There are two ways to approach details in Revit: live model based views and 2D drafted views. Your example is a model based approached where it is necessary to create 3D model elements and a view that "looks" at them closely enough to explain what is necessary to carry out your design. The other way is to create a generic representation of that location in the model that can then reference a drafting view which is a drafted view of that part of the design that bears no connection to the actual model of the building except for your references in the documentation to look at that detail wherever it applies.
Both techniques are possible and suitable...and Revit provides for both approaches intentionally. The latter can help produce documentation quickly without requiring extensive accurate modelling because the model itself can be more generic in a majority of documentation, referring to typical detailed conditions. The closer you are to construction the more logical it may be to model very closely to what will be built instead of referring to 2D details or rather allowing your model to be able to produce specific detail conditions throughout the building.
I think of it as "not knowing what I don't know until I explore something more closely". It is only in the doing of the work that you become acquainted with the subtle issues at hand. Working in a computer to craft a building detail is distinctly different from actually holding the materials in your hand, cutting, welding, drilling, lifting into place and so on... So the further from the actual fabrication or construction of things I get the more inclined I am to model it as closely as I can, to enhance my own understanding of the implications of the design.
The risk or burden of "live modeling to detailing" is that a change to the model requires review and editing of the model everywhere it applies to be changed accordingly. So the advantage of a 2D drafting detail that is merely referenced is that the model need not be changed as much as the detail itself. Everywhere that detail is referenced, the detail is to explain what is required even if the model itself has less detail or even different. If you and your team are diligent about modelling very closely to what will be built then "live detail views" may be quite appropriate and successful. Ultimately it is up to you and your team to determine what is both efficient and necessary to ensure that the design you've promised your client will be built on time and and within the budget.
Steve Stafford
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
