Slow Revit Model

[Baldwin_4-6-0]

What might be the cause of a extremely slow Revit Model?

Example,: when I select a door it takes a bit longer, and the when I try to move it.. forget about it.

File size is only 23MB.
There is no AutoCAD files attached.
GL Hardware acceleration is off, when I turned it on it was even slower.
No Groups.
Nothing is halftoned.

[jv3dcad]

How about inplace families. They can really slow teh model down.

[Baldwin_4-6-0]

Nope, No In Place Families.

I just started this model yesterday, from a fresh template.

[jv3dcad]

Constraints?

[Baldwin_4-6-0]

What kind of Constraints?

[sbrown]

Check your warning messages. Tools>Review warnings. Also is the door family some complex family? Have you tried deleting the wall and placing a new one. Something maybe corrupt. try checking the audit button next time you open the project.

[Baldwin_4-6-0]

Check your warning messages. Tools>Review warnings. Also is the door family some complex family? Have you tried deleting the wall and placing a new one. Something maybe corrupt. try checking the audit button next time you open the project.

0 Review Warnings.

[Jay Zallan]

0 Review Warnings.

Does your computer have an anti virus that checks Revit files?

[rmejia]

What kind of Constraints?

Locking objects such as walls and doors, locking dimensions. Moving a door should not slow down the model, unless it is "constrained" to other objects which move as a result of the door moving. Over constraining can cause a chain of revisions which could slow down the model updates. What are the computer specs ?

[tc3dcad60731]

The three main things that slow my models down are

Too many error messages that I have ignored
Too many constraints
File has been open for several hours and sometimes left unattended (idle)

[Scott D Davis]

Another thing that I find on customer visits that slows modeling down is .....overmodeling! Especially railings/ballusters. Don't model railings on balconies showing every single 1/4" diameter cable on a cable-style railing system! You will never see these in typical elevation views, instead they will look like black blobs! Also, don't model "round" things when they could be represented as square objects. Same object: railings...if the ballusters are actually round, you could have them be square in the model, and then round when you detail them. This will save a ton of processing power.

[ron.sanpedro]

Another thing that I find on customer visits that slows modeling down is .....overmodeling! Especially railings/ballusters. Don't model railings on balconies showing every single 1/4" diameter cable on a cable-style railing system! You will never see these in typical elevation views, instead they will look like black blobs! Also, don't model "round" things when they could be represented as square objects. Same object: railings...if the ballusters are actually round, you could have them be square in the model, and then round when you detail them. This will save a ton of processing power.

I also like to put feature stairs and railings on one workset, and vertical circulation stairs and railings on another. If you aren't doing the vertical circulation you will never need that workset loaded for your work, and you can unload the feature stairs too if you are working on the parking, or the unit plans, or whatever. For feature stairs, I also like to keep railings off in most working views. That way people can see the stairs, but the railings don't bog them down. If you need to interact with the complete stair, then you turn the railings on.

Bummer you can't define the railings as off in Course, square approximations in Medium and true shape in Fine Detail. Now THAT would be slick! ;)

Best,
Gordon

[Scott D Davis]

Bummer you can't define the railings as off in Course, square approximations in Medium and true shape in Fine Detail. Now THAT would be slick! ;)

One for the Wishlist! You wanna post it?

[AP23]

Another thing that I find on customer visits that slows modeling down is .....overmodeling! Especially railings/ballusters. Don't model railings on balconies showing every single 1/4" diameter cable on a cable-style railing system! You will never see these in typical elevation views, instead they will look like black blobs! Also, don't model "round" things when they could be represented as square objects. Same object: railings...if the ballusters are actually round, you could have them be square in the model, and then round when you detail them. This will save a ton of processing power.

This way of modeling is very counterintuitive from a designer point of view.

Is this a temporary solution until Autodesk figures out how to maintain performance. Or is this just the way Revit wants us to work? If the second is the case then revit will miss the boot when digital prototyping in the AEC world becomes mainstream.

[Jay Zallan]

This way of modeling is very counterintuitive from a designer point of view.

Is this a temporary solution until Autodesk figures out how to maintain performance. Or is this just the way Revit wants us to work? If the second is the case then revit will miss the boot when digital prototyping in the AEC world becomes mainstream.

Unfortunately the ADSK folks probably don't need a boat since they mainly own the ocean... I am hopeful though because if they do become over reliant on their industry stranglehold (and not focused on real AEC NEEDS) they may find themselves going the way of the giant (& extinct) dinosaurs!!! I just hope I can hide underground for a few hundred thousand years...

Slow models suck!!! But at their absolute worst they are worlds better than "any-name-here-o-CAD!!!

Model as is appropriate for your needs.
-J

[tamas]

Baldwin,

Have you found the reason why your file was slow? It is always helpful to us if you sent it to Revit support. This way we can concentrate our performance improvement efforts on actual user problems instead of artificial ones.

Thanks,

Tamas


What might be the cause of a extremely slow Revit Model?

Example,: when I select a door it takes a bit longer, and the when I try to move it.. forget about it.

File size is only 23MB.
There is no AutoCAD files attached.
GL Hardware acceleration is off, when I turned it on it was even slower.
No Groups.
Nothing is halftoned.

[Jay Zallan]

Baldwin,

Have you found the reason why your file was slow? It is always helpful to us if you sent it to Revit support. This way we can concentrate our performance improvement efforts on actual user problems instead of artificial ones.

Thanks,

Tamas

Artificial ones like having to hit OK 7 times to finally complete a wall edit? or the fact that Revit doesn't use Video Memory? (beyond 32 MB) or slow like we need to model square shapes to keep Revit from being overburdened?

More development, less talking!!!

[Steve_Stafford]

...More development, less talking!!!Nice one (I refrain from using the language that first came out of my mouth)...responses like this make me embarrassed to be associated with this forum.

We complain that there isn't enough feedback and response from Autodesk and then when a developer proactively asks a question you blast him. Which is it, which do you want? Do you want them to stay silent and keep working or do you want him to answer your every question? You do realize that Tamas doesn't speak English natively so perhaps his choice of words aren't to your liking?

Speaking for myself and I hope more than a few others here at AUGI, Tamas I appreciate that you frequent the forums and hope that this kind of response does not cool your interest in participating.

Fwiw, on another note I have never encountered a railing or stair in nearly six years of using Revit that has noticeably harmed performance except when printing and the issue Scott describes was partly to blame.

[AP23]

In the past, the software developed itself much rapidly than hardware. That is what crippled Archicad a bit in the past. They were able to developed a great product but there wasn't any hardware that can handle it.

Now the tables are turned. The hardware has caught up and surpassed the software industry. you can make pretty much any software without having to compromise.

It is therefore a mystery why Revit can't take advantage of any new technology, while Revit of all software, needs it badly. At the same token, other Autodesk products do make use of new technology like 64 bit os, DirectX etc. So the complaints are more concerns, even though the experienced Revit users is expected to ignore any new technology or any new 3rd party software.

[dhurtubise]

You need to understand that taking "advantage" of the new hardware doesnt happen overnihgt. If you've done any coding inyour life you would be aware that just a minor software version can become a nightmare. Imagine hardware now!
Let me ask you this: Do you want Autodesk to release a 64 bits software that is probably not stable yet so you can leverage your hardware right now or you prefer to kep working on a stable environement?
My call is, i want stability. Whenver it's ready it's going to be released don't worry.

[AP23]

You need to understand that taking "advantage" of the new hardware doesnt happen overnihgt. If you've done any coding inyour life you would be aware that just a minor software version can become a nightmare. Imagine hardware now!


I've gotten used to a slow model, so I don't mind that much. However, It's quite difficult to explain to your co-workers and boss, the lost of money, due to one third time spent regenerating views.


Let me ask you this: Do you want Autodesk to release a 64 bits software that is probably not stable yet so you can leverage your hardware right now or you prefer to kep working on a stable environement? .

Unless your are only using Revit which is not very likely, you will need to leverage your hardware anyhow to get the most out of the other softwares that do make use of higher end hardware.

[Scott D Davis]

I should also clarify my point, because I failed to mention it. The "railings" I talked about were modeled as a family, and then applied to the model, and did not use the railing tool. I think this had a larger impact o performance than using the railing tool.

Also, small round objects (cable rails) will take a tremendous amout of computing power when shadows are applied or when rendering the scene, with very little "return on investment". The gradient in the shade/shadow that a cable rail would have is not even noticable in a scene, but still must be calculated and displayed.

[dhurtubise]

I've gotten used to a slow model, so I don't mind that much. However, It's quite difficult to explain to your co-workers and boss, the lost of money, due to one third time spent regenerating views.
.

I've heard that statement so many times. If youthink about it and consider whats going on in the back, believe me its still light years ahead of plain CAD.

[Jay Zallan]

Nice one (I refrain from using the language that first came out of my mouth)...responses like this make me embarrassed to be associated with this forum.

We complain that there isn't enough feedback and response from Autodesk and then when a developer proactively asks a question you blast him. ....

Tamas, Steve & all,
I wasn't personally blasting Tamas and if I came across that way I apologize.

Steve, Maybe you should hold others' replies to the standards you held mine to; as it sounded to me that the comment I was replying to was pretty nasty.

Perhaps it was just my listening but I still stand by my comments.

ADSK needs to get some (more!!!) development assets on Revit so they can address the 'real' problems and programmatic inconsistencies ASAP!!! get them off ACA.

I suggest upgrading Revit from being a software whose interface is about 10 years behind and whose (non-hyperthreading, non video RAM using, etc.) workflow is now really hindering it on the very projects that they intend Architects to use it on...

[mlgatzke]

vjdx,

I'm sure Steve did not intend to "single you out". We all read posts that border on rants and wonder if the person has any knowledge of precisely "what" they are asking (resources necessary, priority over other requests, demand on present hardware, etc.). On a side note, 64-bit apps will not be the salvation of Revit or any other application. Sometimes, after reading posts like this a person has to "let it out". Not that one person deserved the "brunt of the storm".

However, we also have to remember that the Autodesk development team want Revit to be a success too. Just like we do. They have constraints that they have to work within just as we do. We don't get to work on projects that are funded by an endless stream of money and neither do they.

Everyone has the chance to make their wishes known. Simply fill out a wish in the Wishlist Forum and see if your fellow Revit users agree with what you think is important.

I have been using Revit for many years, just as Steve, Scott, and many others have. I, too, have items that I wish that the Revit development team would resolve or improve. However, I'm only one person and the majority of those in the forum don't happen to place my wishes high enough on the priority list. That's fine. I understand that the Factory (the Revit development team) has to abide by the populous. Many times users think that computer software should be able to do more than it does or be faster than it is. It doesn't and it isn't. There are limitations. Will it eventually, who knows. Let's all just do our best to help it improve; but let's be calm, positive and realistic along the way.

[tamas]

No hard feelings here. I was just trying to point out that a model created by an actual user has more benefit to us than one that an in-house engineer makes up to test some problem.

Especially if the problem is stated as "Slow Revit Model". I can create slow models in hundreds of ways. I can work on all of those hundred cases to improve, but I'd rather start with one that actually occurred in the field.

Tamas

[Baldwin_4-6-0]

What might be the cause of a extremely slow Revit Model?

Example,: when I select a door it takes a bit longer, and the when I try to move it.. forget about it.

File size is only 23MB.
There is no AutoCAD files attached.
GL Hardware acceleration is off, when I turned it on it was even slower.
No Groups.
Nothing is halftoned.
No in place families.
0 Review Warnings.
No stairs, no railings


Wow, this thread got off course...

Anyway.
I thank everyone for having input of what the problem might be, but it was none of the things any of you mentioned.

I pin-pointed the problem to one wall and all the doors that are hosted in this wall. If I put this wall with all the doors in a different spot in the model it works fine, but as soon as I move it back it is back to being incredibly slow.

But then I just Audited the model and now it works fine.

Thanks again, Over.

[tamas]

I pin-pointed the problem to one wall and all the doors that are hosted in this wall. If I put this wall with all the doors in a different spot in the model it works fine, but as soon as I move it back it is back to being incredibly slow.

Thanks for the update. I know you are all busy, but if you sent your file to support, we could have had a chance to understand/fix the cause of this problem.

Tamas

[Wes Macaulay]

What Tamas says is spot on -- if there is a problem with Revit "in the wild", they need to see it to see if there's an issue they don't know about and need to address.

Send in those files! Send in those support requests!

[gordonp147484]

What Tamas says is spot on -- if there is a problem with Revit "in the wild", they need to see it to see if there's an issue they don't know about and need to address.

Send in those files! Send in those support requests!

I think this also validates the premise that a regular Audit and Compress of Central file, along with regularly creating new locals, is a good policy. We try to do the Audit & Compress weekly on Friday for every project, and then make new locals Monday morning. And when something starts misbehaving in strange ways, an audit is usually one of the first things we try. And yet somehow we all tried to find a more complex answer, and never suggested an Audit. Hmm....? ;)

Anyway, glad you got it to work, and glad we can at least say the Audit solved it, even if we don't know exactly what changed.

Best,
Gordon