Will more worksets help a model run better?

[david_peterson]

I'm working on a larger hospital project where I have at most 9 users in one model. From time to time things are getting a little slow. Currently no one is checking out worksets, just all borrowed elements.

I thought I heard at one time that adding worksets can help the model to run better if you have less people borrowing elements from the same workset. ie Using worksets to split up the model will help the model run better.

I read Steve's blog post the other day and it seems to make some sense that this is the case. Books on a bookshelf. More bookshelves with less books, less permissions that need to be address.

Anyone have any solid understanding if adding workests to a project would help with some of the permissions things even if you're not checking out worksets? I had a co-worker tell me that it won't make a difference. Just looking for other options than splitting up the model.

[KoryCox]

If no one checks out worksets there would be no impact on performance. Adding worksets are just names on a list until they are used.

If you split the model by workset then the users could turn worksets on and off at will. This will have a significant impact on performance.

I don't advocate this however. A much better approach to file performance is by splitting your file into multiple files and linking them together.

Just how big is the project, and what is the general form?

[david_peterson]

It's a new bed tower and ER unit attached to an existing facility.
It's not that large SF wise. It's just complex with lots of phases. File size isn't even that big. It's just that I have 9 people working off the same central file. The form isn't complex. The issue seems to be the number of people in it. We get the "Central File is being accessed by someone else" warning all the time. File size is under 300mb

[KoryCox]

300 is a number I try to never hit. 150 makes me happier. Also, by splitting the files you can minimize the number of people in a file at a given time. You can imagine the performance increases this would bring.

With really complex projects I find one of the ways it can be split is to have a core and shell model with no annotation information. This is linked into two blank files. One of them is for general sheets, large scale floor plans, overall elevations etc. To the other add all of your detail information: lab layouts, finishes, etc. and the related sheets with interior elevations and enlarged floor plans. This way the detail information is never linked into the general sheet file. The core and shell remains nice and lean. The logic that brought me to this file structure is this: if you have a sheet with a 1/16"=1'-0" plan you don't want the lab layout becuase it wouldn't be readable anyway. So why have it in that file at all?

You will note that by doing this you break Revit just a little. You would not be able to reference views from one file to another and you will have to collate your final set of prints and keep the sheet list coordinated.

I consider this to be a minor manangement issue created in exchange for massive file performance improvements.

[david_peterson]

150MB??? I've never worked on a project that small.
Typically I would have broken this up a bunch but we're half way done with the project. Also I wouldn't have been trying to do all the presentation views out of the same model either. The tricky part is there's no easy line to separate the model by. I can't create a nice vertical cut anywhere. I could create a horizontal one, but that's going to get messy as well. File size doesn't really bother me that much. I've got plenty of horsepower behind it. I just have to many cooks in the kitchen.

[KoryCox]

We have a large project with no logical place for a brake either, which is why I recommend splitting the detail information away. The 'building' remains as one model, and the finishes and fittings are another.

As you said, that would be a real challenge at this point in the project though.

What other file management do you do?

Keeping it clean will help quite a bit.

[david_peterson]

I've purged everything not being used. Deleted unplaced rooms (that was a big one). Recreate the central file weekly. the team is supposed to recreate locals every time they open along with using the audit function. I'm in the process of removing all the warnings that we have, which will remove a bunch of the redundant rooms. Some of the errors I can't remove because revit doesn't understand that sometimes you have segments of a curve and you get the "slightly off axis" warnings (I really wish that one had a check box to say "Ignore this instance".
I'm trying to clean up views, but I have a team that didn't start the model so there's no one person that knows if that view is being used for anything. They also like to create unique views vs dependent views (I hate that one). I have a contractor that needs the model for verification so I had to create a set of views just for their use. We have a scope creep issue so I had to create a set of views for that to keep track of current SF.
Basically I'm at the point where I can't really remove much from the model until this presentation stuff is done, then I can kill a bunch of that.
This project was 2yrs in before I was put on board. So I'm kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place.

[KoryCox]

That is a hard place.

You're doing everything that I would.

I don't recreate the central models weekly myself. I just compact them sometimes up to once a day. Is that to protect against corruptions?

So, the workset trick will help you quite a bit, but the headache it will give you is that elements have to be created on the correct workset, which is a very easy thing to forget to do so they will often be placed incorrectly. Easy to fix, but after doing it two hundred times it becomes tiresome.

You could also start a swing shift so only half the team is working at a time. Only half joking....

Also, is there a reason the contractor can't link your model into a blank file and create the views he wants so you don't have to manage them for him?

[david_peterson]

Re-creating the central file and deleting all local back-ups from users workstations is supposed to help against corruptions according to our reseller. So I try to do that. I've also instructed our team to try to always compact the central when saving. I'm not sure how many of them do it, but it is a request. First time takes a while, but if it's done all the time, it doesn't. Same thing with the Audit. I've also been told that restarting your workstation over the lunch hour helps as well.
As for our contractor, they don't even want do deal with creating their packages or dealing with CBs. They'd like us to give them completed sets for each portion of their work in nice neatly self-contained packages. This like a 4yr project, with about 17-20 actual phases. But phases packages weren't in our contract with the client. So.... You can see where the problems are going to start. I have our files set up to upload to our ftp site nightly so they could always get the live model. We just starting some of the major construction efforts, so we're still playing nice at the moment. I can't wait for them to ask for cad back grounds. I've only got one answer for it, here's the model, we're not responsible for anything you do with it, sign this agreement stating so, and you can create what ever plans you'd like.
If I get 3 more people working in this model I will be able to ask half of them to stay home. Over 10 people in a central and you're only getting 4hrs of work out of an 8hr day anyway.

[KoryCox]

True, true. Can't just throw people at the problem in Revitland.

if you're not using Worksharing monitor, now is the time to start. You can monitor who saves to central and how often. If one person on the team doesn't save all day it slows everyone down. Rule of thumb is about every hour is sufficient.

Best of luck.

[Steve_Stafford]

More worksets don't help unless people USE them wisely. That means not only assigning elements to them correctly but also being selective about opening and closing worksets that are not necessary to what I am doing right now or for the next little while. If you have a good workset scheme then I can close a chunk of the building while I focus on something for awhile. For example you don't need worksets for upper floors in the hospital open while working on labs on a lower floor. If you can't do that then your scheme isn't supporting workflow well yet.

The point of books on shelves is to be able to ignore irrelevant shelves to focus on the ones I care about now. You can also ask Revit for permission less often if you select many things (that you intend to work on right now) and use Make Elements Editable to borrow them all at once. You'll experience less pausing if you do. Each time you alter something you haven't already borrowed you are waiting for Revit to check to see if it can let you do it.

The more concurrent users there are the more important careful workset use and manipulation becomes.

Splitting models seems the easy fix because we understand that process from other software. Every time we split a model we pay a price in poorer integration of our data. They also introduce a further fragmented workflow and graphic quality issues.

[damon.sidel]

Do you have a lot of area plans? We had a large project with various area plan schemes over a dozen or so sprawling floors. Things got slow and the file got bulky, so we tested removing various views, elements, etc. Removing the area plans was the single largest impact to the speed and file size. I forget if we moved those into a separate file or forced pushed the decision process so we could get rid of the extra area plans, but the fix was a huge one.

I'd throw my hat in with more Worksets and trying people making a few Worksets editable. Less communication with the Central Model.

Another thing to consider: at one point our server was getting so overworked, that our IT guy moved the biggest project to it's own drive, along with other adjustments that I don't understand, and that really helped everybody.

[KoryCox]

Did you delete the areas before deleting the plans?

I have noticed that if I leave the area boundary lines when deleting the plan that when I recreate the plan later it uses the old boundary lines. I am wondering if you delete the plans does it still calculate the areas? If you deleted all the areas and lines before deleting the plans would it give you even more performance increase?

[damon.sidel]

I don't know. I wasn't the one responsible for actually doing the work, but it makes sense that deleting the plans AND the areas would be even better. I think deleting the plan deletes the lines, so I'd skip that step.

[KoryCox]

It doesn't delete the lines. I just tested it because I wasn't sure; I had just noticed this a couple weeks ago. The lines and the areas remain in the project unless deleted before deleting the views.

[Duncan Lithgow]

An easy way to split the model into more Worksets is by Family Categories. We have ours split so casework/furniture/el fittings/pl fitting/speciality equipment is on their own 'Furniture and Fittings Workset. A large number of users don't need to see those things while they're working. And because it's strictly based on Categories it's easy to set up a Worksets cleanup view.

I'm assuming that all RVT links / 3d DWGs are in worksets so they can be Closed as needed.

[david_peterson]

Thanks for the response gents. I think I'm going to split things into the 3 main projects and suggest turning off worksets they don't need. Again one of my main issues is the amount of presentation views and color fill plans we have. I really wish we did that in a separate file. I have 3-4 people working on nothing but overall presentation plans, 2 people working in the tower area and 4 more working on the lower levels. So i think I'm going to propose that we split our "interior" workset, Furniture and those kinds on things into those 3 major areas. So hopefully I can end up with 2 people that might not be able to close worksets or they don't want to because they're "working on everything" and the others can hide the things they don't want to see.
One of the issues that came up on my last project was schedules. When someone would only load the worksets they needed, it would hide all the elements in the schedules for the rest of the buliding, until someone opened the view and picked on the light bulb". Granted that was a Graphic Column Schedule so maybe that's unique to that type of view.

[Steve_Stafford]

...they don't want to because they're "working on everything"...This is truly necessary a lot less than we are willing to admit. We are conditioned to think, "I want to see everything, I am working on everything...". If we are able to focus on the next 10-15 minutes we may find we can compartmentalize things better and spend less time waiting for the software to generate views. I tend to think of it as actually being in the building. If I am working on casework there is no way I can work on stuff on the second floor while I am working on the eighth floor so there is no reason to have that stuff loaded even if it is my stuff too. There are exceptions of course like working schedules or working in an overall section view.


...Granted that was a Graphic Column Schedule so maybe that's unique to that type of view...A GCS is a very unique kind of schedule, unlike others in that it is really a hardwired assembly of views of each column arranged into a schedule-ish format. Regular schedules are showing information only and don't need to load the elements into memory until you alter a value. A GCS has to show the column as well as report some information. Editing a massive schedule of doors, for example, will be more efficient if all the doors belong to the editor (at that time) because they won't have to ask Revit for permission to change them one by one, loading them into memory as they go.

[david_peterson]

So short of schedules, one way to set up worksets for a larger team (say 10 people max, or splitting the model may be a better idea) would be to split by level/levels, Areas, and trades/disciplines. ie I-Interiors-1st-west or something like that.

[Steve_Stafford]

Yes, generally either geographical or programmatic relationships, or a combination of both. You want to provide enough compartmentalization, granular control, without imposing too great a burden on people. We want to be sure people use the correct active worksets so elements end up assigned to the correct worksets.

Go too far and they end up being just another burden instead of helping. In my post How Many Worksets do I Need? (http://revitoped.blogspot.com/2012/04/how-many-worksets-do-i-need.html) I joke that you may have too many worksets if you have to scroll the dialog or have a regularly scheduled meeting each week to discuss them.