Revit rookie. ACA poweruser...Xrefs were my friends... my beloved xrefs... <sigh>...

[mmonty1269]

Revit rookie. ACA poweruser...Xrefs were my friends... my beloved xrefs... <sigh>... I could have the whole office working on one project without stepping on each other toes.... xref everything!!

multi-family project.
5 units types
4 building types

5 units cane be mirrored, rotated into the building plan(s)

building 1 and 3 are three stories in the middle and two stories at the ends.(bldg type 1)
building 2 is three stories (bldg type 2)
building 4 is three stories(bldg type 3)
building 5 is two stories (bldg type 4)

Each building consists of the five units; (the units can be mirrored, rotated)

Unit types----
Unit 1 -studio
unit 2 -1 bedroom
unit 3 - 2 bedroom
unit 4 - 2 bedroom w/ garage
unit 5 - 3 bedroom.



In ACA/ADT I'd just use xrefs for the building shells, the unit types... and then be done.
Use the building shells for the site plan... (so you dont see the individual units in the site plan)
xref the units into the shells for the building plans (provide exterior dimensioning/notes etc)
units plans - 1/4" plans for the interior layouts.detail callouts etc... blah blah..



Now how do i organize this in Revit??? I hear some folks say to use "groups" for the unit plans so you dont have 'issues' when you mirror a unit plan... something about plumbing(tub) 'attaching' itself to a wall causing wierd results when it gets mirrored...i dunno... i'm just trying to figure it out...

I'd like to start off in the right direction so i dont get p.o'ed and throw the computer against the wall after spending too much time on it....

[nancy.mcclure]

mmonty, first, take a deep breath, then exhale. Everything is going to be fine.

The logic of linking is very similar to xrefs. Just in 3D. You can still develop the building shell/core as a separate file. Develop unique unit types as separate files. Link the unit types into the S/C model and copy/mirror/rotate as needed. Use Shared Coordinates so Revit can track the unique locations and update them in their precise location/orientation as further development occurs. Develop your units, update the links in the S/C model.

The 'cautions' are mainly about objects that want to be hosted (attach themselves) to elements that are the 'commons' - party walls, corridor walls, shell walls, etc. Elements want to stay with their host and cannot be copied w/o it. A good way to learn some of the behaviors is to get your units laid out w/o all the fixtures/details, link into your shell, distribute to various locations, share coordinates. I put party walls in the S/C, but others have their own preference. Then develop the units, update the links into the S/C model, and verify their behaviors as you go.

Using Groups is another option, and can work quite nicely if your project is not a mega-housing block that maxes out your processing capacity managing the groups. Groups allow 'clean up' between walls, and make annotations easier down the road. (NOTE: If you're using Phasing extensively, though, you might want to do some side-testing on how that effects when/how you proliferate your units)

Hope that helps. Especially the breathing part! [grin]

[mmonty1269]

.... Use Shared Coordinates so Revit can track the unique locations and update them in their precise location/orientation as further development occurs.

Shared Coordinates..... hhhmmm... gotta read up on that concept....

..... I put party walls in the S/C, but others have their own preference. Then develop the units, update the links into the S/C model, and verify their behaviors as you go.

I put the party walls in the shell as well....Seems logical here as well.

Using Groups is another option, ...... Groups allow 'clean up' between walls, and make annotations easier down the road.

cleanups between the interior (unit 'groups'(?)) and the shell are obviously desireable. For example, the drywall of the interior wall(s) should cleanup with the drywall of the shell. so perhaps 'grouping' the units is the best way to go...

Thank you for your quick response. See above....^^^

On a side note: How do I handle ....'The Crunch"? You know... when the project is due TOMMORROW, and the entire office has to jump on it! For example: user1 is finalizing the wall section, and user2 is keynoting the floor plans, user 3 is annotating the elevations, user 4 is wrapping up the FHA graphics, and details... Does Revit "merge" the work into the single Revit file? Individual users can open the file, but then when saved it gets merged ... Kinda sorta like when you get the notification to 'update xref' when working in ACA?? <maybe this is deserves a whole new thread>

[Paul Monsef]

Thank you for your quick response. See above....^^^

On a side note: How do I handle ....'The Crunch"? You know... when the project is due TOMMORROW, and the entire office has to jump on it! For example: user1 is finalizing the wall section, and user2 is keynoting the floor plans, user 3 is annotating the elevations, user 4 is wrapping up the FHA graphics, and details... Does Revit "merge" the work into the single Revit file? Individual users can open the file, but then when saved it gets merged ... Kinda sorta like when you get the notification to 'update xref' when working in ACA?? <maybe this is deserves a whole new thread>

Multiple Users can access / work in a single revit file using Worksets. There is some pretty good info on how this works in the help files.

"Revit Architecture 2010 User's Guide >
Working in a Team

You can work in a team in Revit Architecture using worksharing or linked models.

Worksharing allows simultaneous access to a shared model through use of a central file. Use worksharing when you are working with a single model (one RVT file) that will have multiple team members working on it.

Using linked models, project elements or systems are separated into individually managed models that can be linked together. Use linked models when your project contains distinct buildings, such as a campus, or when you are working with team members from other disciplines, such as structural engineers or MEP engineers. You can also use worksharing in linked models."

[cliff collins]

xrefs in cad are similar to ( but not as good as )

Worksets and Linked models in Revit.

you'll get the hang of this. Just lose the "cad mentality" and enbrace the "BIM mentality"

cheers........

[mmonty1269]

So far... my basic tests (based soley on floor plan layouts) prove that groups are the way to go. In particular the walls 'clean-up' correctly. The minimal plumbing and cabinetry also mirrored without any isses.....

Now... what are the downfalls to using Groups for the unit plan(s) ??? - I'm trying to think ahead here... door schedules... finish sched's.... keynoting... sections...uuummmm..."worksharing"??

[d.stairmand]

We use them for unit plans a lot - Only downside is every once in a while when you finish updating a group it errors & Creates another group.
Simple fix though - select all of the old groups & change them to the new one - delete the old group & rename the new group to the Old name.
We tend to have no "Wall Hosted" components also. The exterior doors & windows are on the shell, no the unit plan group.

[mmonty1269]

What about the 'worksharing' aspect of Groups? Say I'm in the file and some architect-wannabe-interior desecrator wants to play with a unit layout?? Can he/she work on the individual unit (Group) and then have it update in the file I'm working on... Guess I really need to get into the 'worksharing' tutorials huh?? Is there one??..... ????

[ron.sanpedro]

What about the 'worksharing' aspect of Groups? Say I'm in the file and some architect-wannabe-interior desecrator wants to play with a unit layout?? Can he/she work on the individual unit (Group) and then have it update in the file I'm working on... Guess I really need to get into the 'worksharing' tutorials huh?? Is there one??..... ????

If you have that little respect for your team mates, then Revit may be a frustration for you.

Gordon

[mmonty1269]

If you have that little respect for your team mates, then Revit may be a frustration for you.

Gordon

oooohhh. dont be SO sensative.... :cheers: