When to use 2D Linework instead of 3D Families

[ben]

I'm working on a 6-storey, 100,000 sq ft, 38-unit condominium building. I've finished the basic building model and have begun focusing on the residental unit layouts -- adding families for sinks, toilets, beds, etc. With these 3D additions, my project file size is growing quite large.

I don't think that 3D objects are needed to produce the schematic set so would it make sense to draw 2D objects instead? What is the best method for doing this? Should I create 2D families or use linework? Does anyone have any residential 2D object libraries that they could share?

Overall there are many residential unit variations in my building. If I used families there would be multiple instances for different conditions. Mutiple familes = large Revit file. :(

Any ideas? Thanks in advance for any help.

[hand471037]

We do a lot with 2D famlies; more than you would think. Add some parametrics and some directional arrows to flip layouts, and make lots of types within the families, and we've found that a lot of the time it's all we need for most furniture/plumbing/power layouts. Then, if/when you go to render, just swap what you need to 3D.

For example, we've got a desk that we use that's nothing more than a 2D rectangle with parametrics and some extra shared parameters contained in a furniture family. We use it for space planning, furniture layouts, facilities managment stuff, and the like.

We've found that it's best to 'only put in what you're gonna need later'. If you're only going to see the item in plan then it doesn't need to be 3D at all. :)

[GuyR]

One reason for 3D modelling over 2D details is if you want to use schedules/ODBC for BIM work.

Guy

[hand471037]

Guy, we use BIM/ODBC with the 2D elements all the time. You just give them parameters. What I'm saying is make simple 2D famlies, then load them into your project, not draw things within your project with linework. After all, the furniture schedule doesn't care if the chair is 3D, 2D, or even just a tag that says 'chair'. The parameters for it's cost, what room it's in, what floor it's on, and the like will all remain intact.

We even lock these items down to arrays, grids, walls- just like any other Revit object.

Now, I can see with doors/windows/ect that you would definately want them in 3D, so that later you can get thier size via a schedule for cost estimation. But with some things, and due to our older slow computers, we've found that it's just fine to use 'intelligent' 2D items...

[GuyR]

Jeffrey,


Guy, we use BIM/ODBC with the 2D elements all the time.

How do you export 2D families via ODBC ? Or do you mean you use 3D families (generic families etc) and just draw symbolic lines?

The other 3D reason is rendering. And on that note I'm adding a wish-list item.- batch rendering please!!

Guy

[David Conant]

Jeffrey is correct, create normal families not detail component families.
You can easily build a normal family that contains little or no 3d information. Create symbolic representations using model or symbolic lines. They can be parameterized just like 3d things. The data parameters of the family don't care whether there is any 3d geometry. Use full 3d familes only where you really need to see a 3d image. Even then, make them no more complex than you absolutely need. When you are using many instances, the view generation cost of 3d complexity increases rapidly.

[Steve_Stafford]

2D versus 3D objects...another good reason to use Shared Parameters for the scheduled information. Shared parameters for these different objects will let them "look" the same in a schedule.

[hand471037]

Sorry guy, I meant normal famlies, but with only 2D elements within. I didn't mean annotation famlies or detail bits. Sorry for the confuson in language, we always call things Annotation famlies or Model famlies here at the office, so when I was talking about a 2D 'desk' I just assumed that we were talking model famlies...

[ben]

Thanks for the information. The 2D families sound ideal for the project i mentioned earlier.

Jeffrey, would you be willing to share your 2D library with me to get me started? Anyone else know of some good sources for 2D elements besides Autodesk and RUGI? It would help greatly to see how other people have created these objects.