Instead of a specific detail, how about this week we share our favorite building sections or section details? If you can't share your current work for privacy reasons, share your philosophy on what makes a section drawing good or bad.
Wood Guy
Sep 11, 21 10:20 am
I do a basic section as part of schematic design, often showing how sunlight will enter, as my focus is on high performance homes. Then I do pretty detailed sections for CDs, at least by residential standards, since my assemblies are never standard construction.
ivanmillya
Sep 13, 21 8:40 am
Alright, I'll bite. This is a residential project I'm working on here in the office. I typically approach building sections from the perspective that a 1/4" scale drawing is really a roadmap to find detailed information on other sheets. The notes, tags, etc. all point to other relevant parts of the drawing set, and therefore, the actual information is limited to general heights, elevation markers, room, window, and door tags, and basic structural information.
This is also the first project our office is producing fully within Revit, so there are some kinks to work out, but so far I'm satisfied with the graphic quality and information being shown.
vivisection
Sep 18, 21 9:53 am
We also treat sections as a road map- but more specifically for construction assemblies and level / structure heights, i.e. generally show wall, floor, roof assemblies graphically and tag them very similar to what you have. We usually clip our sections though so they don't show much information in elevation beyond and also don't tag openings in section. For highly specific sectional details, we get to those via a plan view and not a callout on the section. I would guess you've got details of the roof ridge and eaves, and we would tag those on the roof plan rather than referencing them on the section. I've gone back and forth about what makes the most sense and kind of landed on that for the time being. We also reference typical wall sections from the plan view. Way back when I started in CAD, we drafted our sections and never showed an exterior door or window in the building section and then would do a callout for the typical wall section detail. Revit makes it really hard to not show those exterior openings so we've switched to referencing typical wall sections from plan views.
ivanmillya
Sep 18, 21 10:38 am
I saw a workflow someone did in ArchiCad where they used sections to tag assemblies, specifically as a block of text, where each line represented a layer in the assembly (like a wall might be several lines of text working from exterior to interior). Nothing else was tagged except doors and windows being cut through. It looked really smart. I might try it out on my next document set.
vivisection
Sep 20, 21 10:22 pm
Yeah, we actually do that too if it’s residential or small commercial with only a few assembly types and we aren’t drafting all the assemblies individually. If it’s something the scale of a house with quarter inch sections it’s really legible and works well.
Chad Miller
Sep 21, 21 10:34 am
We do something like that in our SD drawings. When we move to DD and CD we use an actual tag that references our assemblies sheet. This includes all walls, roofs, and floors.
kjpn
Sep 14, 21 6:55 pm
nice work, looks awesome for that scale. i'm more lazy and just show flat poche for cut areas. on big residential projects its hard to model all that structure in revit.
ivanmillya
Sep 15, 21 7:28 am
Fair. None of the structure is modeled, except the general wall, floor, deck, and roof assemblies, as well as the ceiling below the roof trusses. All of the joists, LVLs, truss profile, insulation, and studs are drafting components placed into that particular section view. At the moment, we only use Revit as a means to produce base documents that we then detail in 2D (still within Revit).
Wood Guy
Sep 15, 21 7:31 am
I thought that was the point of Revit? I'm an Autocad dinosaur but draw detailed sections. The Revit sections I've seen often have errors, but builders need to understand how you intend the building to go together, and building officials usually require it--what do you do instead?
ivanmillya
Sep 15, 21 7:35 am
We have a structural engineer who works in CAD. We model our building architecturally in Revit (which uses 3D assemblies instead of lines like ACAD), then export DWGs to go to our SE. They then do their structural drawings, and we coordinate within our sections and details to fill in the poche with the necessary 2D elements. On the occasion where we have an SE who uses Revit, it's a different story, where they take our model and add structural information via a structural workset.
We're still learning Revit as an office, so a lot of our document production relies on using a basic model (walls, windows, doors, roofs, floors, stairs, and railings all modeled correctly), and then using "Detail Components" (which are 2d drafting items created in Revit) to fill in the blanks on elevations and sections. All detail sheets are made with drafting items, produced in Revit. When we get better, we may start modeling to a higher level of detail, which will mean less 2d components.
Non Sequitur
Sep 18, 21 11:23 am
Ivan, that's the workflow I try to have in my projects, regardless of size and whether it's CAD or BIM. Sections (1:20 scale) get levels, major dims for openings and features, and tags. We try to avoid writing out assembly descriptions in more than one place since it cuts down on the copy/paste errors tho... and I do have to constantly delete texts and dims or irrelevant things made by others in the office (or things too small to see when printed). No... you can't draw a membrane lap at 1:50 scale and expect the GC to know your intent.
One of many. I do include an arsenal of 1:5 scale (and some 1:2) section details which are callouts of the main sections since you don't build up your window sill using a building section afterall.
ivanmillya
Sep 18, 21 12:17 pm
NS - Something I've taken from when I used to work in AutoCAD is that I've created a "generic" family of doors and windows; they're entirely stripped of hardware, special trims (depending on how traditional our project is, I'll model in a stand-in exterior trim for elevations), and everything else. They're essentially symbols that *represent* doors and windows.
Then I have neurotically-organized window and door detail sheets that use exclusively drafting views that detail out the manufacturer's window along with our flashing, membranes, trims, rough or masonry opening details, etc. So essentially, my sections and floor plans (at 1/4 scale... 1:50 metric?) are really thorough diagrams that tell the builder where to find the actual detailed information, often within drafting views or dumb schedules.
Instead of a specific detail, how about this week we share our favorite building sections or section details? If you can't share your current work for privacy reasons, share your philosophy on what makes a section drawing good or bad.
I do a basic section as part of schematic design, often showing how sunlight will enter, as my focus is on high performance homes. Then I do pretty detailed sections for CDs, at least by residential standards, since my assemblies are never standard construction.
Alright, I'll bite. This is a residential project I'm working on here in the office. I typically approach building sections from the perspective that a 1/4" scale drawing is really a roadmap to find detailed information on other sheets. The notes, tags, etc. all point to other relevant parts of the drawing set, and therefore, the actual information is limited to general heights, elevation markers, room, window, and door tags, and basic structural information.
This is also the first project our office is producing fully within Revit, so there are some kinks to work out, but so far I'm satisfied with the graphic quality and information being shown.
We also treat sections as a road map- but more specifically for construction assemblies and level / structure heights, i.e. generally show wall, floor, roof assemblies graphically and tag them very similar to what you have. We usually clip our sections though so they don't show much information in elevation beyond and also don't tag openings in section. For highly specific sectional details, we get to those via a plan view and not a callout on the section. I would guess you've got details of the roof ridge and eaves, and we would tag those on the roof plan rather than referencing them on the section. I've gone back and forth about what makes the most sense and kind of landed on that for the time being. We also reference typical wall sections from the plan view. Way back when I started in CAD, we drafted our sections and never showed an exterior door or window in the building section and then would do a callout for the typical wall section detail. Revit makes it really hard to not show those exterior openings so we've switched to referencing typical wall sections from plan views.
I saw a workflow someone did in ArchiCad where they used sections to tag assemblies, specifically as a block of text, where each line represented a layer in the assembly (like a wall might be several lines of text working from exterior to interior). Nothing else was tagged except doors and windows being cut through. It looked really smart. I might try it out on my next document set.
Yeah, we actually do that too if it’s residential or small commercial with only a few assembly types and we aren’t drafting all the assemblies individually. If it’s something the scale of a house with quarter inch sections it’s really legible and works well.
We do something like that in our SD drawings. When we move to DD and CD we use an actual tag that references our assemblies sheet. This includes all walls, roofs, and floors.
nice work, looks awesome for that scale. i'm more lazy and just show flat poche for cut areas. on big residential projects its hard to model all that structure in revit.
Fair. None of the structure is modeled, except the general wall, floor, deck, and roof assemblies, as well as the ceiling below the roof trusses. All of the joists, LVLs, truss profile, insulation, and studs are drafting components placed into that particular section view. At the moment, we only use Revit as a means to produce base documents that we then detail in 2D (still within Revit).
I thought that was the point of Revit? I'm an Autocad dinosaur but draw detailed sections. The Revit sections I've seen often have errors, but builders need to understand how you intend the building to go together, and building officials usually require it--what do you do instead?
We have a structural engineer who works in CAD. We model our building architecturally in Revit (which uses 3D assemblies instead of lines like ACAD), then export DWGs to go to our SE. They then do their structural drawings, and we coordinate within our sections and details to fill in the poche with the necessary 2D elements. On the occasion where we have an SE who uses Revit, it's a different story, where they take our model and add structural information via a structural workset.
We're still learning Revit as an office, so a lot of our document production relies on using a basic model (walls, windows, doors, roofs, floors, stairs, and railings all modeled correctly), and then using "Detail Components" (which are 2d drafting items created in Revit) to fill in the blanks on elevations and sections. All detail sheets are made with drafting items, produced in Revit. When we get better, we may start modeling to a higher level of detail, which will mean less 2d components.
Ivan, that's the workflow I try to have in my projects, regardless of size and whether it's CAD or BIM. Sections (1:20 scale) get levels, major dims for openings and features, and tags. We try to avoid writing out assembly descriptions in more than one place since it cuts down on the copy/paste errors tho... and I do have to constantly delete texts and dims or irrelevant things made by others in the office (or things too small to see when printed). No... you can't draw a membrane lap at 1:50 scale and expect the GC to know your intent.
One of many. I do include an arsenal of 1:5 scale (and some 1:2) section details which are callouts of the main sections since you don't build up your window sill using a building section afterall.
NS - Something I've taken from when I used to work in AutoCAD is that I've created a "generic" family of doors and windows; they're entirely stripped of hardware, special trims (depending on how traditional our project is, I'll model in a stand-in exterior trim for elevations), and everything else. They're essentially symbols that *represent* doors and windows.
Then I have neurotically-organized window and door detail sheets that use exclusively drafting views that detail out the manufacturer's window along with our flashing, membranes, trims, rough or masonry opening details, etc. So essentially, my sections and floor plans (at 1/4 scale... 1:50 metric?) are really thorough diagrams that tell the builder where to find the actual detailed information, often within drafting views or dumb schedules.