Topic: Revision History

[Keith™]

Okay, how did you accomplish that prior to CAD? See I go back to manual drafting, and we NEVER recreated a drawing just to keep a revision history. We revised the ONE drawing when it needed to be changed, backing up to a previous revision required an eraser.

We maintained a reproducable copy set, it was a cardinal sin and you were subject to immediate dismissal for modifying a previous archive drawing that had already been issued for construction... instead, a copy was made of the sepias with the revision area blocked out, only the revision area was redrawn and the new copy was only modifyable in the area that was being changed. I have seen too many mistakes in the field because of changed drawings because someone changed the original. I will not put up with it and anyone who does it will not work for me.... but that point is moot since we haven't used hand drawn plans in over 15 years, probably longer....

If he requires additional work, he needs to be ready to pay for it. Again how was this done in the manual drafting days, once the originals had been revised? The client paid for the changes or he didn't get 'em. And that's the way we still contract our projects.

True, BUT, if you have the flexibility to offer that previous drawing at little cost to the client, then your client is happy and in turn you are happy.

The major advantage to CAD is accomplishing the desired task faster.

Exactly, and if by saving an archive drawing of a previous drawing I am able to reproduce for example the second revision of a drawing simply by plotting it, then CAD has served the ultimate purpose. If I have to recreate the drawing from scratch everytime then some usefulness of CAD is compromised.

If we unnecessarily burden the system with procedures that we never implemented for manual drafting, we've lost some of that advantage.

You have got to be kidding .... that has got to be the most ignorant thing I have ever heard from you. It is precisely these new procedures that we have implemented that has gained us the advantage.

Rktect3j stated that he has never had to retrieve a previous revision, and in the last 30 years, I've only needed to do so 2 or 3 times (only once with CAD). So it seems maintaining previuos revisions may be spending a dollar on a safety net for a dime.

Perhaps, but consider my position, we archive all of our drawings individually per client on a CD-RW, these cost us on average $0.10 each and it is included in the cost of the clients work. We have never had a project even come close to filling up one.... never .... not in 10 years... So, I spend a dime to archive the drawings, and we can work right off of the CD.

Now back in "those days", we kept a print of each revision in the project file, just for paper trail reasons. We accomplish the same today by using PDFs of each issue. This gives us the advantage of a plottable format that is not dependent upon XREF's, CTBs or anything else, and it's a considerable smaller file. We're not burdened by multiple files and extensive directory systems, nor XREF file path maintenance.

If that works for you by all means continue, but it would be inefficient in my field... in fact, if I were to convert my drawings to PDF for archival purpose I would need MORE space. It just so happens that PDF's end up being larger than the original drawings, especially when you consider the number of pages in a PDF we would have to plot... one for each layout...so rather than 25 drawing files that total less than 1 meg, I would end up with 20 PDF 's each nearing 250k and that would make my PDF file over a meg....

We never did so prior to CAD, why should it be necessary to do so now?

We did... but either way, not necessary, but more efficient to do so....keep reading....

In DWG file format? Why?

Readily accessable, easily opened for further revision as a "NEW" revision

In my inductry the drawings would be the least of his problems. By then concrete is poured, steel is flying, and pipe is fabricated.

...and in my industry, it would not....construction would not begin until a complete set of plans are provided to the building department. Revisions after that point are not my problem, but if the client wants to revert to a previous design then so be it ... I get paid to do nothing, except plot out the original documents and seal them. If that means the client must tear down the structure and start over again, I have no problem with that...it isn't my money he is pissing away, it is his....

If that is truly the case then by all means carry on.

that IS the case, actually I have worked for other companies who did not archive previous revisions and we were frequently bit in the ass because someone revised something that wasn't supposed to be revised....
 

how often do you really NEED to go back,

3 times this week already

and how much time does it REALLY save, and is that savings REALLY enough to offset the cost of maintaining the history?

It saved me probably 12 hours work this week alone.

The cost to maintain the history is about a dime, exclusive of benefits of the maintenance also acting as a backup. And there is a cost involved in maintaining such a history, even if much of it is automated. There is still storage spcae required, time to find the right file(s), making sure the process is properly implemented, making sure something isn't missed, the time spent trying to find the desired file when it IS needed. Is the daily drain of a minute or two here and there REALLY offset by the retrieval of one drawing in a hundred? or a thousand?

If you had hair, I'd bet you would pull it all out in my industry after only a week or so....I know people, we work directly with the final customer, not a bean counter... Just to put it into perspective, I dealt directly with 38 clients last year, of those 38 clients, the average revision is 5 times. Out of those nearly 2/3 wanted at some point to revert back to a previous incarnation. If I can revert back to a previous version with the click of a button, then I am way ahead of the guy who has to redo work that he has already done in the past.


and to answer your question about why someone would regularly use previous versions of a file, ... it is because a majority of people cannot make up their mind what they want, and they change it several times before finally settling on a design.

[whdjr]

WOW...We have a new  quote King now.

"Quote King Keith"

[CADaver]

It seems we're operating with two vastly different definitons of REVISON. We don't have revisions until it is issued to the building department.  What you're describing are not revisions, but preliminary design options. We don't begin construction design until after that phase. During that phase we don't keep "previous revisions", we do separate option presentations. "You can get it like this, or like this, or like this".

[dubb]

i have to post in this thread because i ran into this problem yesterday with this job. my boss told me to revise this drawing and save it as the same drawing but only to add rev_1_04-806.dwg which i strongly disagree with.

the way i was used to haneling revisions, whether it be revision 8 or 100. is i put it in a folder under the "dwg" directory name 04-8-6_rev_1 and so on. so that keeps the dwg directory the original drawing without revisions.

every revision cloud delta and title block revision note is on a layer called S-REV-1 and every other layer proceeds with a new number per revision. after i add revision 2 i use the previos revision set (revision 1 set) and do the process over with all the revisions in one drawing..simply freeze S-REV-1 and you will only see S-REV-2.

as for the dates of when drawings get plotted...i depend on the plot stamp and or the date on the title block.

i dont know whats the best way to keeep track of revisions. throughout my whole career as a drafter i probably had to deal with pulling old sets of drawings at least 50 times out of 4 years. and there has been times when i had to refer to the network administrator to retrieve old drawings that have been overwritten and requested to to be recovered.

i dont like the fact that some edit the drawing names per revisions it just screws up the xref process. why not xref the whole sheet and name the new sheet per revision?

[TR]

It seems we're operating with two vastly different definitons of REVISON. We don't have revisions until it is issued to the building department.  What you're describing are not revisions, but preliminary design options. We don't begin construction design until after that phase. During that phase we don't keep "previous revisions", we do separate option presentations. "You can get it like this, or like this, or like this".

It's funny how you love to tell everyone they're wrong when you don't understand anything about their industry or the company they work for.

[dubb]

CADaver wrote:
It seems we're operating with two vastly different definitons of REVISON. We don't have revisions until it is issued to the building department. What you're describing are not revisions, but preliminary design options. We don't begin construction design until after that phase. During that phase we don't keep "previous revisions", we do separate option presentations. "You can get it like this, or like this, or like this".


It's funny how you love to tell everyone they're wrong when you don't understand anything about their industry or the company they work for.

well let me clarify my point of view. its considered a revision when the engineer says...this is revision set. but when a client changes his mind, the engineer asks me to change this and that its just an update. but there are times when we need to revert back to what had been done and thats when i start to panic. because whats been done is done. and saving and exiting autocad is done. the only person you can depend on is your administrator.

could there be one single way to handle revisions? damn clients need to get there decisions straight.

[Keith™]

Well, let me put it like this ... if the file changes, it is a revised file, if it is a revised file then it is a revision, if it is a revision it gets a revision folder... it makes absolutely no difference if the design process is in the preliminary stages or after permitting had been done and construction has started. If I create a document and it is changed at ANY time, there is a 66% chance that client will revert back to some previous incarnation before construction is complete. If I don't want to spend all my time redrawing work already done before, then I MUST save all incarnations of the plans, regardless of whether final plans have been issued or not.

[CADaver]

It's funny how you love to tell everyone they're wrong when you don't understand anything about their industry or the company they work for.

Funny how you felt the need to jump in with a personal attack when you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion.

[CADaver]

Well, let me put it like this ... if the file changes, it is a revised file, if it is a revised file then it is a revision, if it is a revision it gets a revision folder... it makes absolutely no difference if the design process is in the preliminary stages or after permitting had been done and construction has started.

 What? Every time you decide to use a 3-0 window instead of a 2-8 you save a version?? That would be hundreds of versions for each drawing.  I can understand why you don't wish to spend time redrawing, you're spending all your time saving previous versions.

[Jassper]

If one looks at the aspect of Industrial engineering, Radar Dishes, Medical Equipment, Switches and Controls, etc. you will find a great need for new documents for revisions. If a plant manager calls and says he has a problem with a machine - first question is What Revision? If he needs replacement parts, What revision? Functionality of the product depended on What Revision?

Little :O)

[CADaver]

If one looks at the aspect of Industrial engineering, Radar Dishes, Medical Equipment, Switches and Controls, etc. you will find a great need for new documents for revisions. If a plant manager calls and says he has a problem with a machine - first question is What Revision? If he needs replacement parts, What revision? Functionality of the product depended on What Revision?

Little :O)

The answer to each of those questions is "the latest" whatever that may be, unless you're using the same drawing over and over on different projects utilizing subsequent revisions.  The few vendors, of which I'm aware, that used to do that, ceased doing so years ago after losing their shirts in court.

[CADaver]

It's funny how you love to tell everyone they're wrong when you don't understand anything about their industry or the company they work for.

I went back to check, just to make sure.  No where in this thread have I said anyone was wrong at any time.  I have asked some questions and made statements based on my own experience, but never have I said anyone was wrong.  So, next time, check your facts before you shoot your mouth off.

[TR]

You're right...you never actually flat out said anyone was wrong. I apologize.

However you do continue to tell people how _YOU_ do it and the truth is it doesn't matter. You need to realize that different disciplines and different companies have different needs. Just because you can continue to modify a single file which has been submitted to a client without giving it a revision does not mean that other companies/disciplines can do the same. I don't understand why you can't accept that or why you would even care.

[Keith™]

Well, let me put it like this ... if the file changes, it is a revised file, if it is a revised file then it is a revision, if it is a revision it gets a revision folder... it makes absolutely no difference if the design process is in the preliminary stages or after permitting had been done and construction has started.

 What? Every time you decide to use a 3-0 window instead of a 2-8 you save a version?? That would be hundreds of versions for each drawing.  I can understand why you don't wish to spend time redrawing, you're spending all your time saving previous versions.

If it were only that simple .... In all of my years, I have only had a very few such changes, most are bastardized beyond recognition from revision to revision.... I would be elated to have something as simple as a window size change, but alas that is the exception rather than the rule...

But here is one for you ... what if the client is ready to build, and all he wants to do is revert to the previous revision and change a single window size....YOU would end up revising the drawing and likely spend hours doing so while I would have it done in a matter of seconds and move on to the next project.

The answer to each of those questions is "the latest" whatever that may be, unless you're using the same drawing over and over on different projects utilizing subsequent revisions. The few vendors, of which I'm aware, that used to do that, ceased doing so years ago after losing their shirts in court.

Oh my fellow, you would NEVER make it in the aerospace industry .... some of those controls have been though hundreds of revisions and there are hundreds of those controls in the marketplace....each revision only working with certain other revisions....if you requested the "latest" revision on a part, your part would never fit or might cause serious consequenses if it did fit.... now the NTSB and FAA regulations even require that certain projects be submitted to them in either DGN or DWG format, which incedently the state of Florida is now requiring on certain commercial and industrial projects .... do you think THEY delete the old ones? I think not ...

I might add that a DWG format file is infinitely more useful to the designing staff than a jpg, bitmap, tiff, or pdf of the same project.

[CADaver]

However you do continue to tell people how _YOU_ do it

Yes, and they continue to tell me how they do it, it's called a discussion, that's how they work.

and the truth is it doesn't matter.

Which "truth" is that, mine Keith's or Hendie's?

You need to realize that different disciplines and different companies have different needs.

Which I did, see my response to Hendie, that is if you're more interested in the truth than bashing me.

Just because you can continue to modify a single file which has been submitted to a client without giving it a revision

You've missed something there.  We go through a priliminary design phase that is controlled by revision numbers just like everything else.  Only based on preliminary design data.  During that time the client gets his shots at different options (each a separate drawing file, number and all).  But not EVERY change is a revision that's re-submitted to the client.  If it were we'd be buried by paper on facilities that cover 130 acres containing several hundred pieces of equipment and several hundred miles of pipe. The majority of the changes are red-lined on a "Master Set", and only after the client is prepared to make a final descision (on some aspect of the design) are the changes made to the file.

Once that preliminary design process is final, it's final.  At that point detailed design begins which incorporate final vedor supplied data and configurations.  Literally thousands of changes will occur during that phase as final configurations are modified to fit together.  Most of those changes will only be drawn to the attention of the client if it has a major effect on the contracted design concept, and then by letter, not revision.  If the client has a problem with that change, we may hash it out on a "mark-up" print of the effected design concept drawing that would then be added to the design file for record.  Once the detailed design drawngs are complete, the first issue is "Client Approval" (Rev. A), that's where he gets his last shot at it.  Once approved, it's Issued for Construction (Rev. 0).  Any modifications to that drawing after that will require subsequent revisions.

Just because you can continue to modify a single file which has been submitted to a client without giving it a revision does not mean that other companies/disciplines can do the same. I don't understand why you can't accept that or why you would even care.

If it works for you, fine (as I told Hendie).  Why I care is with the current boom in PetroChem, Pulp-Paper, and power distribution, we're pulling in all kinds of people from other companies and other industries to fill the gaps.  Some of these guys are showing up with the mindset that every revision must be maintained.  On projects with 25,000-40,000 drawings, that rely heavily on xrefs, that are revised an average of 4 times each, the maintenance of multple revisions would be cost prohibitive.   If you'll read my original post, I was curious as to the thought processes behind the descision so that I could more easily explain to these new guys why we don't.  If you'll read it closer, you'l notice my primary concern was adding the revision number to the file name, which is a real killer for xrefs.