Using Reference Planes

[davidthigpen]

I have been using Revit for several years now and I'm pretty comfortable with my modeling skills. Recently I have received files from others that are using lots of reference planes to construct their models. I rarely use them, only if I need a reference from view to view that isn't easily accessed from other views. Am I missing something in my use of Revit? It seems to me that these folks are using them as construction lines but I believe that the model elements should be referencing other elements when possible and most of the time that that is how I build my models, reference other elements? How are others modeling - construction planes a lot or only when necessary?

[Scott D Davis]

I have been using Revit for several years now and I'm pretty comfortable with my modeling skills. Recently I have received files from others that are using lots of reference planes to construct their models. I rarely use them, only if I need a reference from view to view that isn't easily accessed from other views. Am I missing something in my use of Revit? It seems to me that these folks are using them as construction lines but I believe that the model elements should be referencing other elements when possible and most of the time that that is how I build my models, reference other elements? How are others modeling - construction planes a lot or only when necessary?

Its generally considered a "best practice" when creating families to construct a framework or skeleton of reference planes and/or reference lines, and add parameters between these references. Then flex the model to make sure the references are acting as anticipated. If they are, then start to add geometry which is based upon or locked to these reference planes/lines. It is also a recommendation that elements in families are NOT referencing other objects, but rather reference planes, as this can minimize issues with circular references and other errors when building families.

The way you are building them isn't "wrong", but it's generally easier to use reference planes to build a framework for the family, then add geometry.

[patricks]

I think the OP was referring to actual project files, not families. I have also seen files like this, with a messy spider-web of reference planes running every which way. It's really annoying sometimes. I like the rule other people on here follow - if a RP isn't named, it's getting deleted.

[Scott D Davis]

I think the OP was referring to actual project files, not families. I have also seen files like this, with a messy spider-web of reference planes running every which way. It's really annoying sometimes. I like the rule other people on here follow - if a RP isn't named, it's getting deleted.

Ah...good point.. I read it as "families" the first time around.

[DoTheBIM]

We use reference planes in lieu of grid lines mostly. Revit has it's own set of rules that are not visible to the user what to do with walls and such when moving grids. I found them very counter-intuitive for our production environment for residential work (I see their purpose for commercial work)... so I opted to set up our template/training without them. In fact almost exactly one year from training a user asked me today "What are grids? What the purpose of them?" And I know that was included in basic training. But most users forget what they don't use... but I digress.

We sketch in 1st floor walls and then create/lock reference planes to the walls, when going to subsequent floors and foundation, you know where you are and don't have to deal with underlays which don't work well when trying to layout by the core face of a wall. I try to train to dimension to reference planes as well so that all you have to do to shift the entire side of a building is pick the ref plane and adjust the dim as needed. we also use them for outlining things that need to line up from floor to floor like stair openings. When you sketch the floor object it is then good practice to lock the sketch lines to these reference planes so that that will adjust as well if something should change. It works fairly well and I get users throughout the day say things like "Wow, I didn't expect all that to adjust at the same time." Depending on the change, it may work out to be a negative and give errors when trying to make adjustments but then I just use the dis-join option when moving if needed and do all the other adjustments like we did before revit. There are a number of other miscellaneous uses for reference planes that we use as well. I try to train that you use walls to build roofs, floors, and what not when possible, but when you can't use geometry to relate new objects, use the existing reference planes and define the alignment as design intent (aligned/locked or dimensioned and locked if needed), but yet use dimension locks very sparingly.

Nothing wrong with your method. We generally use ref planes for exterior of building, interior of stair well. and some other minor checking/alignment purposes.

Oh and we do not name them. that would be a nightmare. Most times it's pretty clear what they're for.

[aaronrumple]

Oh and we do not name them. that would be a nightmare. Most times it's pretty clear what they're for.

Around here.... Name a ref. plane - its a keeper. Any unamed ref. plane in your way is fair game for deletion.

[DoTheBIM]

Around here.... Name a ref. plane - its a keeper. Any unamed ref. plane in your way is fair game for deletion.I could learn to like that rule real easy on larger projects.