarliy clouding and adding the delta to each
drawing area.

What do you all prefer?

Sincerely,
Michael Coffman Edited by: Discussion_Admin on Oct 9, 2009 1:29 PM
*john coon
Message 8 of 18 (6,525 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-08-2009 12:58 PM in reply to: mcoffman
I agree....each sheet that HAS a revision is based on THAT sheets individual
revision

John Coon





wrote in message news:6267682@discussion.autodesk.com...
Each sheet is revised individually, so Rev 1 on Sh 23 may be in response to
Dept of Health comments made in April, and Rev 1 on Sh 54 may be done for
Dept of Transportation in August.


seems to work -- but we're also adding an "Issue" chunk to the Title Block,
which is uniform between sheets describing what that particular stack of
paper was issued for, - Review, Bid, addendum, etc.
*Matt Dillon
Message 9 of 18 (6,525 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-12-2009 08:16 PM in reply to: mcoffman
Ahem...

That would be "pursued".

Do you not own a spell-checker?

And what's "beng"?

Slop, indeed...

--

"clintonG" wrote in message
news:6268527@discussion.autodesk.com...
quality beng the most
persued objective. "

wrote in message
news:6267589@discussion.autodesk.com...
Greetings!

My design group is in the midst of a debate regarding drawing revision
standards. Some argue that each sheet has an independent revision record
(i.e. rev 1 on one drawing may be different than rev 1 on another). Another
group argues that a rev is universal across a drawing set, but only affected
drawings are marked with the revision. Still another group argues that the
entire set should be marked with the revision so that it is known that the
whole set is current to that revision.

When I refer to "marked with the revision", I'm referring to placing the
revision number, note, and date into the title block (architectural style
along the right side), not necessarliy clouding and adding the delta to each
drawing area.

What do you all prefer?

Sincerely,
Michael Coffman

Edited by: Discussion_Admin on Oct 9, 2009 1:29 PM
*K
Message 10 of 18 (6,525 Views)

Re: Drawing Revision Standard?

10-13-2009 01:22 PM in reply to: mcoffman
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...
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 or visit the Installation and Licensing Forum to get help installing your software.