Interior Design model link to ARCH model

[pfaudler]

Dear friends,

I have been through Scott's AU 2009 class handout on Interior Design and Revit. I must admit that it is very impressive. I have been trialling a method whereby we can link ID model into ARCH model. We would have ARCH model with wall (no finish), floors, ceilings, doors, windows, and rooms (may be) etc. In ID model, we would like to have finish wall, rooms, furniture, room elevations, finishes material take-offs, room based finsh matrix etc.

I have two queries on proposed method.

1. How do I cut door/window opening in finish walls in ID model. I assume that we start ID model with either CM ARCH walls or copy/paste ARCH walls and set them to monitor. But when i draw finish walls in ID model and join them to CM ARCH walls, It doesnt cut openinings in finish walls. Am I missing something here?

2. Rooms. Since we can not CM rooms, I understand we have to manage rooms in both models in order to generate room based schedules etc.

I understand there are various ways to address ID and ARCH packages interaction, i.e. one mode with worksets etc. (as per Scott's handout). But the main reason we would lilke to go down the ID-ARCH linking route is because this is how our teamwork is setup in our company.

Can you please share your experience on this subject?

Thanks in anticipation of your response.

I would ike to take this opportunity to wish you all and the AUGI a Merry X'mas and a Happy New Year.

[cliff collins]

[QUOTE=rahul.shah;1034879]

1. How do I cut door/window opening in finish walls in ID model. I assume that we start ID model with either CM ARCH walls or copy/paste ARCH walls and set them to monitor. But when i draw finish walls in ID model and join them to CM ARCH walls, It doesnt cut openinings in finish walls. Am I missing something here?

2. Rooms. Since we can not CM rooms, I understand we have to manage rooms in both models in order to generate room based schedules etc.


We are using this method, and here are some suggestions:

1. Place all the Interior Walls AND Finish Walls in the ID model, this will solve the "cutting" problem.(--OR-- you could edit the ID wall profile to "fit" the openings, but I would not recommend this.)

2. Place Rooms in the ID model, and create Schedules in that Revit file.
The Linked Shell model can be set to Room Bounding to "close" the Rooms' perimeters.

Then, you can issue 2 sets of drawings:

1. Arch Shell & Core Package
2. Interior Design Package

There will be issues along the way with Linked models, but the benefits outweigh the downside.

cheers............

[UpNorth]

If you have access to Revit MEP you can use it to place Spaces in the ID model. Spaces will allow the ID model to report the Room object numbers. You onyl need to add the Space with Revit MEP and then you can work in RAC.

[pfaudler]

Thanks Cliff and UpNorth for your quick response. Much appreciated.
Unfortunately we do not have access to MEP so we cant explore/use space option.

Cliff,

I had also thought about the option you mentioned in which we have interior walls in ID model. But I dont see it working for our setup. When archtiects start a model, they place all walls in ARCH model and control the layout of the buildilng throughout the project. What ID team does is looks after the final finishes of the walls, ceilings, floors, FF&E loading, schedules etc.

Another option I am thinking is to map the ARCH walls to Interior walls (ARCH walls + finish layers). But I understand doing this would break the walls alignment, No? Or has this been fixed in RAC 2010?

OR

Copy/Paste ARCH walls into ID model (or save ARCH model as ID model to kick off ID model) and set walls to "Monitor" to ARCH model.

In an ideal world, I would like to have ARCH model holding all walls without finishes and have ID model holding walls with finishes, FF&E, schedules, room elevaations, etc.

I am also not sure how to adddress ceilings? I believe ceilings cant be CM. So coordination between ARCH-ID would be challenging. Floors can be CM so its fine. Like ARCH-ID walls, I can apply the same rule to floors.


I would also like to hear from Aaron Maller and Scott Brown on this topic. I visited Aaron's blog http://malleristicrevitation.blogspot.com/ many times and read between lines under CM topic on Interior Design/Architecture interaction. But still have some confusions. Scott's AU 2009 handout material is very very informative on this subject too. Three case studies he has shown amazes me. Fantastic work. I quite like the workflow he mentioned on page no. 21 about how he splits ARCH and ID models (please see captured screen shot from that handout). This is exactly I would like to achieve.

Thanks in anticipation.

[twiceroadsfool]

Hello Rahul- Thanks for the shout out. Ive been meaning to write in there recently, but have been bured BURIED at work.

Scott is definetely the person to ask about Interiors, i havent done nearly as intense of Interior work as he has, Architecturally or Revit-ally.

I can tell you what i know about File Linking and Copy Monitor, and what i personally would and wouldnt do, but Scott may have better ideas that differ from mine as hes ventured MUCH MUCH farther down the road.

But, heres my take (only on a few of the items, since theresa lot to cover):

1. Walls. I would NOT copy/paste/Monitor, and i would NOT Copy/Monitor, nor would i *save as* the arch model to start. I personally would do this: The architectural walls are the architectural walls. For me- that includes Gyp. (ITs necessary to be defined in the partition type for us, since it dictates Rating and STC values). I would put the walls in the arch model, then in the Linked ID model, make "thin walls" for finishes. Their walls being just the Tiles, the Coverings, the whatever. What do you do for paint? Im not sure. Id probably model a very thin wall, but thats an off the cuff guess since i havent had to do it that much. Im not sure what to do about Openings, honestly. Id LOVE to peek at Scotts handout to see how he handles that. A lot of the time we do ID on another workset of the same Model as arch (ours arent as intense as his) so a simple Join Geometry handles the Opening issues quite nice.

There are a number of reasons i wouldnt Copy/CM/save as the arch walls. Youre going to want the walls seperated in each room, and the arch walls wont be that way. Youll spend more time splitting and editing and reconfiguring, than you will running new walls around the perimeter. THEN you can monitor THOSE to the arch walls.

Plus, the Copy portion of Copy/Monitor is a giant PITA. Its quirky, it finds the EXTENTS of families with openings, not the openings, which makes that fairly useless. It even finds things not visible (not present) in the model, if its defined in the family. Its buggy about wall joins, and it only copies from wall CL to wall CL, as Steve Stafford reminded me at AU a few years ago. That doesnt SOUND to bad until you try to use it in the real world, than its just annoying as all heck.

Floors- we do the same thing: Its in the arch model if ifs got to be detailed in the arch drawings. If its just a finish floor (carpet, tile, whatever) it can go in with the "FIN" stuff. (As i said, we do it mainly in the same model, and use Filters to control visibility... But it would be the same for Linking).

The room situation sucks. The way i see it, theyre in the architectural model because they have to be. Casework and Furniture is ehhh for us. Ours is in the arch model, but not for any good reason. IF i was seperating an ID model, id certainly move it over there. Im not entirely sure what i would do with scheduling rooms at that point. There are a bunch of crummy workarounds, and i would default to someone whos done it more. I know with our MEP guys we wait as long as possible, then have them copy the rooms and paste. It sucks, but its what we do. Then we make sure to tell them if we change anything.

Im definetely hoping to check out Scotts class though, if i can see it online this weekend.

[sbrown]

Scott here:) Thanks for all the praise, I certainly don't deserve it. The reason we did 3 case studies was because there isn't a "right" answer to your questions. All methods have pro's and cons. The one you are chosing to use (case study #1) in my opinion (if you were in the actual class) is the worst to use unless you really have to. There is alot of coordination between teams that has to be done. Ie Rooms, Room schedules etc. have to be done in the arch model and the ID team has to give the info to the Arch team to input. Same with doors. the ID team would create the door panel families and the trim families and give the door panels to the Arch to insert into his doors. Or you could have the Architect create only the frames and the ID team insert and schedule the panels.

Can you post the type of project you are going to work on? The project type will affect which option to go with. Ie if you have something that lends itself to a core and shell and then interior fit out. Option 2 works best.

On a side note, we had 3 hours or more of content to present but it was only a 90min. Class. So maybe next year we can come up with a format that allows those doing both ID and Arch to get together and share in depth workflows. Its really hard to demonstrate the pros and cons of each method without more time. I'd love to hear suggestions on how to present this material logically and usefully in the future.

[twiceroadsfool]

Scott- I think its a big enough topic with enough interest that you have an informal meeting (sort of like AU Unplugged) that runs for a full half day. This is the *real meat and potatoes* for a lot of users. To actually get an AU Unplugged room with AV equipment would be great. But you could kill a half or an entire day going over pro's and con's of the different solutions, and i think THATS the kind of power-user-group-discussion that needs to be going on at AU.

I would totally be up for participating, and im definetely planning on being there next year.

[sbrown]

I agree. I would love to get a room for an entire day with top users from different companies and each share our workflows then document the best practices as a group. Then a follow up class presenting the findings to the masses.

[gwnelson]

This is the *real meat and potatoes* for a lot of users.

So for now we have to settle for Tofu 'n Turkey Bacon?

[twiceroadsfool]

LOL, i didnt mean it like that. Its just that if you search the posts here on AUGI, people have TONS of questions about the UNsexy of architecture and Revit: Partition schedules, door details, Finish plans, Fire ratings, Standard Detail libraries, Naming conventions and on and on.

That brings up a host of items people need to know how to circumnavigate: Revit catagories versus architectural catagories, interacting with Linked files (hence this post), how to make legends work when legends dont work, how to load content in to a template (youd be surprised how many people dont know, and they end up with Familyname, Familyname1, Familyname2, Familyname3 in their project).

Ill bet you could fill a room for a week talking just about "how to get **** done" in Revit, LOL.

Scott, im on board and will even vounteer to be the secretary, LOL.

[sbrown]

Cool I'll propose something to the AU leaders. I'd like to get some more input before I put a proposal together. I'll start a sep. thread.

[pfaudler]

Thank you very much Scott and Aaron. You guys are really very helpful to the community here. I would also like to participate in your one day (OR week...ha..ha..) event on ID-ARCH linking and coordination.

Anyways, back to the original post. Scott/Aaron, We are mainly into healthcare her ein the UK. Let me explain you our project execution setup from ID-ARCH coordination point of view in the traditional 2D CAD workflow. We would have ARCH team working on a 2D CAD plan layout in a CAD file, say 123. We have a dedicated room loading and ID team, who work kind of seperate from ARCH team, although they communicate on a regular basis. The room loading team uses a software called ADB/Codebook which is bolt onto Acad. ADB/Codebook work from MS Access database having room styles defined with all room information (design, environment, electrical etc.) together with equipment requirement. The room loading team would start a new CAD file, say 456, and link 2D CAD plan file 123 into it. They would then link ADB/Codebook database of the project, which contains project specific room styles, to the CAD file 456. Now here is the key point. In the 2D CAD file 456, they have to draw close pline of each room (tracing over Xrefed CAD file 123, plan layout) and link each room to the MS access database. ADB/Codeook then load room specific equipment group into the room using pre-defined CAD blocks. The system is something similar to OPS. I havent used it but have read about it. ADB/Codebook also develops 1:50 room elevations, room loaded plan, equipement list, room data sheet (word doc.) from MS access database link.

We have been working with this setup for quite a long time now and with success. So we would like to achieve the similar setup in Revit. So what I was thinking is that we would have ID model seperate with WALLS and FURN worksets and have ARCH model with required worksets. So room loading/ID team can work on ID model and can have thin paint/tiles etc. walls and can copy rooms from ARCH models, to start with. Then ARCH and ID teams communicate to each other whenever there is a change in room names or add/delete rooms. This is normally one way process. The room loading team decides room names and add/delete rooms. So If they make any changes they inform ARCH team and they make changes in the rooms in their model too.

In each project we first try to split the project into multiple Revit files, if there are multiple buildings on site with obvious/possible detachment. Now each Revit file is a building with, lets say, 60-100 beds. So I was thinking to have one ARCH and one ID Revit file for each buildling. This is partly because of the way responsibilities are split and the interaction between two teams (ID-ARCH) is established.

I hope I have explained this clearly. I would be happy to talk to you too, if you want. Please drop me your contact nos. and I will be happy to call you and discuss this further.

[twiceroadsfool]

Thank you very much Scott and Aaron. You guys are really very helpful to the community here. I would also like to participate in your one day (OR week...ha..ha..) event on ID-ARCH linking and coordination.

Anyways, back to the original post. Scott/Aaron, We are mainly into healthcare her ein the UK. Let me explain you our project execution setup from ID-ARCH coordination point of view in the traditional 2D CAD workflow. We would have ARCH team working on a 2D CAD plan layout in a CAD file, say 123. We have a dedicated room loading and ID team, who work kind of seperate from ARCH team, although they communicate on a regular basis. The room loading team uses a software called ADB/Codebook which is bolt onto Acad. ADB/Codebook work from MS Access database having room styles defined with all room information (design, environment, electrical etc.) together with equipment requirement. The room loading team would start a new CAD file, say 456, and link 2D CAD plan file 123 into it. They would then link ADB/Codebook database of the project, which contains project specific room styles, to the CAD file 456. Now here is the key point. In the 2D CAD file 456, they have to draw close pline of each room (tracing over Xrefed CAD file 123, plan layout) and link each room to the MS access database. ADB/Codeook then load room specific equipment group into the room using pre-defined CAD blocks. The system is something similar to OPS. I havent used it but have read about it. ADB/Codebook also develops 1:50 room elevations, room loaded plan, equipement list, room data sheet (word doc.) from MS access database link.

We have been working with this setup for quite a long time now and with success. So we would like to achieve the similar setup in Revit. So what I was thinking is that we would have ID model seperate with WALLS and FURN worksets and have ARCH model with required worksets. So room loading/ID team can work on ID model and can have thin paint/tiles etc. walls and can copy rooms from ARCH models, to start with. Then ARCH and ID teams communicate to each other whenever there is a change in room names or add/delete rooms. This is normally one way process. The room loading team decides room names and add/delete rooms. So If they make any changes they inform ARCH team and they make changes in the rooms in their model too.

In each project we first try to split the project into multiple Revit files, if there are multiple buildings on site with obvious/possible detachment. Now each Revit file is a building with, lets say, 60-100 beds. So I was thinking to have one ARCH and one ID Revit file for each buildling. This is partly because of the way responsibilities are split and the interaction between two teams (ID-ARCH) is established.

I hope I have explained this clearly. I would be happy to talk to you too, if you want. Please drop me your contact nos. and I will be happy to call you and discuss this further.

If thats all youre after, dont bother putting any rooms in the Arch model. Theres no need. The ID team can set the Linked 123 (arch model) to Room Bounding, and they can place the rooms as they see fit. The arch model will act as the *pline.* Now when Arch changes the shell, the rooms will update in size, etc. Plus, arch can schedule the rooms by telling the Room Finish schedule to "include elements in linked files."

The only caveat is to fill in any of the information for the rooms, the ID dept has to do it, which sounds like how they work anyway.

If thats the case, why have the room items in the arch model at all?

[sbrown]

I agree the rooms should be in the ID model in most cases.

[pfaudler]

Thanks Scott and Aaron. I think you are right about having ARCH model as a link in ID model for pline. So we dont need to repeat rooms in ARCH models.

But what about finish walls (paint/tiles etc.)? I can think of two options here. (1) Have ID team working on ARCH model in FINISH WALLS workset and perform join geometry to ARCH walls. - (true BIM environment, as per S.Brown's third option in his class handout).

OR

(2) Have ID team working on ID model and add finish walls and add doors/windows openings using frame version (or just opening version) of doors/windows families. So ARCH model will hold full version of doors/windows families, whereas ID model will hold frame/opening version of the same doors/windows families. - (less favorable option as per S.Brown's comments).

I like option (1) but i fear about ID-ARCH interaction. We have ID team, in most cases, sitting in a different city than ARCH team. So do you think this will work between two offices, in the same country (no time difference)? We have pretty simple connection line between two offices so i can't think of working live on a central file (for STC) from two cities.

Also, for wall face based and ceiling face based furniture families, would they work with linked model ceilings and walls? I havent tried this before.

Thanks in anticipation.

[twiceroadsfool]

Two different cities in one central file: Without some serious hardware, isnt going to work well. Youre only viable option there is remote desktop, which means buying extra computers.

Wall Hosted and Ceiling Hosted are different than Face Based. Face Based can host on a Linked Model Face. Wall Hosted and Ceiling hosted cannot, their hosts would have to be copied as well.

[twiceroadsfool]

Let me throw one more thing in to the mix:


Room tags. Right now you cant tag Linked Files, so it goes something like this. You either:

1. Copy and paste the rooms so you can tag them in your file, which stinks cuz you have to manually update and coordinate the room information.

2. Have the ID dept. create a Floor Plan that has the room tags, then show that view as By Linked View where you need room tags. For buildings with tight spaces and big room tags (like NCS) this kinda stinks, since you cant nudge the tags this way and that because theyre linked.

But its basically one or the other...

[cliff collins]

I'd vote for Room Tag Option #2, which will require a bit more fussing and moving the room tags once dimensions,notes, etc are added, and ID staff/SC staff going back and forth a bit
in each other's models--but still better than Option #1.

cheers.........

[twiceroadsfool]

I agree completely. Although depending on workflow and beliefs about being in one anothers models (if they were going to allow going in each others models they could just do the workset thing as mentioned earlier, so im assuming they dont like to play nice, lol) and depending on office standard symbology, it REALLY can get tiresome when youre working in close quarters with dimensions, text, room tags, door tags, wall tags.

Id still do it that way, but im a glutton for punishment, and it IS a hassle.

[sbrown]

I would have the dimensions done in the ID model too. I would have the Architecture team readline the ID plans indicating where they want dims and partition type tags. Then show that view on the ID sheet and just reference it with a note from the Arch sheet. It's tricky to "partially" annotate a view so if possible annotate views where the info is live. You will have your core model set to room bounding so everthing is "live" in the ID model. Your Arch plans will annotated the exterior info and all interior info can be linked in and halftoned with a big note saying refer to sheet ID xxx for partition types, dimensions etc.

[cliff collins]

Scott,

Agreed--

Except.........The Arch. redlining is an "old school" paper markup technique, inefficient because by the time someone carefully redlines all of the annotations, it could already be done in Revit-- qualifying statement: by someone who actually knows how to do it correctly! That's the rub.

Then there's always dwf markups imported into Revit........... Hard to get an entire staff using that.... LOL!

Great discussion here.

cheers.........

[twiceroadsfool]

Well, that also depends on something else....

Im operating under the assumption that the Arch people are controlling the "partitions" themselves, on the interior. In that instance, it really stinks to have the dims in the INT model, as when the architects need to dim the construction plan, they really need the INT model. But here, the architects finalize the partitions and the ID peeps put the finishes ON the wall.

If the workflow is different, than that would have to change. But our construction plans get dimenioned to finish face of partition (sans finish tile, etc), and the architects do it, not the interiors people...

[wmullett]

I think everyone should be demanding that we can tag linked file elements. If they can schedule they we should be able to tag them.

[jennah105988]

I would like to know if this topic has been expanded in any later threads or if anyone can provide the links to the classes you guys so highly praised ( I realize it has been a few years since this was posted). I work for an interior architecture hospitality firm - and in our limited experience thus far with Revit coordination we usually do not own the main architectural model, which is just linked into our model - which does not contain its own walls, ceiling etc. as we are a consultant to the architect from a different company. (We are responsible mainly for everything finish-face of gyp out - though we do design the "shape" of the architectural space and then communicate those needs to the architect to incorporate into their model- so that it shows up as we intend - in our model). As you can imagine this is fairly tedious and we are not able to take advantage of some of the efficiencies of Revit such as applying actual finishes to walls for ease of tagging and scheduling etc. - without recreating the walls as thin walls in our model on top of the architects model. From this thread I am assuming that there would be a way however - if we were to create our own thin walls on top of the architects - that we could use copy/monitor to keep the walls together whenever a change was made instead of having to track down every minute adjustment.
One small example of this – for our guestrooms we designed crown molding profile which as then applied to the walls as a sweep. The issue came whenever a wall was moved – the crown would no longer line up with the wall and we would have to keep track of adjusting every bit of crown for every room type…every time something moved.

I am curious about how/if the copy/monitor function could help us. There are a lot of issues with sharing models between companies so that is not an option - and we currently just operate with their model linked into ours and our model linked into theirs - however we are finding this to be cumbersome as all we are really using the Revit model for is 2D documentation since we cant take advantage of owning the walls etc. Its to the point where we might as well draw/document everything in CAD - just using Revit as exported floorplans to draw from.

Would Copy/Monitor allow us to copy the walls, floors, openings etc. from the architect – to create our model as a separate project file that is linked to the architects project file so that when a wall changed in theirs –we would be alerted to the change – but it wouldn’t move until we relinked? We would also have the ability to assign finishes to walls and model on them and have those items belong to the wall since it would technically be ours – but a “copied” version of thiers? Or is it still just a linked file with notifications – in which case we could not treat the walls as our own?

[pfaudler]

ID documentation is indeed tricky in Revit.
Please see the latest interior design class

http://au.autodesk.com/?nd=event_class&session_id=9437&jid=1753872

I also recommend you go onto AU and study some previous years' Interior Design in Revit classes.
Overall your workflow is correct..have ARCH model inked into ID and vice versa and particularly when two companies are different. Regular coordination/communication is the key to the success of such projects.
If you need any more info pl do not hesitate to PM me.