File Linking

[brd]

I have a very simple question about file linking, in fact I almost feel silly asking. We have a 3 story office building in Revit that is a shell building. Later this week, we are starting the T.I. spaces in the buildings that will be separate projects with independent budgets, clients and everything else. How should we set those projects up in Revit? It seems to me like the easiest thing to do, and most convenient in the long run, is to open a new file with a clean template and link in the shell building file. Another idea that someone else came up with is to create a flat DWG of the floor plan and import that as the background. However I still think linking is our answer. Which way should we go here? Also, what are the important things to remember when doing this? Are there any major do's and don'ts involved?

As always, thanks for you help!

[Dimitri Harvalias]

Look into phasing. The shell can be existing and each TI can be a different phase.
Depending on the level of detail you require and how extensive the changes to the shell might be (exterior entrances, changes to glazing etc) there could be issues with linked models and how some joins clean up.
As for the 2D idea, again, depending on the extent of documentation required you may have to recreate exterior walls to have RCP's and sections dsplay correctly so that might be more trouble than it's worth.
Not the final word but let us know what you decide and how it works out.

[rod.74246]

I'd probably link these as well, provided of course there aren't any real changes required to the base model.

Of course a lot depends on the size of your office and how you work. In the past we have also just done a "save as" and started each fitout project as its separate file. That however was mostly due to file management issues and project management issues on the server etc. (Nothing worse than using a linked model and someone else archives the linked file)

[Scott D Davis]

My advice is to NOT use file linking, as this was intended to put multiple Revit building projects onto a site. Not to link parts of the same building together.

The advice of Phasing is a good one, and also to look into worksets, which can be used to define the different parts of the building. The shell of the building can be put on a workset, and then checked out by an "admin" login, which will keep others from edting it. It also can be put on the "existing" phase. The TI build outs can each be done on their own workset, so each can be opened individually, and by multiple users. Each workset can contain its own titleblocks, etc for each client.

[Tom Dorner]

We too are struggling with this same issue.

The problem I see with worksets/phases is that in large building we sometimes have dozens of ongoing projects, some of which are merely prospects and frequently each project may overlap or compete for area with another prospect. It is also important that at any given time we be able to produce the current "as-built" condition of each floor without any fuss.

Adding all of this to a workset could get dicey. How do I show the demo work on one project that will occur in a couple of months yet still show that future demo as the current condition and I have three prospects all competing for the same place on the floor?

How do I have my titleblock information fill-in from the Revit "project information" if I have 10 simultaneous projects?

How do I manage revisions for each of these projects when and if they go to CD's?

How do I keep my BOMA area calcs for the current condition pristine yet be able to figure out the proposed area of each prospect?

For now we have been doing the "save as" method. Of course if the master building is worksetted, then this is not as simple as you need to detach the file from Central then save as.

There are still many issues out there when it comes to Revit in practice for TI's in multi-tenant buildings. Hopefully this thread will start to bring us together on what we would consider the "best practices" for this use of Revit.

Tom

[Prodev75]

My advice is to NOT use file linking, as this was intended to put multiple Revit building projects onto a site. Not to link parts of the same building together.


Almost sounds like you are speaking from experience Scott. Come on spill the beans.

I’m going to have to disagree with you on that one Scott. If that's was the case why would we need the capability to monitor or schedule across linked files. Why would I need to monitor or schedule elements of a building that’s down the street?

And based on what you’re saying, you should not use Revit Structure and Revit Building in a linked file scenario.

There are some unknowns in this topic.
How big is the project? How many tenants? How big is the project team? Can you inherit certain project information between linked files?---[Yes] Can you keep the building shell from being archived?

If I'm not mistaken phasing works between linked files.

[Scott D Davis]

If that's was the case why would we need the capability to monitor or schedule across linked files. Why would I need to monitor or schedule elements of a building that’s down the street? In our case, we do schools that are in campus arrangements. I need to take a site plan, link all the separate buildings into it, and then schedule the drawing index, the doors, windows, etc in one 'project' schedule, rather than individual schedules in each file. So our buildings are not really down the street so much as across the Quad.


And based on what you’re saying, you should not use Revit Structure and Revit Building in a linked file scenario.File linking in RS and RB works a bit differently, because the Arch sends the model to the Struct, and the Struct uses the copy/monitor function to copy parts out of the linked file into his own file, which he then tweaks as necessary.

In a TI situation, this may or may not work between two instances of RB files. A linked file will not clean up with its host, so interior walls cannot be attached to an existing ceiling if they are in separate linked files.

There definately needs to be more thought on this area with the development team.

[Prodev75]

In our case, we do schools that are in campus arrangements. I need to take a site plan, link all the separate buildings into it, and then schedule the drawing index, the doors, windows, etc in one 'project' schedule, rather than individual schedules in each file. So our buildings are not really down the street so much as across the Quad..

In my case I do retail where there are areas that are not in my scope. Sometimes for coordination purposes those area are modeled and linked into the main projects. I can dimension to those objects, if need be I could schedule them. If for some unknown reason that area needed to be modified (for demolishing purposes or the client just changed his or her mind) I could open the link in a separate session and make the adjustments.



File linking in RS and RB works a bit differently, because the Arch sends the model to the Struct, and the Struct uses the copy/monitor function to copy parts out of the linked file into his own file, which he then tweaks as necessary.


Exactly it’s not for just linking buildings on a site. There are some things you can do with linking files and at the same time there are some draw backs. The question is; Which do you want to deal with? Each company may have different ideas and obstacles. Again, not being sure of the entire project scope and the players involved. Its hard to say what can or can not be done.



In a TI situation, this may or may not work between two instances of RB files. A linked file will not clean up with its host, so interior walls cannot be attached to an existing ceiling if they are in separate linked files.

Very true. You would need to redraw the ceiling and/or jump back and forth between the main building and its individual parts to get you desired results. Or just turn off the ceiling in the main building (linked shell) and redraw the ceiling in the TI that way you will have more control over the clean up.



There definately needs to be more thought on this area with the development team.

Most definitely. But so far the factory is doing a great job. I'm just waiting for the bubble to pop and all the functionality to just come pouring out.

[PeterJ]

I would approach this via Design Options, though it does depend on the complexity of the fit-outs. At least with design options you can bring different parts of the existing model into the new work if required, so, for example, an additional fire escape or delivery entrance required by the tenant could be incorporated, which would not be the case with the linked file.

You would still work with new and existign phases but each fit-out would be an option set in it's own right so that you didn't end up with complexity over which 'new' phase you were looking at.

At the end you would get a model with just new and existing and all the design options brought back into the as-built version - though this last step would be fiddly as the options would need to be versions within an option set and not option sets on their own.

[DanielleAnderson]

This is a perfect thread for a project we are about to begin...Here's the scenario:
We are about to start a 180k TI project, 6 floors in 2 separate buildings for 1 client. The PM would like the ability to manage this model into the future (similar to a DBOM project where the architect is on-board for the life of the building) and have the ability to hand off parts of the building (say, one floor at a time) to consultants or other architecture firms in the future for remodels, etc. We are also dealing with a completely inexperienced team that is new to revit and, unfortunately, will have to begin the project without any formal training. So this project will have no experienced Revit users beyond my occassional advice and answers to questions, and someone we've brought in for just the summer who is building the basic shell and core for them.
We're building the 2 shell & core buildings as their own individual files linked into a composite. The question is, keeping in mind the above information, should we build the 6 floors of TI in their own individual floor-by-floor models and link them into the whole composite (with the idea that they can be given out later if needed), or create 1 TI model that contains all 6 of the floors and is then controlled by worksets. There is no need for phasing, this will be built out all at once.
For new users who are used to how autocad works with xrefs, etc., and will not have much pre-training to change their "mindset", how would this be best approached?
I want to make sure this is a successful adventure for everyone involved.
Thanks in advance,
Danielle

[dbaldacchino]

If each fit-out project is to be issued as a separate job, I'd opt for separate projects that can be all linked into a "master". This is more in-line with x-ref thinking and since your users are inexperienced, it's easier to grasp as a concept than phasing or design options. Worksets would probably work (once more, analogy to layers) but for the sake of size and simplicity, and the fact that you might need to split these up in the future, I'd opt for linked projects. If you re-use 2D drafted details between projects, you can easily import those views between the separate Revit projects.

[DanielleAnderson]

If each fit-out project is to be issued as a separate job, I'd opt for separate projects that can be all linked into a "master". This is more in-line with x-ref thinking and since your users are inexperienced, it's easier to grasp as a concept than phasing or design options. Worksets would probably work (once more, analogy to layers) but for the sake of size and simplicity, and the fact that you might need to split these up in the future, I'd opt for linked projects. If you re-use 2D drafted details between projects, you can easily import those views between the separate Revit projects.

I was thinking this as well, but does anybody out there have a really good argument for worksets? I'm sort of curious waht the other view point looks like. :mrgreen: