Links and good practices

[MikeJarosz]

When working on a project with multiple engineering consultants, we all trade files to be used as backgrounds. For example, the plumbing engineer takes the architectural file and links it to the plumbing model as a background, then places equipment based on the architect's partition layout. When the plumbing layout is done, the plumbing engineer posts it on the collaboration site (We're using GTeam on this project). 9 times out of 10, the outdated architectural link is left in the plumbing file. I don't believe that matters, because the copy of the architectural file was downloaded by the plumber and placed on their network with a totally different naming convention than ours, guaranteeing that the outdated link to the non-existent path will not be found when loaded back into our network.

Or does it matter? I'm interested in everyone's view on this.

One reason I do this is because the plumber uses the architectural file as a host for face based families. Let's say the plumber places a wall based drinking fountain using the architectural link. The plumbing file has no walls - that shouldn't surprise anyone - he uses mine. After he sends the file to me, if I remove the architectural link, the fountain is orphaned. So, I've been leaving the plumber's links in place.

When I discovered orphaned objects exist I thought OMG, I'm losing life safety equipment! At least now I found a way not to lose any sprinklers.

[jsteinhauer]

Mike,

We do not change file names. We download their files and place them on our network. We link them, but we NEVER open them. The reason being, is that we're not doing work in that model. So what if a faced based family gets orphaned in a background file. The final documentation should be coming from the consultant, and not you from the file sitting on your network (in theory they are the same, but they're not).

We set our links to Overlay with file paths as Absolute. If the link isn't where it should be, it doesn't get loaded.

I hope this helps.
Jeff S.

[MikeJarosz]

The final documentation should be coming from the consultant, and not you from the file sitting on your network (in theory they are the same, but they're not).



That answers the question as far as sheets and plotting goes, but what about the model? How will the model be assembled? Arch in foreground, consultants as links? How do you prevent the contractor from rearranging the links. I have one job where the contractor has the Mechanical as the foreground, because that is where most of the clashes are.

Will orphaned objects be seen by Navis? If we give the model to the contractor or owner, will someone exploring the model not find essential life safety objects that were created by the plumber but hosted to the architectural file?

I think you are right about not changing the same name of the link files. Most of the time I don't either, but there are some crazy-namers out there. The one approach I find especially annoying are the filenames made from job numbers, which are usually meaningless outside their home base.

[jsteinhauer]

I guess I am not understanding 'Foreground'. If it is a mechanical contractor, that is what they are going to be most concerned about, and where they will be creating their shop drawings, construction scheduling, etc... Once it leaves our office it is not our responsibility to hold the hand of a contractor, unless they are willing to retain us as their BIM modellers (has not happened yet). We still need to provide record documents at the end of construction. But, how accurate is the "Design" BIM model vs. the Contractor's BIM model? I would say that the Contractor's model will most likely be as good, if not better then the design model. Of course, this will need to be included within the specifications Division 1. But, the designer isn't going to know what fan coil unit is being purchased until the contractor buys it. We've had structural systems completely redesigned by the contractor, because they felt they could do it 'Better' one way vs. another.

I haven't delved into Navisworks, so I don't know the answer to Face Based Object being orphaned.

This is where a BIM - Execution Plan comes in handy. It should spell out exactly how everyone on the project team will name their files. No spaces either!!!!

Cheers,
Jeff S.

[david_peterson]

For your navis works question, it depends on who's creating the NWC file. On my current project each trade creates their own, then we link them together. I believe as long as it's still hosted in your plumbers model, it shouldn't cause any errors.
The only issue we've run into with our file exchange (on current project 50+ models exchanged twice a day) is dimensioning to the linked model. But part of the reason I think is that we are sending a central file, we're sending a local. But then again we don't send anything, the server does it. Takes zero time from production staff for us to exchange files.
If we were to use the revit server method, I'd need a full time person to sit and re-link models all day, every day. With this method (while not the cleanest) it is the easiest for the production team.

[Craig_L]

Having worked on a few multi-discipline projects now, the easiest method I have seen is as david mentioned above, we dont rename anything at all I think this causes possible errors we leave it just as we get it. As for the navisworks co-ordination, each consultant exports their own, I have never seen any errors produced this way for orphaned objects but thats not to say they are impossible...I've just never seen it happen.

Also I'm not sure exactly but for example, we output co-ordination comments from navisworks (clash detection for example) which identifies okjects by their element ID, I wonder if you are linking files, producing one navisworks model (as opposed to each consultant producing navis files) if this can cause issues with the element ID numbers, because thats how I work through the naviswork clash output is input the ID number, isolate the problem pictured and fix it that way its certain that I correct the issue exactly as its reported...

Also this consultant based export method, means in navisworks I can filter by discipline and see each model separately, a few at a time, or all at once...etc Which can be a huge help on a complex project because, for example, plumbing and drainage might only care about clashes between structural, mechanical and thats it. Where mechanical only cares about clashes with structure and arch (the rest must work around them...etc etc)

[MikeJarosz]

For me, in the past, someone else on the team always did the Navis reviews. I created this post a few days ago because I am updating our standards and best practices. I was unhappy with the way we were using links, and I thought someone out there might be doing links better. Just as I was about to start revising the best practices manual........

Guess what!

The "someone else" doing the reviews just quit! The PM comes over and anoints me to be the new Navis expert. Looks like I'm about to be doing a lot more clash detection, and a lot more linking. Don't you hate it when, because of your senior status, it's assumed by everyone that you know every software package out there?

Let's see, "Mastering Navisworks", page 1 :lol: