DWG EXPORT setting

[WFTDesign]

On a previous fee-based project, I started with Revit and was going to complete the project with Revit, I had been stuck at 88% progress for three weeks and gave up and decided to finish the project in AutoCAD. I have converted to DWG files. Unfortunately, as expected, it took over 45 hours to finish the project due to lot of changes of layers, entites, etc. I was exposed to DWG EXPORT SETUP in the Revit, which is wonderful feature but NOT PERFECT. So I have REVIT IDEA suggest. 

For Sections, Elevation, Detail drawings. They are pure graphic drawings, not 3D drawings. Take picture of a view, draw heavier lines at close and draw lighter lines at far. Create G-DETL layers instead of A-WALL, A-GLAZ, A-DOOR layers for the Sections, Elevations, Details, etc. 

At exported DWG files, I had to change too many entities of A-WALL, A-GLAZ, A-DOOR to Graphic layers such as G-ELEV, G-DETL, G-SECT , etc.   I did set up A-WALL-INTR to cyan, heavy lines, then in the graphic drawings, all are heavy lines, I had to change them to lightest lines at far, for one example. 

DWG EXPORT SETUP TEST - Elevation - South Elevation- SAMPLE.dwg

[ipselute]

It sounds incredibly complicated. Wouldn't it be easier to convert Revit views to drafting views (CAD views) and edit them as desired? In Revit.

You gave up Revit for just 10-12%. Even with those simple CAD tools in Revit it would take less time to finish the project than exporting, converting lines, managing layers, etc.

If you need some specific CAD details , you can do it in Autocad, then importing it to Revit. This way you can have both 3D model AND all CAD drawings in one (united) place (namely Revit).

[WFTDesign]

If you think that way then that would be because I DON'T HAVE any in-office experience using Revit AT ALL. I run a one-man home business without any fellow co-workers to check with me about how I was doing. 

I have been learning Revit pretty much on my own, without attending classes, workshops, etc. I did learn Revit all by myself using books, Lynda, AutoDesk Support. 

At that time, I had been stuck in progress at 88% for three weeks, I had been in continuous contacts with the AutoDesk Support at all times (Many times, I would scream to myself about wanting to work with someone in Architectural firms). Many of them had to do with creating details and sections. And at one architectural firm, I had an interview with them and they TOLD ME that they are going Revit 100% and AutoCAD 0%. 

BUT, I did complete that project in AutoCAD only successfully and my client was pleased with my hard work. 

I hope you will understand. Thank you. 

[ipselute]

@WFTDesign: Learning by myself works best for me too. It's good to learn in your own shoes, by your own schedule, nobody to stress you out for little advantage. I've been working in Autocad for 14+ years, as well as in other CAD software (Allplan, Strucad, Datacad), but i haven't found any other more advanced software than Revit. I admit Revit "lacks" some essential tools , especially in the Structural part of it.

Actually, the basic framework is there, it could have even more options than it presently have, but Autodesk can't adress every particular request it gets from any random user. Perhaps you could consider using extensions for Revit.

Revit is like Autocad, somewhat general, but at more elevated levels than Autocad. It's important for Autodesk to keep the big picture, not losing time with every little detail.

I see Autocad as manual labor, you can draw anything in Autocad, but it's not really smart, especially in 3D, because all you do is simple geometry. It lacks smart objects, and databases, and advanced Reporting/Scheduling tools. Because Autocad is CAD and Revit is BIM. Of course Autocad Architecture is smarter than Autocad, but not as smart as Revit. And that counts a lot, especially in very large projects with tight schedules and materials' quantities (BOM) oversight.

When you draw in Autocad, you don't do it the same way you would draw by hand. The same goes for Revit, don't try to do Revit in Autocad-style. It's just different. Like you can't use MS Word and MS Excel in one single software. They are distinct in features and intents. Cheers.

P.S. I believe Revit should have more CAD skills added to it, but it's really hard work convincing Autodesk to do so.

[WFTDesign]

@ipselute

I agree and can see about Revit being not smart on structural parts, happens to be MY FAVORITE TOPIC! I can read Structural Plans and create Architectural Details out of the Structural Details while working for the architectural firms. They loved my AutoCAD detailing work! I believe I created five support cases just to deal with complicated structural parts in Revit!

I am using Revit LT, so the extensions will be out of option unless I can sacrifice $375 a month for a new car loan.

Yes, I can see that AutoCAD is pure 2D while Revit is pure 3D. That was a partial reason why I would like to go Revit 100% and forget AutoCAD. I was advised by a local architect that his firm is going 100% Revit after having AutoCAD Architecture and asked me to be proficient in Revit. That is another reason why I decided that way.

And to give an example, if Architect tells me to re-size that one window. In Revit, it would take me just five seconds just to change from 24x36 to 36x36 and that is all done. In AutoCAD, I would fix that window in a plan, oh right, need to fix that window in section, oh right need to fix that window in exterior elevation, and if I do need to fix that in interior elevation, too?  That is a HUGE difference! That is why I decided to go 100% Revit, but after seeing that hardship, I have to be flexible.

But I appreciate your tips.

Starting now, I am doing new project and name that as P806 Cabin Addt Restart and hope that will help me confident be able to finish the Revit project using a mixture of both Revit and AutoCAD. I do know another local architectural firm doing the mixture of both Revit and AutoCAD for final construction documents.

Let’s HOPE that AutoDesk will see the NEED for more CAD skills incorporated and our hard work would convince them!  That is why I created this Revit Idea!!!

[ipselute]

@WFTDesign: I totally agree with you. BIM is the for the present/future. Take care about the precision you draw in Autocad. I've seen many architects working quite loose in Revit. They don't care much about precise dimensioning of elements. Nor care about slightly overlapping objects. The structural engineers on the other hand, they tend to be more precise and always prefer "round" values for dimensions. That's for technological reasons, not trying to make their projects hell for the construction teams.

P.S. I think we should stress out Autodesk with every occasion and make them understand you can't have BIM without CAD. At least not yet, with present-day computing power. Maybe with quantum-computing we could model everything 3D and need 2D sketching no more.

[WFTDesign]

---

---

@ipseluteAs of now, I have figured out way to do both Revit and AutoCAD details in the Revit file. BIG KUDOS TO YOU for advising me that way. If I had known this and called Michael J Fox (Back To The Future movies) to go back to April with that knowledge, then I would have not gone 100% AutoCAD conversation. I would have stayed with Revit to complete the project and incorporating many AutoCAD Details. 

Oh well, experience is KEY.

But I would still to call on Autodesk to do BETTER at converting to DWG files, especially the Section and Elevation drawings. They should export the section and elevation drawings based on GRAPHIC, not materials like A-WALL, A-GLAZ, etc.  The goal should be to be time saver as much as possible, make sense? 

[ipselute]

You learned it the "easy" way. I had to learn to that the hard way: in Allplan. Which was totally alien to me at the time. So called "friendly" people told me the best way to switch from CAD to BIM would be Allplan, because it got both BIM and CAD capabilities. Like a universal wonder-tool. It even had layers, just like Autocad. It got architectural tools, and reinforcing tools for concrete elements, and topo commands, etc.

Piece of advice: DON'T listen to anybody on that! Always go your own way. What's good for others may not suit you AT ALL. 

Allplan seemed like a fairy tale at first. But it got such a complicated interface, with hundreds of layers, with hundreds of drawing files, with fixed numbering system. You really needed a map to surf an entire project scheme. Half the interface in english, the other half in german! That complicated system started to make sense to me only after an entire year, and after finishing 3 different projects.

You got "lucky". Sort of. Revit and Autocad are somewhat compatible in export-import. Allplan to Autocad is no good. Allplan to Revit is no good. Allplan, and Tekla, and other software keeps you "prisoner" in their own system.

Revit feels the most natural, even when it lacks obvious commands or options. Paradoxically, the lack of layers in Revit makes it more efficient. Layers are just a human construct. There are no layers in a building, at least not in the sense they are defined in Autocad.

 I just hope Revit developers will manage to refine (=to make usable) the CAD tools in Revit to the same level the CAD tools are in Allplan. Like seamless integration and interplay.

Another piece of advice: free yourself from the Autocad philosophy, break the chains, break the layers paradigm.

Layers are just like any ancient language: dead. There is no future for Autocad. Like there is no future for diesel engines.

[WFTDesign]

Okay, Of course, I am still layer addict,  LOL.  But, I will find much comfort in using both AutoCAD and Revit then completing the project using Revit.  

Allplan link:  https://www.allplan.com/products/allplan-architecture/

Is that right one? 

"I just hope Revit developers will manage to refine (=to make usable) the CAD tools in Revit to the same level the CAD tools are in Allplan. Like seamless integration and interplay."... I AGREE. 

[ipselute]

@WFTDesign: I was reffering to Allplan in general : https://www.allplan.com/en/. 

You should know there is a dirty trick with Allplan. It is modular. One module for Achitecture, one module for Engineering, one module for Topo, one module for MEP, one module for 3d/associative views, etc. You get the ideea.

Thats great, isn't? You buy and load into RAM memory just the module you need (arch, eng, mep, topo, etc) ! Not exactly. Some modules depends on others, hence the need to buy several modules depending on what you're planning to do with Allplan. But, rest assured, no Allplan dealer/vendor is gonna tell you that before you buy at least one module.

E.G. You may want to use Allplan for Engineering. Allplan doesn't do steel structures shop drawings. It only does concrete and rebar detailing. Quite good at it, actually. BUT... Engineering module requires the Architecture module and the 3D/associative views module preinstalled. Similar scenarios goes for the MEP modules, topo modules, energy module, etc.

Why do i call it a dirty trick? Because each module is not very expensive ( varying from 500 to 1000 € aprox.), but you have to buy several. Of course you get a discount when buying several modules, but that's kind of complicated to account in. It's a financial haze. You end up spending more money and more time to fix the configuration you need.

I don't blame the modular ideea, i find it good, i just wish Revit to be modular (little side ideea: Google Chrome is so fast because it is modular). It's the financial part i don't like in Allplan. Smells like a Ponzi scheme to me.