Design Options

[dsw98]

I'm about to start a new project for a builder and they want to see 3 different elevations for the one floor plan. My question: The elevations are so completely different would it be easier to just draw the floor plan then do a "save as" and then finish the elevations or just do it all with deisgn options? One elevation is going to have a Craftsman look and the other 2 will have a Victorian look. So there will be lots of detail with each look. Opinions please.

[Rhythmick]

My first option would be to use options, so as other elements in the project change - as they always do, you will not have to make those changes in all the different models.

[dsw98]

Another question about this. I haven't really had time to experiment with Design options, but if I have a brick/rock wall, but then as an option want it to have lap siding. Would I change the wall style as an option? Not sure if I'm making sense or not.

[Andre Baros]

Each Design Option would contain it's own wall(s) and all the related families (doors, windows, trim, etc.) You can start out by doing one scheme and then copying it to all the design options then changing it in each option. The same wall cannot exit in multiple options, nor can you have a wall host windows from different options. Once you think of each option as a complete package it works really well.

[jkrager]

You will definately want to use options. Though it may be a little tricky to get the hang of at first, it will eliminate that "did I do that change in this plan" feeling. The key is to select for your option only those portions that you need to change, and let Revit keep track of everything. That way, when your client says "I want that one" then you do a saveas(KEY STEP) and then simply "accept" the chosen option then.

[dsw98]

So I have my basic plan laid out, and right now I have stucco walls with a stone/brick wainscoat. But now I want those walls to be an option and have lap siding. So I would pick those exterior wall and put them inside an option and change them? The design option tutorial doesn't get into depth on this kind of thing.

[jkrager]

You got it. Once you select your objects, you should see in the Options dialog a button to "add to options" which will take that wall out of the "overall model" and add it into the options. (I am doing this from memory so bear with me). Then you can set each option to current and make the appropriate changes to each element within that option. Scrub to a lather, rince and repeat with each design option. It won't let you edit anything that isn't part of that option and will retain the objects and positions for each option as you go. Just try it, it is really cool!

[dsw98]

But if it's an exterior wall and the only change I'm making is it's style how is going to be inside the option and also be part of the Original version?

[jkrager]

Revit stores one of the options as the primary. In any case, when you are looking through your views, you will see one of the options "active" in your model. When you want to see another option, you go to your options dialog and make another option "active". In actuallity, you will have two exterior walls, but only one will be showing at a time. When you "accept" the options, Revit discards the other wall and keeps the one you want. When you are editing one of the options, you will only be able to edit the objects in the option. When you are not editing any of the options, you will only be able to edit the common objects (object not applied to an option). You have the choice of starting with options and creating new objects within it, or adding exsting objects to your design options. I believe that when you add existing objects to the options, Revit adds "duplicate" objects to each option, letting to change/delete/move/etc in each option individually.

To say it clearly: You will see all your common pieces along with the pieces of one of the options.

[dsw98]

So I will have 2 wall ontop of each other? So I should just to a copy and paste into the option and ignore the little warning box that says walls are overlaping?

[jkrager]

Select your wall and go to design options. You should see a place to click and "add to options". I can't remember if you can right click on the object... This will do the cut-paste thing to each option at once. Then you can activate your second option and change the wall to another style.

[Andre Baros]

Yeah, once you select your original wall and add it to your design options (one of which should be called "current" or something like that which tells you it's where you started) it takes it out of the main model. You'll need to have at least two options, one for what you have now, and one for what you might have.

[dsw98]

Yeah, once you select your original wall and add it to your design options (one of which should be called "current" or something like that which tells you it's where you started) it takes it out of the main model. You'll need to have at least two options, one for what you have now, and one for what you might have.


Okay, but I am going to need that wall to have 3 different looks. That's the thing that worries me. Once I add it to the option it's not part of the original, how can it be part of 1 option and also other options.

[jkrager]

You will have three different walls, one in each option, and a blank space for it in your common elements model. (I am trying to use consistant terminology for sanity sake) The common elements model will not display without the "active" option showing as well. Think of it like a mister potatohead. :Puffy: The body stays the same, but you add different pieces to it. Each set of pieces is an "Option". Revit automates the turn-option-1-off-and-turn-option-2-on process because it is so cool like that, but that doesn't change the "body" of the model.

[dsw98]

You will have three different walls, one in each option, and a blank space for it in your common elements model. (I am trying to use consistant terminology for sanity sake) The common elements model will not display without the "active" option showing as well. Think of it like a mister potatohead. :Puffy: The body stays the same, but you add different pieces to it. Each set of pieces is an "Option". Revit automates the turn-option-1-off-and-turn-option-2-on process because it is so cool like that, but that doesn't change the "body" of the model.


Okay, I'm about to actually get into my elevations. Mr. Puffy put a smile on my face. That's good stuff.

*** Okay I just found out for myself a good way to do it. I hope it's working like I think it is. I created my main option set. Then created the primary option inside that set. Then just duplicated that 2 more times and am started to change the elevations within those seperate ones. So I don't need to actually copy and past. I think it's working like that.

[irwin]

So I will have 2 wall ontop of each other? So I should just to a copy and paste into the option and ignore the little warning box that says walls are overlaping?
If you have walls in the same geometric position but in different options of the same option set, then the warning is smart enough not to complain about this. If you do see the warning that means something wasn't set up correctly (for example, a wall in an option is overlapping with a wall that isn't in any option).

[dsw98]

So another question about options. How do I dimension my options. When I do, the dimension is grayed out on the sheet and in print preivew. So then I thought I would just change the option and make it the (Primary) set then label it, but then I get an error message that certain walls and roofs don't join and that Revit wants to delete a bunch of stuff, which I can't have.

[jkrager]

I have not yet run across this and I fear that any answer I give will be mostly a guess. I am thinking that dimensions to objects within an option should be within that option. If you are changing between the options and your roof is wanting to dissapear, then you are doing something wrong. Perhaps that portion of your roof or walls need to be added to each of your options.
If you can post a portion of your project so that the masterminds that run this place can see what you are describing, that might get a better answer.

[dsw98]

I have not yet run across this and I fear that any answer I give will be mostly a guess. I am thinking that dimensions to objects within an option should be within that option. If you are changing between the options and your roof is wanting to dissapear, then you are doing something wrong. Perhaps that portion of your roof or walls need to be added to each of your options.
If you can post a portion of your project so that the masterminds that run this place can see what you are describing, that might get a better answer.


Well I've tried dimensioning inside the option, That's what creates the grayed dimension. Of course I was in the edit mode maybe that's what was causing that.

As for the parts that it wants to delete, it's not doing that when I change between options, It was going to do it when I changed the Primary option from one to another.

[dsw98]

I think I've figured it out. Before I start dimensioning I need to change what option I was actuallying view. I think you need to be out of edit mode with any option. So I just changed the visibility/graphics setting under the options tab to the option I wanted to lable and it works great. Still working on that learning curve :-)

TGIF

[jkrager]

Glad you could figure it out. I will have to pay more attention to what I am doing when I dimension options next time. :wink:

[nrenfro]

Just picked up this thread. you are doing everything right so-far. I would like to ask how far you intend to take your Design Options. That's the key they are DESIGN options and the option tool is not set up to be used in construction documentation. Not to say that you can not work around and get what you want, but you will be taking things further than what was intended with this tool. I have in the past done work with production builders and created houses with optional facades and plans all managed with in one Revit model. So it can be done.

[dsw98]

Just picked up this thread. you are doing everything right so-far. I would like to ask how far you intend to take your Design Options. That's the key they are DESIGN options and the option tool is not set up to be used in construction documentation. Not to say that you can not work around and get what you want, but you will be taking things further than what was intended with this tool. I have in the past done work with production builders and created houses with optional facades and plans all managed with in one Revit model. So it can be done.


I was planning on taking it all the way to completion. Should I not, is that where the old "save as" comes in? The floor plan it's self isn't really changing much at all. It's almost all elevations that are changing. What I did was just took my main floor plan, added my dimensions ect. made a copy of that page, changed to one of the other options and dimensioned that. It seemed to work so far. Should I not do that?

[residarchitect]

I have extensively used Design Options to show clients multiple schemes
within the same model. Its so much better than having to create multiple
drawings in Autocad, because when the client wants a little of this and a
little of that, you can toss the stuff the client does not want and accept
the things they do.

I agree with Nathaniel that Design Options are not intended for producing
construction sets, but hey I don't know why you couldn't. Using Visibility
Graphics you would need to create a view that displays the Design Options
and annotate and dimension it accordingly. And only publish the
appropriate Design Option the Client wanted. So you would have a Craftsman
Option, and Two Other Victorian Options.

Based on how you would use it, I guess you would never accept any of
the Design Options because to do so would eliminate the other Options.

The bottom line is while all options are in one model, however, each
Design Option would have to have all elements uniquely associated with it (roof,
walls, floors, cabinets, trim, etc). So theoretically, you might have to create
3 roofs, 3 floors, 3 ... (and so on) if any of those unique elements varies between schemes.

[nrenfro]

Very true options can be maintained into CD, but they were not intended for this type of application. For example if you use schedules for doors, windows or what ever you will note that only the items in the primary options schedule. Schedules have phase controls but not option controls. Drawings views can be controlled as residarchitect notes. I also remember that room tags could act a little strange, as they would pick relationships between different options. It can be done, but I think it is important to keep in mind that it they were named Design Options intentionally. Revit is an awesome product and with a open mind, and some flexibility...

[irwin]

Very true options can be maintained into CD, but they were not intended for this type of application. For example if you use schedules for doors, windows or what ever you will note that only the items in the primary options schedule. Schedules have phase controls but not option controls. Drawings views can be controlled as residarchitect notes. I also remember that room tags could act a little strange, as they would pick relationships between different options. It can be done, but I think it is important to keep in mind that it they were named Design Options intentionally. Revit is an awesome product and with a open mind, and some flexibility...
I would like to clarify a few things.

First of all, you can have a Schedule show the elements of particular design options. In Properties for a Schedule, if you pick Visibility you will find option controls. Some discussion of why it's there and the use that people are making of schedules with design options can be found in this thread: http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=2174

Next, the name Design Options simply means that you are considering different alternative designs for the building. When we were designing this capability considerable thought went into making annotations, views, and sheets, work with Design Options -- there was no intention to limit them to the design phase as opposed to construction documentation.

Room tags in a design option behave as if the building contained only the elements of that design option and the elements not in any option. They ignore elements in competing options (except that there are warnings if elements in competing options are likely to cause confusion -- for example if a room tag in one option is in a view that shows a competing option).

Next, regarding jkrager's post above, there is no way to put a dimension into an option. View-specific elements cannot go into options. We considered allowing it but our internal users found it caused too much confusion.

Finally, with regard to dimensioning -- I'd recommend that an element in a secondary option should only be dimensioned in a view that is specifically set to show that option. That way you can print that view and it will come out looking the way you intend without having to first start editing that option. It isn't like AutoCAD where first you must turn on or off some layers and then print.