A Revit Architect re-using Revit Structural objects: is this really possible

[Helsinki_Dave]

Hi,


How do Revit architects re-use the structural engineers Revit model?

More specifically, do you re-use the .rvt objects that the engineer creates (linking etc), then use face-based architectural families to apply surfaces to structural floors, wall and columns - or not?
I'm an ACAD veteran, so the thought of re-modelling what the engineer has already modeled is not so appealing!

I suspect the problem is in the layers in compound objects. Simply put, the engineers wall is 'inside' my wall, but Revit doesn't really recognize this parametrically through the linking process (unless I use face-based families right?)

Thanks in advance!
Dave

[patricks]

I pretty much use the above-grade structure only from the RST file, and nothing else. Reason being is that things change too often, and I don't want to wait on my structural guy to fix his model when an exterior wall in my model has to move, or a recessed floor area or equipment pit, etc. I model the floor the way it needs to be, and then he matches mine and adds the appropriate footings, piers, etc.

Same with plumbing, though I do use the engineer's lights and HVAC equipment. Plumbing fixtures too often need to move, and so I just put them in my model and they match mine.

[Helsinki_Dave]

Hi, thanks for the super quick reply.

When you say "above-grade structure only from the RST", does the include things like clad columns and clad core walls? Like, do you create clad elements the are compound objects etc. And even tagging the straight structural in-situ concrete walls - is this tagging lost when you update from the Structural engineers revit file?
Would it make sense then that the Structural Engineer using Revit would issue on IFC files which I can then reference in Revit Architecture? That way he can issue to a server location- in a format which is locked and doesn't contain data that he doesn't want to share (IFC), and then I can just take dimensions from the the elements that concern me as an architect - and update (stretch, widen etc) my Revit walls, wall, piers etc as needed?
Is this a logical workflow?
Apologies if this is daft, I searched high and low on this, spoke to others at large practices in London - and it seems all a bit wild-west out there!

[Helsinki_Dave]

..I guess this leads to the kind of question, is there any real advantage in asking an engineer for his Revit model when

a. He doesn't really want to give it to us, since it contains quite clever bespoke family objects that he'd rather keep to himself
b. If he sent an IFC, it's the same result - I can reference it and adjust my 'guessed structure' to match his proposed structure.

Any thoughts on this?

[dhurtubise]

I've had some very good experinces with it.
Working on a project in NYC with WSP, we show no structural element at all in our files. On a different project in Seoul, it's with ARUP and same thing.
The process is simple. We get them involve a lot earlier, work out a process so they keep they're files up to date and we link them. We exchange files on a weekly basis except when deadline approaches.

[patricks]

..I guess this leads to the kind of question, is there any real advantage in asking an engineer for his Revit model when

a. He doesn't really want to give it to us, since it contains quite clever bespoke family objects that he'd rather keep to himself
b. If he sent an IFC, it's the same result - I can reference it and adjust my 'guessed structure' to match his proposed structure.

Any thoughts on this?

Seriously, your engineer doesn't want to share his model? Does he not want to be part of the team or something? This just seems odd to me because we and our consultants always freely share our models and IMHO our drawings and documents are better because of it.

Typically we set up the initial structural grid lines, and also model floors just so our sections will look correct. Then structural will put in his own grids, floors, structure, etc. Then when we link theirs in we turn off their grids and floors, but keep all their other structure visible.

[Helsinki_Dave]

Hi dhurtubise, thanks for the reply!
Is there a chance that you could clarify;
"we show no structural element at all in our files"
Does this mean that you show no structural element in your files but you show the linked elements in your documentation? If so, how do you control the graphics (line weights etc) if new families/types are introduced by the engineer etc
Thanks in advance!

[Helsinki_Dave]

Thanks for the reply Patricks,
Apologies that I gave the wrong idea - my last post was raising just the scenario of an engineer who has created the likes of a complex bespoke family (say hollowcore slab tool - like Dynamic Blocks in Autocad which don't get shared) which might best be kept under wraps because of the time spent creating it.

With regards to your reply gratefully received - by linking the engineer's structural columns etc, how do you deal with cladding, fire protection, crash-bars to column base etc. How do you place Revit architecture detail onto the structural columns so that when things move/ adjust - your rework is kept to a minimum - and as I asked above, how about the visibility of those structural parts - is that difficult to keep to your standards when they have been created for structural drawings rather than architectural?
Thanks hugely for your thoughts on this!

[dhurtubise]

Hi dhurtubise, thanks for the reply!
Is there a chance that you could clarify;
"we show no structural element at all in our files"
Does this mean that you show no structural element in your files but you show the linked elements in your documentation? If so, how do you control the graphics (line weights etc) if new families/types are introduced by the engineer etc
Thanks in advance!

Exact. We place no structural element but display the engineer's one. We control it simply through VG

[Helsinki_Dave]

searching on this far and wide and bizarrely it's not a hot topic.

Thanks for your reply again dhurtubise. So in the case of say a lift core - would the internal architectural cladding (fire protection, sound insulation, aluminium panelling) , stairs , lift families etc all be floating or hosted - tracking what they reference to by copy monitor? Also do you dimension back to the linked file?

(feel free anyone to pitch in here! We all do this daily so your thoughts would really help those also asking this question in the forum!)

Many thanks in advance.

[dhurtubise]

Structural walls that have finishes is the only "problematic" situation. Whether you draw them again with the finish or add simply the finish layer on top depends on who we work with. The coordination issue is with openings. But those walls don't usually have very complicated openings so it's really not a big deal to coordinate.