To nest or not to nest

[Nic M.]

C3a is a reseller in Belgium who's in the process of creating some local content for Revit.
They have set up a few windows and doors with nested families as demo / test.

The id there following is nested families.
Less families, more nested families. Easier to maintain / change, more flexibility in one family.
For example a window has nested: outer frame, inner frame, sill, tablet, glass, mun-tins and hardware. Has +30 parameters and is 915Kb large.

My opinion is to be flexible in creating a total new family, not in one big family.
For every new project we do in Revit I create 2 or 3 new families based on existing ones. So I want my families to be clean with as less overhead as possible.
I only use nested families for door / window hardware or in some rare occasions
I also have questions on the large family size (915Kb) and the many parameters.

What's the best way to tackle this?

Your opinion is, as always, much appreciated.

P.S.
Important to know is, in Belgium + 95% of windows and doors are custom made (no big manufacturer that has fixed dimensioned and types)

[sdm.77920]

Hi,

I work for C3A and am currently involved in creating localized content for Belgian Revit users.
In order to clarify Nic's message, I would like to elaborate a bit on why we opted for nested families.

First what we see as benefits:

Less families = less clutter
The less families, the easier the choice.
For instance: so far we created three main window families: single fixed, single opening and double opening (others will follow shortly).
The main families contain nested families, so for a given main family the user is offered a choice in hardware, whether or not to place a (parametric) lintel, (parametric) window sill etc. Although this means several extra parameters, subsequent similar windows can be placed using the "create similar" method thus eliminating the need to set parameters for every window instance.

Adding parameters
If in the future parameters need to be added, the number of families to modify is limited.

Maintenance
As future versions will add new functionality to windows, we will have less families to update.


Downside:

"fat" families:
As Nic already pointed out, a typical window family is about 900 Kb.
When using several different families in one project, this makes for an impressive file size.
Anything above 4 Mb we consider as "unmaillable".
RVT-files being already considerably bigger then their DWG counterparts, this certainly is a consideration to be reckoned with.

Time consuming:
Every parameter one changes, takes 5-10 sec. for Revit to accept and to allow the user to change the next parameter.
Luckily this is hardly affected by the size of the project...
Nevertheless, it would be nice if the developers could find a way so that one can change any number of parameters and have Revit only accept them when the dialog is closed.



Anyway, we are willing to lend an ear to the more experienced.
If it would turn out that "nested" is not the way to go, we still can alter our course as we are still in the early stages of developing content.


I hope this kicks of a lively discussion....

Cheers,

Steven

[aaronrumple]

Nested families is the only way to do door in my opinion.

What I've worked out for our office is:
Door--
Door Swing - Single (Double, Bypass...etc.)
Door Panel
Frame

[Steve_Stafford]

Probably obvious from other posts, but I'm a fan of nesting families too. Complex geometry that behaves simply in a family is a great candidate for nesting. It reduces the complexity to a simpler object and you can decide how much of the complexity is adjustable by the end user. This can go a long way toward minimizing families that break because someone put a family that belongs in a thick wall in a thin one.

What remains to be seen is how improvements in future versions of Revit affect the nesting strategies we choose now. That said, it seems reasonable to prefer to nest as few things as possible, using their complexity and the chance of re-using these nested objects in other families as important criteria.

[Nic M.]

Thanks for the responses (had hoped for a more vivid disc. )

I had a swift look at nested families and concluded it was to much overhead. Maybe I should take a closer look and make some test families.

[Phil Palmer]

I tend to go the nested family route but must add that the 'performance' can be a bit of an issue when changing parameters.

[aaronrumple]

I look at it this way. I can use nested families and get a much more flexible family, spend less time managing families, build new families faster using nested components. To me this far outweighs the few second I get to sip coffee which changing a parameter in a large project.