Jump to content

'Revision dates' vs. 'issue dates'. Which is better for CD's?


Recommended Posts

Hi, all.

I wonder if anyone would be kind enough to help me understand the latest best practice for issuing drawing revisions.

We use the 'revision date' record in our custom title blocks, but have never used the 'issue date' record because I'm not sure what it's for.

Currently we use a sheet date (which never changes once a sheet is issued) and revision dates for changes to each sheet. We often haven't bothered with flagging changes during design phases, but all changes after issuing for bids or construction are always marked with a revision flag and a cloud. We usually only re-issued the revised sheets, along with an updated sheet index with a matrix of revision dates.

But since our details and elevations are now generated from the 3D model, I'm curious about whether we should change our methods for flagging and issuing revisions.

Would we be culpable if we fail to flag one of the drawing changes that were generated from the model? Would it be wise to always issue complete sets? If so, does that change our responsibility to flag revisions?

Possibly an open-ended question, but I'm hoping there is someone in the group who is close to this issue?

Thank you all,


Link to comment

In my small practise this is what I do:

I use Issues to indicate the "type" of drawings i.e. conceptual, appoval, construction, tender etc.

As for revisions, obviously this is used when there are changes. As I'm presently a one man studio, I usually issue a revision across the whole drawing set.

The issue date becomes my sheet date, and like you, the sheet date doesn't change until the next issue. I only change the revision number (not the sheet number) when I make changes.

The other modus operandi I've toyed with is to create an Issue (e.g. For Tender) and apply any revisions to the sheet/s only. That probably is a more "green" way to go about it but unless the client is equally environmentally conscious it doesn't work. Problem with the sheet revision approach is that you need an accurate way to track, record and dsiplay your revisions somewhere on the sheet set, usually on the project page. Adding to the complications of this approach is that VW does not appear to have a way of handling or tracking individual sheet revisions on a title page (I believe this is possible in the Australian version of VW) although it could be possible with a worksheet - I haven't investigated that yet. Revit on the other hand, has a very useable Issue/Revision manager.

Personally, I believe that we need to do all we can to ensure the accuracy of our drawings, including the recording of changes to a drawing set and ensuring that the client/builder has a way of being able to ensure they have the latest drawings.

Link to comment

Would it be wise to always issue complete sets? If so, does that change our responsibility to flag revisions?


It might seem obvious to just issue complete sets but in my practise I would like to keep a record myself of how the project has evolved. Sometimes a project may go on the back burner for a while before proceeding further. Accurate documentation of changes could very well come in handy.

Just my 2c

Link to comment

I do much the same as Kizza.

I use Issue dates for typical milestones of a project.

Issued for Design Review

Issued for Pricing

Issued for Development Permit

Issued for Building Permit

Issued for Tender (along with any Post-Tender Addenda issued prior to Tender closing)

Issued for Construction

Once Tender is complete, I switch to Revisions, as these need to be quantified and may alter the original contract between owner and contractor. I assign a revision number and date to each batch of revisions and re-issue the effected sheets. The revision numbers can then be referenced in any corresponding change orders that may result. I tend not to re-issue the entire set if only one or two sheets are affected, but if the majority of sheets have revisions, I'll re-issue the whole set. It all comes down to finding a means of documenting all agreed upon changes without the process becoming too onerous.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...