Detailing a multi building (campus) project

[Duncan Lithgow]

I've been reading up on ways of doing details across several building models. Myself I'm working on a hospital campus project for the next few years. Here's what I've put together - comments very welcome

Thanks to these posts for their input
- http://forums.augi.com/showthread.ph...campus-project
- http://revitoped.blogspot.com/2011/0...d-details.html
- http://www.revitcity.com/forums.php?...hread_id=17400
- http://forums.augi.com/showthread.ph...campus-project

Here's the structure I'm working on for a hospital campus project
-----------------------------------------------------------------

* Each building has it's own project RVT file
* There is a separate details project RVT file where all callout are made, all sheets are made and printed. In this file there is a 2d imitation of each callout (because Callouts do not show up via By linked View)
* Each building is linked into the details project to provide a 3D context
* The detail project is linked into each buildings RVT file, by setting plan to show the detail project by linked view 2d imitation of Callouts can be seen
* There is also a separate RVT file for standard details. These are copied with 'Insert 2D from file' as needed into the details project for this project

I have not yet found a good solution to ensuring that sections are placed identically in the detail project so that the 3D models placement is the same. I'm tempted to say that sections should also be drawn in the detail project - but if a building gets unloaded from there then a lot of tagging and dimensioning work can be lost. I may have have to draw a line at each section placement in each building and then show it in the detail project by linked view - cleaned up for scruft by hiding all in the linked file expect 2d lines.

Workflow
--------

* If you want to draw a new detail - all project details should be drawn in regular views (not Drafting Views)

1. Open the project details file
2. In a plan or section create your Callout and open the view
3. Draw your detail (preferably with with Detail Components and Keynote Tags)
4. Create a sheet and give it the correct number and name
5. In a plan or section place a 2D Detail Component imitation Callout and fill out the correct information - it should be identical to the real Callout
6. If the corresponding view in the building model is set up correctly with by linked view then the imitation Callout will show up with the correct information

* If you want to use an existing details from the standards file - all standard details should be drawn in Drafting Views
1. Create a Drafting View
2. Use Insert > Import > Insert from File > Insert Views from File to choose the drafting view with the desired detail
3. In a plan or section create your Callout and reference it to your new Drafting View
4. In your plan or section place a 2D Detail Component imitation Callout and fill out the correct information - it should be identical to the real Callout
5. If the corresponding view in the building model is set up correctly with by linked view then the imitation Callout will show up with the correct information

Notes
------------

* Remember that Revit will not allow you to open a project linked in to a file you already have open
* Drafting Views cannot be collected with By linked View, they must be imported. Therefore there is no reason to link the standard details project into your project details file
* If a standard detail is revised it must be copied in again - remember to delete the old copy
* I have not found a satisfactory way to stop people editing the standard details once they have been copied into the project details file. My best suggestion is making a View Template which is only used on all Drafting Views and makes the content dark red. This creates a visual cue that they must not be edited - but it does not show up differently when printing.

I can attach an example if people want it, but the actual files are in Danish.

Hope this plan is useful for some of you, please do comment with your reactions.

[sbrown]

Sounds like a nightmare to me. I personally would not do it this way. Way too hard. I would do all my details in each specific building model. Then if there are crossover details, Ie details that are shared between multiple buildings, I might do those in a shared detail project, Ie if stair details and window details are the same, I would then just use a general note to point the contractor to the sheets of common details. No wall sections would be in that project. Another way to handle campus's are with "COMPONENT ID'S" in the titleblock, IE use a building identification system with one for General or Commons, So in your titleblock you have sheet A2.01 But in front of it is a modifier CD(common Details) or something like that, Each building gets one, so you can have BX A2.01 AND BY A2.01. Then you just put a note to see CD series for common details.

[david_peterson]

It is a nightmare. I'm working on a current project where I'll end up with 25+ different, unique structural packages to go with the 25+ phases. The problem here is that I can't tell contractor "A" to go look at contractor "B"'s drawings. So my plan is to try to do as much as possible in one model and duplicate details as often as possible. I would treat each building like it's an individual project since that's how it's going to be bid out (my assumption). Telling a contractor to go look at drawings he doesn't have and didn't include in his contract for reproduction costs causes confusion and usually ends up with someone getting a bill in the end.
I worked on a project that was done in cad a few years back where our archies tried to do a Common Details set. The problem was that there were similar details, but they weren't the same conditions. Caused us lots of problems in the end.
Depending on how your detailing ie if you're using the model to create the details or if you are going the 2d method. If the 2d method you can always use the "import 2d view" from another project.
Personally I think you really need to look at how the project is going to be delivered and built. If it's all going to be done at once by one GC or CM, then a common detail set may make some sense. If split between 1 coordinating CM who hires 3 other CM's who each hire 3-6 GC's and is going to be done in many phases, I'd look at doing separate sets for each phase/area. More work, but much less confusion.

[LP Design]

Interesting discussion. It seems to me that the most valuable aspect of shared details is having to do less coordination between drawing sets. For example, if a standard roof drain detail changes from metal to plastic, that change can be made once and all drawing sets will reference it.

Unfortunately what ends up actually happening is that a detail changes on one building for a specific reason. Say building A requires metal drains due to construction type, but buildings B-E can remain plastic to save cost. What if the foundation type is different so the wall terminations are not the same? In these cases you lose value because you have a detail that would normally be part of the common details set but isn't. Now the possibility of referring to incorrect details compounds with the inclusion of "imitation callouts" and the work of coordinating the details goes back up.

Here's an idea for a workflow that maintains separate details in each set but leverages Revit's capabilities. I have not tried this yet on my own projects so I'm curious to see if users such as Duncan would see it as a benefit.

1. Link all building models into a shared file for printing (this may be done already)
2. Set up a sheet-set that contains only the detail sheets for all projects
3. Print these sheets to PDF or DWF as a QA set. (or hard copy depending on your PM)
4. Flip quickly back and forth through each page to confirm that the details are matching between each set.
5. Make any required changes to one project only.
6. Save-to-file any modified views, then reload them into each respective building file.

Downsides: 1. It takes more effort to change details because you have to reload into each model. 2. Multiple reviewers making comments on multiple sets could be very difficult to coordinate.
Upsides: 1. each drawing set is unique so it can be split between contractors as David describes. 2. Revit detail references will stay current (extremely important imho) 3. Unique details can be addressed in each set more easily.

-LP

[Duncan Lithgow]

Hi LP Design. I don't understand what you mean, is there one set of all details or several sets to compare?

4. Flip quickly back and forth through each page to confirm that the details are matching between each set.

[LP Design]

Several sets. My experience with multi-building campuses has shown that there are not all that many details that can be purely shared between sets without any modification. So there would be maybe 1 or 2 sheets of shared details total. Those would be duplicated for each building set. So in your 10 building example, the QA documents would consist of 20 sheets total. 10 identical sets of 2 pages each. I will admit, however that the system fails if you truly have a large number of shared details, say 4 pages worth, because then you are cross checking 40 sheets at a time.

Think about it. If your buildings are so close to each other that you have that many details shared, you could accomplish your goal by having a single set of documents containing design options to cover the small differences. Then you end up with 1 set of drawings for the buildings, 1 set for the sitework. If your buildings are different enough that they need different document sets I would imagine that there are not that many shared details.

[Duncan Lithgow]

Hi David.

This project is being sent out in just two rounds (I assume that's what you mean by phases - nothing to do with Revits Phases? I don't do my daily work in English so I don't know what everything is called in the US)

[david_peterson]

Hi David.

This project is being sent out in just two rounds (I assume that's what you mean by phases - nothing to do with Revits Phases? I don't do my daily work in English so I don't know what everything is called in the US)

Yep those would be phases. I look at phases as how many sets of drawings must be issued. If you do things in a traditional Design, Bid, Build delivery, you have one package for all trades and everything goes out for bid and construction at once.
Phases in Revit can be used for many things, but they can also get very complicated and cumbersome so we tend to use revit phases only for the basics - existing, demo, and new construction.
My little project is 1.6 million sqft over I think it's about 16 buildings that will be delivered in multiple bid/build packages. The first package may be the foundation of say 3 of the buildings, but those are going to separate contractors on separate contracts, so I would issue 3 unique packages. Then about 6-8 weeks later we'll issue another foundation package for 3 more of the buildings and so on....... followed by the super structure packages and finally we have the balance (ie everything else)
And you mention you have 5yrs to draw it? I have to start putting out packages in 4 mths and I couldn't tell you where the exterior wall is yet. Should be a fun summer for me.
Hope this helps.

[MikeJarosz]

My little project is 1.6 million sqft over I think it's about 16 buildings that will be delivered in multiple bid/build packages.

Sounds like fast track. Make SURE everyone understands this, so that you aren't hit with change orders later. When you add work in multiple packages, you are not correcting deficiencies from the previous issue, but a lot of contractors see it that way.

Example: If you don't know what the exterior looks like yet, you might discover you need embeds long after the structure has gone out. Contractors love to get you into that situation! Revit can't help you there.

[Duncan Lithgow]

The first package may be the foundation of say 3 of the buildings, but those are going to separate contractors on separate contracts, so I would issue 3 unique packages. Then about 6-8 weeks later we'll issue another foundation package for 3 more of the buildings and so on....... followed by the super structure packages and finally we have the balance (ie everything else)
And you mention you have 5yrs to draw it? I have to start putting out packages in 4 mths and I couldn't tell you where the exterior wall is yet.

Okay, interesting. Is that what they call fast track? When the rest of the building is not yet designed as the structure starts going up. Anyway, the big difference between what you describe and what I have is that we deliver all the drawings for two groups of buildings in July - you're splitting things up into different aspects of the project: foundations, sub-structure, façades etc (sorry if my terminology is wrong). So of course it makes no sense for you to have a central project with all details inside.

On the other hand I assume that your details for the sub-structure will often be the same across several buildings. Would there be a benefit in collecting those in a centralised project - if not why not?