utilizing Master Project File w/ linked building models (sharing details)

[jledgewood]

I have a co-worker who is working on a project that consists of several buildings on a site. I recommend that he have separate files for each building and a separate file for the site/ topography (Master). that he link the building files into the Master (site/topography )file. he was hoping to have one set of details that can be used for all the buildings.

1. is this an efficient way of handling this (each bldg. separate & separate site)?

2. how would you recommend utilizing details between buildings?

[KoryCox]

1. Most definitely. Depending on the size of the buildings. But, it makes life easier even if they are single family homes. Note, that the Master site file will become quite slow as the buildings linked into it get loaded with information. Consider breaking things up into even smaller chunks. For instance, Core & Shell Model and Interiors Model. that way the sheets can live in the Interiors file, and the shells are linked in to the Master Site File and into the Interiors Files. The best part of this is that the sheet information never finds it's way into the site file keeping it lean.

2. Efficient? Not really. You have only a couple of options here. In one of the files you will create the 2D details. In every other file where a detail needs to be referenced you create blank dummy details on dummy sheets so that the reference number is the same. This makes two copies of each and every detail (not the detail information, just a detail view with a text box that says "Dummy".) I recommend that the details be placed in their own file (mostly so that anyone working on the details enjoys blazing fast speed, and the details do not bog down any of the other 3D modeling files.

All of my recommendations are dependent on the size of the buildings and the site. smaller means less fragmentation, bigger means more fragmentation.

It is a bit counter intuitive when working with a BIM platform like Revit to de-BIM it. I.e. create layers of management and introduce opportunities for human error. It breaks BIM. However, there is no network/hardware solution capable of handling a 500,000 SF campus building with ten team members working on it simultaneously that won't break down under the strain. For this reason you have to make compromises to protect the performance of the Revit files vs. keeping the file structure simple. You don't get both.

Think of it this way, if you can add a few hours of management, and give every team member an additional hour of productivity per day because the file performance stays higher, then you are winning.

This methodology requires some discipline and management. It is not perfect, but well managed it can benefit your team.

I also should ask, if you have multiple buildings, how similar will your details be? If the lion's share of the details will be different per building then you can let those details live in their own buildings. I would be careful with this however, you don't want to run into a situation where you have details in a bunch of different places and team members are spending a bunch of time hunting for the detail they need.