Can't open central file after background update

[matt__w]

We've recently received an updated architectural model. One of the guys here opened the file, purged/audited and overwrote the exisitng file on the network and now we can't get into our central file. We get multiple messages about "highlighted geometry no longer determines a plane", "can't move element", "instance origin does not lie on host face. Instance will lose association to host", and "one or more dimension references are or have become invalid". The DELETE CHECKED button is grayed out as is OK. The only things I can do are press the cancel button and restore the previous architectural model. What's the trick to getting into the file? It looks the majority of the issues are with wall hosted receptacles, switches and lights. Should we NOT be using those? We're sort of SOL at the moment here.

Any thoughts/ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance!
Matt

[Jrobker]

overwrote the exisitng file on the network

Whoops!


It looks the majority of the issues are with wall hosted receptacles, switches and lights. Should we NOT be using those?

No, you shouldn't use those for this exact reason.

I would have IT get a backup of the original linked file so you can atleaast open it and salavage what you can.
I would also call the Architect and let them know what is happening with their latest model. It sounds like they are deleting rather than modifying.

Take luck.

[matt__w]

We have a backup copy... it's been restored already.

So you're telling me I have to create my OWN switches, receptacles, etc... now? Oy! This just keeps getting better and better!! ;)

Matt

[matt__w]

So, JR.... Just to be clear here. I need to create all NON-HOSTED devices, fixtures, yada yada yada... so I can avoid this issue? Is this what you've done?

I'm looking for any pointers, tips, suggestions I can get my hands on.

Thanks!!
Matt

[smcmillin]

So i'm guessing the architect made a huge amount of significant changes and now you're screwed. I have not had this happen yet to the extent of not being able to open my model and I do use face hosted families for about 99% of electrical fixtures. You may be able to send the file to Autodesk and they can probably get it so the file will open.

This is more of a problem with how work flow should be handled in a Revit project. The arch needs to be further along in the project with Revit than if they were using cad, this needs to be made clear at the beginning. I know it is asking a lot for the arch to be 100% client approved design before the MPE consultants start but they should at least be close and if they can't do that, the arch should tell the client that, and the MPE guys can just do their portioin in cad. Revit is to infantile at this stage for what most arch's think it can do and should just accept the fact that some projects are just not meant for Revit MEP.

[RobertB]

So, JR.... Just to be clear here. I need to create all NON-HOSTED devices, fixtures, yada yada yada... so I can avoid this issue? Is this what you've done?The camp is probably 50-50 on face-based vs. non-hosted. The issues with face-based objects flying out into space has largely disappeared in 2010, so I've used face-based for the majority of our families.

[Jrobker]

What I am saying is that it's a risk to use face/wall/floor or any hosted families.


The camp is probably 50-50 on face-based vs. non-hosted. The issues with face-based objects flying out into space has largely disappeared in 2010, so I've used face-based for the majority of our families.

Robert is right. Also the word is out there (mostly) about best practices and modifying Elements.

Speaking of flying out into space (tags). I noticed with 2011 they have that fixed that.

One day we will be able to use this product the way it was sold (pitched) to us and how it's intended.

[moliva]

What I am saying is that it's a risk to use face/wall/floor or any hosted families.



Robert is right. Also the word is out there (mostly) about best practices and modifying Elements.

Speaking of flying out into space (tags). I noticed with 2011 they have that fixed that.

One day we will be able to use this product the way it was sold (pitched) to us and how it's intended.


one of these days, one of these days. I'm still not convinced it is even a great idea to be modeling all of MEP in Revit anyhow even if everything was perfect...

I would agree that the arch needs to be closer to finished before we start but from my experience the trend seems to be going the other way. Not to mention changes once the project is under construction...

[matt__w]

It's too bad we can't use 2010 exclusively for all of our projects since we work for the architects and owners. :\

[matt__w]

I've found the root of the problem here...

Someone had downloaded a Trane unit and loaded the family into our project. That Trane unit was then placed and then PINNED down. For some reason Revit didn't like that. Once I unpinned them I was able to update the background. I'm still getting the "instance origin does not lie on host face. Instance will lose association to host" message, but at least I/we can get into the file again.

Now the question is, why does pinning an element cause this to happen?

[Jrobker]

Now the question is, why does pinning an element cause this to happen?

Becuase it was never tested.

This reminds me of a conversation I had with an Architect. He mentioned that if we dimension to a linked model and lock the dimension it will wreak havoc on an update... in the event that the element that the dimension was locked to moves.

Im wondering if pinning it has some relation to the link.

[mwiggins121466]

You should never constrain/pin to a link. Also, as long as the arch is MODIFYING walls and such you should not have that many problems with face hosted items. "lose association" message just is telling you that if the wall moves now the receptacle will not move with it. Not that big of a deal.

Your OP can also mean that there is a dimension in the arch model that is having a problem.Just open the arch model and delete the dim's.