I am a recent hire at a small architecture firm (I got hired through Archinect!) and one of the many tasks that I've been given is to create and organize a Details Library for our office. I just thought I'd create a forum that asks how your firms structure the organization of construction details.
I'm going through the archives, and was going to begin just by creating folders for details specific to the building type (we do a wide variety of projects at our office) so this would look like:
A: Labs
B: Restaurants
C: Private residences
D: Multi-family Residences
E: Educational Facilities ETC.
Then I realized there is going to be a lot of subdivisions within each category, as well as some overlapping between details that can be found in multiple types of structures.
Which led me to look for threads on architecture forums on how other firms might organize their data--does anyone have a template structure they might be willing to share that they find useful and flexible? Thanks!
I usually say - use that job for this and that job for that. You should organize it by assembly not building typologies. CSI spec format if you have time......I Have always wanted to organize my library but never have time....
Everybody get tasked to create a detail library at a new job, which is next to impossible because you don't even know the system well enough to do so without having to bug somebody 50 times a day. After a couple weeks, the real work will start to pile up and everybody will forget about the detail library until they hire a new guy at which time the library will get assigned to him. It is a vicious cycle.
So I proposed it as building typologies and the boss turned that idea down.
I think we'll create 2 main folders (commercial vs. residential) and then I am going to move forward with developing a key nomenclature system within the office
You know... one of the best organizations I've seen is by price... if you have a good cost breakdown from the program, you know what percentage of the budget you can allot to a certain item such as lighting, finishes, etc... So if you have a very limited budget, you won't be looking through catalogs of very expensive light fixtures.
you may want to shorten the naming convention. talk to IT about how longer file names will impact the server or file storage system. ODN's suggestion about organizing the details by building assemblies is the way to go. CSI format is widely used for detail libraries.
Just wait until you get to the conversation about how to add details in the future and who will vet them before they get the stamp of approval. If you have more than one designer in the house it gets messy quick.
Abraham, I recommended using CSI as a way to categorize our details, but the idea was not received well in my office, they want things to be simpler and easier to search for. What we've done is create a nomenclature system that lists the detailed object first, construction method/material second, a job/project number 3rd, and any other miscellaneous descriptors last (if necessary).
We will place all details in an archived folder on a server (we are very electronic in the office to minimize printing and paper waste). The nomenclature we came up with looks like this:
base-stone-1111-4_inch_with_reveal.dwg
or ceiling_reveal-wood-2222.dwg
We'll see how well it gets executed, but in theory it is simple and logical and will list details in alphabetical order and will be searchable by jobnumber. Wish me luck!
I suggest using an established system like Masterformat, or even the less familiar Uniformat, as a prefix naming convention. I am an advocate of using these systems as they are internationally accepted in the construction industry and the Masterformat categories are expected./tested professional knowledge, which means daily reinforcement of necessary jargon.
Uniformat is nice for assemblies (B101 - Floor Construction, B102 - Roof construction, etc.). Working a Revit template or an AutoCAD template like this would be reasonable in my book and I'm currently working on our Detail Library in Revit with this in mind.
Using Masterformat for elements simplifies searching for individual items when you understand the prefix and are diligent about naming conventions. In Revit, my preferred organization is to keep a 2-digit number in front of the name, with no other acronyms in there. I title everything from general to specific, so derivatives share the majority of the title, effectively grouping like with like.
For Revit, all detail components are under a category as opposed to model components in their individual categories, so I don't stress about adding additional info (firm acronym, abbreviation relating back to ootb categories, etc) in the name.Firm acronym is a traditional one, but it's more letters to tire my eyes after years of staring at this stuff.
I also think categories like you described in the OP are daunting and will result in more confusion. View names or notes could clarify this. In revit, you may be able to define a view type/filter with commercial/residential, but I would only sort like this if searching becomes a challenge.
Mar 31, 23 3:29 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Details Library Structuring - how does your firm organize details?
Hello,
I am a recent hire at a small architecture firm (I got hired through Archinect!) and one of the many tasks that I've been given is to create and organize a Details Library for our office. I just thought I'd create a forum that asks how your firms structure the organization of construction details.
I'm going through the archives, and was going to begin just by creating folders for details specific to the building type (we do a wide variety of projects at our office) so this would look like:
A: Labs
B: Restaurants
C: Private residences
D: Multi-family Residences
E: Educational Facilities ETC.
Then I realized there is going to be a lot of subdivisions within each category, as well as some overlapping between details that can be found in multiple types of structures.
Which led me to look for threads on architecture forums on how other firms might organize their data--does anyone have a template structure they might be willing to share that they find useful and flexible? Thanks!
I usually say - use that job for this and that job for that. You should organize it by assembly not building typologies. CSI spec format if you have time......I Have always wanted to organize my library but never have time....
Everybody get tasked to create a detail library at a new job, which is next to impossible because you don't even know the system well enough to do so without having to bug somebody 50 times a day. After a couple weeks, the real work will start to pile up and everybody will forget about the detail library until they hire a new guy at which time the library will get assigned to him. It is a vicious cycle.
This.
So I proposed it as building typologies and the boss turned that idea down.
I think we'll create 2 main folders (commercial vs. residential) and then I am going to move forward with developing a key nomenclature system within the office
such as: (Project # - type/location - material/finish - application/style - revision # .dwg)
so a file might read as: 1154-base-stone-flush-01.dwg or 1223-soffit-wood-03.dwg... we'll see if this works once I start copying and renaming files.
@Chigurh I think you're right. I guess it's my turn to be a part of this vicious cycle.
You know... one of the best organizations I've seen is by price... if you have a good cost breakdown from the program, you know what percentage of the budget you can allot to a certain item such as lighting, finishes, etc... So if you have a very limited budget, you won't be looking through catalogs of very expensive light fixtures.
you may want to shorten the naming convention. talk to IT about how longer file names will impact the server or file storage system. ODN's suggestion about organizing the details by building assemblies is the way to go. CSI format is widely used for detail libraries.
Just wait until you get to the conversation about how to add details in the future and who will vet them before they get the stamp of approval. If you have more than one designer in the house it gets messy quick.
Thanks for the replies everyone.
Abraham, I recommended using CSI as a way to categorize our details, but the idea was not received well in my office, they want things to be simpler and easier to search for. What we've done is create a nomenclature system that lists the detailed object first, construction method/material second, a job/project number 3rd, and any other miscellaneous descriptors last (if necessary).
We will place all details in an archived folder on a server (we are very electronic in the office to minimize printing and paper waste). The nomenclature we came up with looks like this:
base-stone-1111-4_inch_with_reveal.dwg
or ceiling_reveal-wood-2222.dwg
We'll see how well it gets executed, but in theory it is simple and logical and will list details in alphabetical order and will be searchable by jobnumber. Wish me luck!
Albert Montenegro
I suggest using an established system like Masterformat, or even the less familiar Uniformat, as a prefix naming convention. I am an advocate of using these systems as they are internationally accepted in the construction industry and the Masterformat categories are expected./tested professional knowledge, which means daily reinforcement of necessary jargon.
Uniformat is nice for assemblies (B101 - Floor Construction, B102 - Roof construction, etc.). Working a Revit template or an AutoCAD template like this would be reasonable in my book and I'm currently working on our Detail Library in Revit with this in mind.
Using Masterformat for elements simplifies searching for individual items when you understand the prefix and are diligent about naming conventions. In Revit, my preferred organization is to keep a 2-digit number in front of the name, with no other acronyms in there. I title everything from general to specific, so derivatives share the majority of the title, effectively grouping like with like.
examples: 05_Nelson Stud, 08_Mullion_Sill, 08_Mullion_Jamb
For Revit, all detail components are under a category as opposed to model components in their individual categories, so I don't stress about adding additional info (firm acronym, abbreviation relating back to ootb categories, etc) in the name.Firm acronym is a traditional one, but it's more letters to tire my eyes after years of staring at this stuff.
I also think categories like you described in the OP are daunting and will result in more confusion. View names or notes could clarify this. In revit, you may be able to define a view type/filter with commercial/residential, but I would only sort like this if searching becomes a challenge.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.