We have a Revit file containing a library of "standard details" which are drafting views that apply to most of our projects. We bring them in as necessary to a project using "Insert Views From File". However that only works for 2D Drafting views and Schedules. For actual Section details cut through the model, you would have to copy/paste the detail components from one project section to another.

You can also set up your template with drafting views, schedules and legends that you use on every project.

Hope that helps!

Actually, I find it faster to just cartoon a set with all the typical drafting details needed inserted, also including Section Details. Since Callouts are View specific, if a section/view gets the ax then so does the Callouts. With views becoming corrupted sometimes too I prefer to have as many "details" as drafting views, then do a "View Reference" callout where needed. One can always copy/paste the inserted details into a live view & delete the drafting view.

For Large teams:
Instead of wasting time developing where to create callouts of details then further develop/coordinate to design later, it saves time by having the "Detailer" update per project design intent off the bat if needed, then do the final dressing up of adding detail callouts to plans/section/enlargements. I usually have just a few dedicated working views with "Construction Lines" put in a Group that is used to coordinated setbacks/offsets/material layers in a drafting view, or I overlay a detail model view on top of the drafting detail on the sheet in wireframe mode to coordinate changes. That way Modelers adhere to the drafting view design as those become gospel to implement into the Model. Updating Detail Lines/Items is just cleaner & quicker to indicate design intent to the team for the PA/PM to update themselves instead of redlining them in cases if Revit Savvy.

Woah. No freaking way I would have sections and details as drafting views. Defeats the entire purpose of using Revit. And... It's one of the first things we check for when we do model Audits for clients.

It almost always means other things are entirely inaccurate or wrong in the model.

If much rather get faster at pulling in parts of details to build live sections.

Sent from my Phablet. Please excuse typos... and bad ideas.

Aaron Maller
Director
Parallax Team, Inc.

Certainly not the fully assembled drawing, but we keep detail group vignettes of such on drafting views.

I'm with you, Aaron.
We had a project a few years ago with a Stair Section.
Wasn't even a Drafting View, but they decided it was too much trouble to get the Structural model to look right.
So they just turned it off ann added a Detail Component for the beams.
Project got issued. Project got built. Project got inspected.
Inspector said "You don't have enough head clearance on this stairwell"
The stairs had to be ripped out an moved. That was not a cheap change.
Later, I went back in our model and turned on the Structural model in that Section. Their beam was 6" deeper than our Detail Component showed.
Now I yell very loudly at people who don't use the model as it is intended to be used.

For standard details like a door sill threshold, or a grab bar attachment, which is the same on every single project, Drafting views are quite appropriate for those details. Doing those as live sections would be a complete waste of time, not to mention a nightmare trying to turn off the live section mark all over the various plans and elevations that intersect that live section mark.

Starting a project right about now and we have an agreement that you can in no way hide model information.
So no detail items on top, no hide in view, no filters to turn stuff off etc.
This is how it should be of course, but I see hidden stuff all over in other projects.

But we digress from the origional post. I have never had any standard detailing ever in any project. Not in Revit and not in AutoCAD. Maybe becasue I never worked on 2 projects that looked the same. Sure I do look at projects with similar details and get some inspiration from those, but there is always something different.

I also try to avoid making the common details, like how a window is mounted in a masonry wall (we do those A LOT in Holland) because the contractor know how to build that better then I know how to model it. Unless we want something specific of course, but knowing the distance from the from of the mansonry to the front of the windows is enough most of the time. This does of course depend on the contractor as well, if he is a dick and tried to screw you over from the get-go it is better to give him the details so he can not screw you on that one as well.

You might consider changing your detail items to allow the model to show through rather than obscure it.

After your post, Cesar commented on bringing in typical Sections and Section Details as Drafting Views. Thats what my response had to do with.

But since you opened that door, Grab Bar details and Door Sill Details: They are typical, until they arent. I DO have drafting views for them, but they have a lot less information in them than most peoples drafting views, and they say *refer to schedule* for information that SHOULD be coming out of the model, such as Grab Bar Length, or Door Sill location/depth/height/etc.

People always tell me "Grab bars dont ever change," and thats sort of true. But that doesnt mean someone didnt MODEL the wrong grab bar (and decide that it fit fine, because they modeled it 12 inches too short, but showed a *typical detail* where its 12 inches longer). Ive actually seen architects who think this is okay, and their argument is: "Well there is a conflict in the drawings, and its the GC's responsibility to bring it up, because one detail shows a 36" bar and the typical detail shows a 42" or 48" bar."

This is JUST like the project i worked on recently, where a "typical detail" showed shower tile, where the dimensioned partitions had no room for the shower tile. Yeah, its someones job to *catch it.* And its someones job to design it correctly.

I dont have an issue with drafted views for things like grab bars or door sills, as long as there is some sort of check and balance those those drafting views cant or dont conflict with the model. But the drafting views that show the entire "Toilet stall" with dimensions and everything, and then none of it refers to anything live in the bathroom? If im that GC, im calling the architecture team out on every one of those grab bars that are incorrect in the drawings. And i WILL find them.