Site plans…who is using separate files?

[J-G]

I am looking for input on how others are organizing the site plan and building model. I have used separate files with shared coordinates and this seemed to work well, but I did think having the site model in the actual building file would make edits and display a bit easier.

What are the gurus doing? Even for single buildings, do you use separate site files? Any comments on your preferences and the cons and pros would be appreciated.

Jonathon

[beegee]

I am looking for input on how others are organizing the site plan and building model. I have used separate files with shared coordinates and this seemed to work well, but I did think having the site model in the actual building file would make edits and display a bit easier.
Jonathon

Hi Jon,

I use separate files with linked coordinates also, mainly because I'm usually linking numerous different building types and copying and rotating and mirroring them around the site. For that sort of thing, separate files are essential and work brilliantly.

I've onlly ever had the site model and the building model combined for single buildings, or at most 2 to 3 buildings.
For the 2-3 buildings combined with the site model, it worked fine, the only real difficulty being that I wanted to place all the building plans on a sheet with X,Y axis running horizontally and vertically. Since the plans were skewed on the site, it wasn't possible to rotate the site to achieve this for all the buildings, so I ended up using callouts, which allowed rotation to the correct orientation. That was OK, but in hindsight, I would have had more control using liked files for that situation also.

[PeterJ]

I have started using linked files for site and building. Alongside worksets it gives an additional layer of control over visibility, it also lightens the processorr load if you unload the topot model while working.

I have come across a funny one though. I want to do some work on the site and it needs to be dimensionally controlled by the location of the building. This means I need the site model to have a link to the building or I need to trace and then cut and paste an outline of the building. I also have to do any work with pads etc in the site model then close that and reopen the building model to refresh the link.....This all becomes a little tedious. Dare I say we need an edit xref in place command?

[sbrown]

I think it would come down to project size, all of our projects have the site info in the model, just on worksets that are set not visible by default. This way you can use the site info when needed and not mess with linking. However if you have multiple buildings than it makes sense to link.

[Martin P]

Linked files every time.

If you open another session of Revit and open the linked file in there edits are easy, just save then reload. I am using linked files for more than just site plans. On larger projects I am using them in exactly the same way xrefs are used in autocad, for example I create a structural link, site link, curtain walling link, etc etc -

I think worksets are the "correct" way to do this, but linked files dont take any learning or any real management and I havent hit any problems yet. - Also the fact that drafing lines etc do not come thorugh is excellent as I can add notes, construction lines etc etc in the file, but when I link thefile the construction lines and notes to self arent there.

Most important of all linked files do not react with each other in any way at all, which is massive help for things like curtain walling in openings, structural components etc - I can make thinks stay EXACTLY where I want them to be, without any locking or ref planes etc (ie no extra work to STOP Revit moving stuff)

[Steve_Stafford]

Is is accurate to say that you are documenting your projects on sheets in several projects and pulling the "set" together at the plotter Martin?

[Martin P]

Is is accurate to say that you are documenting your projects on sheets in several projects and pulling the "set" together at the plotter Martin?

Not for drawings, I still have just one project and link all the different parts together just like xrefs. I dont make absolutely everything a link, just stuff I need to have fixed 100% but still be very easily editable (structural parts, curtain walls, external works) - for example a curtain wall in an opening of a compound wall can do things you dont want it to because the ends magnetically move, but not if I do it this way. Structural stuff is really easy to edit when working like this because you can just switch off or on the link to the main model in one go (you cannot create circular links with revit it only links 1 file deep, so I can link the main model into the structure link)

If I have to schedule any of the stuff in the link files I have to do this in the different files, which will result in splitting schedules between 2 "projects", but for the small inconvienace of schedules the benifits are much greater to me. I could evev "cheat" and do bits of it manually :twisted: :shock: scheduling with revit does come second to producing drawings for us though

[Steve_Stafford]

So you might, for example, model the structural design of your project in it's own project? Linking it to the master?

[sbrown]

Martin, do you link you main building file into your struct files and curtain wall files etc to use for reference purposes? This sounds interesting for a workaround, but obviously we want revit to work diff. then xref or allow more data to be extracted from the links into the main file.

[J-G]

interesting discussion, I would be slightly hesitant about using the links as much though. It seems like you could start to get some of the disconnection that revit helps do away with. The reason I was curious about not using links for site plans, was that the site plan doesn't interact in the same way when it is linked. If structural plans are drawn in a seperate file how do you manage updates and changes? You can't align and lock various elements...though at least if there were any big changes your sections would probably let you know you had a contradiction. Perhaps a item should be added to the wish list about more interactivity between refferenced files. That could help Revit overcome file size problems.

[Martin P]

Martin, do you link you main building file into your struct files and curtain wall files etc to use for reference purposes? This sounds interesting for a workaround, but obviously we want revit to work diff. then xref or allow more data to be extracted from the links into the main file.

Yes, that is what do - because Revit only links 1 file deep it is fine - ie any links in my structure file dont come through when I link the structure file, exactly like an xref that is overlaid in autocad, so I can . As Jon points out there are some issues with aligning to objects in linked files, I have discovered a workaround though. You can snap to these objects, so I draw a detail line if I need to align something. I will try and post some images of the separate files if I get a chance.

[Martin P]

Steel and curtain walling

[Martin P]

views with link in place

[Martin P]

It seems like you could start to get some of the disconnection that revit helps do away with.

The reason I was curious about not using links for site plans, was that the site plan doesn't interact in the same way when it is linked.

Perhaps a item should be added to the wish list about more interactivity between refferenced files. That could help Revit overcome file size problems.

Personally I dont like Revit changing too much without my control, parametrics cause me as many problems as they solve, particularly with structural elements and curtain walls - I generally want these things to stay where I place them and have found that in complex areas revit gets totally bogged down trying to work out how everything should interact - or ends up deleting your in place familes, giving masses of errors, persistently moving things you dont want moved and so on (locking them doesnt work sometimes).. So I suppose am using links to prevent Revit changing things, and so would not like any interaction between the files - I think this is where worksets come into it though, but I have never tried to use them :!: I like the disconnection of linked files, and find that Revit causes me problems by having too much connectivity between everything, sometimes I dont want it to be clever... :wink:

[Henry D]

Martin,

This doesn't have to do with linking files, but I think that's a real nice looking title block and the lettering is the best "handwritten" one I've seen - what font is that?

[Martin P]

Martin,

This doesn't have to do with linking files, but I think that's a real nice looking title block and the lettering is the best "handwritten" one I've seen - what font is that?

Thanks you :) although I cant take any credit for the design of the title box.... it does give us a lot of usable space on our sheets instead of having lots empty fiels for revisions etc, so we like it too!

the fonts I got from RUGI.org - they are called Architxt and archititl... they used to cause problems with PDFS I think, but I havent had any problems. I will post them if I get a chance....