Best Lineweights on Autocad for Architectural Drawings
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
rodriguezwairespleet.blogspot.com
Source: https://archinect.com/forum/thread/150240441/lineweights-guys
...and your point is? Some people don't know or don't care. I certainly take the time to make my shit legible... which quickly becomes a problem for the GC because they can't hide their slimy shortcuts when I have instructions right there in their faces in crisp 1:2 details.
So you're venting? Maybe vent to the people who drew that garbage?
You* get what you pay for.
*not you the contractor, "you" the client. Sorry you have a cheap client.
"Lineweights, lineweights?! This about LINEWEIGHTS!?"
I don't have a problem with the lineweights per se, but the dimensioning, it's shit.
What scale are these two snippets? Are these the only places the relevant information is conveyed?
That's a problem, but this, ain't about LINEWEIGHTS.
Isn't it just a little bit about lineweights?
Like I said on the plan, maybe. On the elevation, yeah, but I've found that offices are pretty resistant to the "depth" control on elevations. That solves everything, and is the coolest thing that Revit has added. So yeah, but...
Understood. This and another thread on LWs both seemed to head quickly to the tech involved-- and this seems like a hotspot. But I also wonder, separately, if there's a segment of the field who don't understand the importance of proper LWs and other critical conventions, like dimension strings.
citizen, definitely. Add onto that comment the fact that paper-less has contributed to that lack of understanding.
I was once being recruited for a job teaching AutoCAD to HS students. I refused to do it unless they learned hand drafting first because, while lineweights certainly can be controlled well in ACAD, I found it hard to explain to people who never learned to use a pencil WHY lineweights mattered.
Users should not change anything on a whim tho. Set an office template and you're good for almost every situation. Just don't touch my template or there will be trouble.
Yeah, change the defaults in the template, but don't let the staff change anything without permission after.
lol sorry guys yes I'm ranting.
Yes it could be improper scaling. but this is a floor plan and I doubt there would be much if any difference in the "blob" effect if was at 3/16-1/8-1/4.
You guys are the architects so I think this is the right place. Further more this is the way your young up and comers are doing their drawings (this and worse is very very common these days) maybe keep this in mind when you get new guys under you if you don't train the next generation who will ? Why do you think your overall pay is going down? Why is the profession of architect is not as it was 20 years ago why do you think more and more people are going with "designers" and not a full architect. You guys are gonna "not my problem and field verify" yourselves out of a job.
Lol I have to pay extra for legible drawings? no how about you do your job and earn your 60 to 100 grand salary that you complain is not enough
I'm not hating on architects just the bad ones. Sorry if I struck a nerve with you guys.
I wish you luck in the projects to come
You simply need to work with better clients and consultants.
Let me see if I understand. 1/4" drawings, drawings that I would do basic overall dimensions, openings and keying on of plan details, enlarged details and sections. And, I do this so we can convey more info, at larger scales. You want to have legibility, at 1/8", or 1/4" of material components? You're looking at the wrong sheets for the info you need. I'm going to need to speak to your boss. - Architect Chad
"You guys are gonna "not my problem and field verify" yourselves out of a job."
Tell that to the fucking profit hungry shitty developers and rich kids out there unwilling to pay for the time and effort quality requires. One shitty asshole makes the entire room stink.
As long as you are paying at least as much as the table above (from RS Means), then you'll get quality work (at least from me). Most developers I've worked with pay between 1/4 & 1/2 of this, and get what they pay for.
You simply need to work with better clients and consultants
yea ok man ill tell this to my boss and will just turn down projects and money got it.
Better than making gross generalizations based on a few shot examples.
Newengland12, if you're losing time and money on every project because of shitty clients (and/or consultants) then yeah, you absolutely need to be turning them down. There's a time and place to accept that not everything will turn a profit, but as a general rule, if you keep "getting screwed" then look at the common denominator in that equation.
Newengland12, please excuse my fellow peers on this forum that take everything personally.
Its my experience (working in a large office in a major city) that no one teaches youngins in school about lineweights (and many other things). When schools like SciArc that charge a buttload of cash but dont teach kids simple shit like lineweights, rather focusing on stupid parametric forms, this is the end result. Also sorry to harp on SciArc but that was just an example.
Technologist learn about linewieghts in school.
Dec 9, 20 10:41 am ·
·
He probably printed on 8.5"x11 and is wondering why line weight is fucked.
I don't take it personal. I admire and respect the field and profession of architecture very much. It truly is lost to the public on your service to society.Your underpaid for the amount of schooling required and forced to build sub par building that's not progressing anything. But still there are standards to be kept no reason to take things personally. Sorry if I offended anyone
No offense taken. We're a thick skinned bunch & the snark runs deep.
Takes two to tango.
One, the client/developer/contractor who wants his drawings yesterday, and an architect who is willing to bend over and comply.
Each deserves the other...
Newengland12,
you looking for columns on architectural drawings?!
LOL....Lord help you!
Check structural - they're more accurate...architects don't like columns, beams, lintels...everything is supported magically, we don't need no stinkin' columns! They get in the way of "architecture".
Not even close to reality Aps. Even mediocre offices will show this stuff accurately.
Having computers nowdays, and the ability to xref each others work - at least in acad - helps tremendously as far as co-ordination is concerned. However, long time ago when we used pencils and papers, fuckups happened more frequently, including missing columns. Seen it with my own eyes on several occasions.
that was a long time ago...probably used an abacus to determine the size of those columns.
You must not have had the kind of mean job captains I did. I believe I might have been physically beaten if I ever left a column off a floor plan. Accurate sizes of structural members were sometimes an issue (usually because the SE didn't get us the final sizes until the last minute), but missing a column completely?!?!?!?
Speaking of this.....how the hell do you change lineweights of projection lines of reveals on walls in Revit. They come out soooo thick! I cannot find in the visibility graphics how to change this other than manually going in and changing the line type of each side of the reveal. Not the best use of time!
Line weight tool. Just type 'LW', select the desired line weight from the drop down menu on your ribbon, select the lines that need to change, done. With reveals you have to double click b/c you're changing the line weight of the wall being cut as well as the edge of the reveal itself.
Or use the sweeps object style
Under walls. You can also create your own sub types for finer control.
I don't even think this is Revit.
archisel text? Who does that in revit? Plus the fonts are different in the symbols?
How could this be drawn? I am discouraged
the line weight is overall too thick in the example. Honestly line weight is not as critical in construction document as it serves in design presentation drawings. You can illustrate most CD drawings with Light, Medium, Heavy to show hierarchy in a CD set. Just have them correspond to the drawing scale. Revit has a setting for that, how thick weight 1,2,3 appears under each scale.
What is more critical is information organization across the set. You do not put furniture, all various tags, structure, MEP, all dimensions, notes, etc into a single 1/8" scale floor plan jammed together. Different firm has different ways of doing it. It also depends on the project it self.
The example snapshots look like a tiny residential cheap reno job. With everything jammed in that single plan. Dimensions, tables, tags, etc. Even got dimensions of window frames under the overall? WTH? You just need R.O. for window or door.This is not about lightweights, this is about absolute poorly organized set.
my first thought looking at this is: was there even an architect involved? it looks totally like an exempt project any designer could have done.
Someone who uses three exclamation marks and has their title in all caps is in no position to be complaining about lineweights..."A sure sign of someone who wears his underpants on his head."
I've spent a lot of hours recently laboriously perfecting line weights in a CAD drawing. It's unbillable time, tho. I do it for the pleasure I get from it.
Same. Some might call it a fetish.
Serious question: Does AIA not have a Revit template standard? Would this be a possible thing to have made? or would Autodesk lose too much money on such a thing?
Autodesk never loses money! They just charge their clients for everything. Get a CAD guru/programmer who can set up the application to your liking. Will cost you some money, but at least you won't be paying those thieving bastards at Autodesk.
Autodesk is a scam. There are plenty of cheaper and free alternatives
Please list significantly cheaper and free alternatives to Revit. I will wait.
Here comes SneakyPete with his raging hard on for me... Autodesk is not a monopoly in the AEC industry. There are plenty of free and cheap AutoCAD alternatives... Cheaper alternatives to Revit sure... Vector works , micro station, archicad
Please try and be civil or at least not disgustingly sexual. Have you had any luck convincing a firm you do not own to switch from one major software package to a different one?
SneakyPete always with the 'gotcha questions'. Hey! I can do those type of questions too! But I will answer you... I've never been in a position / role to make that decision or to even suggest it. The fact is... options are out there. Its the responsibility of the principals and firm owners to make those decisions. Can I come into your house and tell you how you should be arranging things? Autodesk will continue to rake the AEC industry over the coals because people like you allow them too. Once people start voting with their feet... Autodesk will change their ways.
Why do principals and firm owners make the decision to use Revit as opposed to Vector works , micro station, or archicad?
Dec 8, 20 10:28 pm ·
·
I dont know Pete... why don't you ask them... I know firms that use Archicad, Microstation, and Vectorworks... why is Revit more popular is what you are trying to ask me? Cause Autodesk has the stronghold on the industry and they have rammed in down our throats to be the software of choice. Are there software better than Revit? Yes, I believe so. Have alot of firms drank the kool-aid? Yes.
Plenty of firms here don't use Revit. Archicad has become the go to software for quite some design firms I know here in Amsterdam as it is software for architects not for engineers and has great customer service and training, it is made from the ground up as a product to create architecture and not built by buying other software that have to be integrated into it. It is also a native Mac product so people can use their fancy-schmancy eye candy. I've been BIM-ing since I was a student in the late 90s early 00s (Allplan, Vectorworks, Archicad) and never had to use Revit until now (knocks on wood).
OLA, you seem to think I am assuming an oppositional position with you. I am not.
Rando - I've seen a couple of firms here in Colorado that use Archicad. The program seemed to be much like you said - built from the ground up for designing and documenting architectural designs. The firms I've seen using Archicad have made a choice to move to Revit however. I wonder if it's because of compatibility issues when your consultants use Revit?
Dec 9, 20 10:05 am ·
·
Probably compatibility (and inexperience with BIM of the people in an office making the decisions). We exchanged in IFC format and used Solibri to do the checks. I find it weird personally to adjust as an architect to what our consultants would be using, in the hierarchy of a project and the relationship with the client that approach doesn't make much sense to me, we should be in the driving seat.
Dec 9, 20 10:29 am ·
·
I've haven't dived into Archicad much but what I've seen it's very similar to Revit with the major differences being graphical and the user interface. Both programs seem to do roughly the same things. Revit has way more powerful analytical tools though, however I've never really used those.
If my firm used Archicad, I'd use Archicad. If I start a firm, I'll look into the options. Until then I use what my firm pays for and I give them my unvarnished opinion. Surprising, I know.
How dose Archicad work with sharing and linking Revit models from your consultants?
That is a great question. I do not know.
OneLostArchitect,
"...why is Revit more popular..."
One reason is that, at least in Canada, if you want to do any jobs for the governments, they will require you to do it in either ACAD or Revit.
Autodesk sales staff is, arguably, the best in the World - they convinced the governments and most architects that their programmes are THE best in the World, and that only theirs should be used.
Another reason why is that way back when, Autodesk allowed their AutoCAD to be copied and pirated to the point where all the young drafters had it on their machines and learned it. Then they said, "Right, now you will have to buy it!" They had the firms by their balls!!!
Sorry APS but that last paragraph simply is not true.
Dec 9, 20 10:07 am ·
·
Aps, that's not true about GoC projects. They specify file type, not a particular software.
Here they normally specify exchange file types such as dxf, ifc or pdf that multiple software packages can both read and write in.
Non, he is partially correct. I worked on a public project for a government agency that mandated the CDs be done in Revit. This was in one of the Canadian provinces. (Not Ontario)
I'm willing to accept that I'm wrong on the software thing but I'm pretty sure the last req doc I went through earlier this year only mentioned IFC files.
Non Sequitur,
....except that if you translate some cad applications' files into dwg, they end up looking like shit (layers get all messed up, text style do as well, blocks disappear, xrefs vanish, and so on. In other words, they become un-usable.
Perhaps things are different now with Revit and other programmes's drawings drawings that are translated into rvt files...
Chad Miller,
so tell me then, how did so many draftsman learn how to use acad back in the 80's? They paid $3,500 out of their own pocket, huh, or maybe they pirated the programme?
So then, you had 15-20 people in the office who now know acad, and the boss would come and say, "Ok boys and girls, we are switching all of our work to Architrion next week!"?!
No, AutoCAD became THE programme because it was readily available, and everybody learned it and everybody knew it to some degree.
I know some firms up here who went to Architrion, and MiniCAD. Soon enough they found that they could not find any employees who knew them, but there was plenty who knew acad. Then, our governments stepped in, and said, "Oh we want dwg files" because Aurtodesk snake oil salesmen told them it was the best thing since sliced bread.
Well, the rest is history.
My first job used Vectorworks, and we sent DWGs all of the time.
Oh, and I didn't know VW when I started, either.
Well, I took it, in 1992 in night school, together with Architrion and Archicad.
Many years later I received a bunch of dwg file translated from miniCad of a shopping centre in Surrey, BC that we were going to renovate and add to using acad. Drawings were, essentially, not usable. Paid another draftsman/part timer to redraw everything into acad.
Guess your mileage varies.
How long since retirement?
I learned AutoCAD in high school. As for your cute little story APS - it's still untrue.
"randomised
Here they normally specify exchange file types such as dxf, ifc or pdf that multiple software packages can both read and write in."
You are in NL, right?
Maybe the EU officials are more strict about softwares and such and allow less monopolies than Canada does. Here, it's not so wide open to competition,at least it did not used to be. And like I said, it's hard to find employees who are productive in anything but AutoCAD (or Revit now).
It goes against the logic of having a free and open market to exclude other software companies, therefore they specify open file formats. I am horrible at Autocad, last used it 4 yrs ago against my will and never even touched Revit. That said I am not very productive in general...
APS - it's the same way in America - only the drawing file format is specified when requested. I think you just live in a weird part of Canada because I've only ever run into files there being requested in IFC format in the Great White North.
"...randomised
It goes against the logic of having a free and open market to exclude other software companies..."
I agree, it does.
But, you have to remember I was dealing with various branches of Canadian Federal or Provincial governments. Logic is not always part of their vocabulary. Again, I blame Autodesk snake oil salesmen for this.