storing junk

[cparsons]

hi all,

i got the question below from one of my users ...

"what's the best way to model "miscellaneous" stuff in order to "cheat" drawing (like build a unit junkyard separate from the building) -- use phases, or design options?"

any ideas?

thanks!
chris

[patricks]

ummm I don't really follow the question. What misc. stuff are they trying to model?

[jbalding48677]

If you are talking about what I used to call a scratch pad, an area in AutoCAD where my viewports did not see and I could put other options or workout things away from my drawing, then I have used a separate project. Open both projects, the real one and a scratch one that has been totally purged. Cut and paste the parts into the scratch, work it out and cut and paste it back... I guess I was not smart enough to think about using phases or design options...

.

[sbrown]

I would work in a sep project file, link your building in if you need to ref. it, then you can always copy/paste from one project to another, then you won't mess up your documentation, views, etc.

[kpaxton]

OK, I will third that opinion. Definitely a separate file. You don't want to start messing with your main file with options or phases (until you really need them). I haven't had any problem with running multiple files open at the same time.

Scratch pad, huh? That's so..... Autocad.;)

-Kyle

[cparsons]

hi all,

exactly what i was looking for.

thanks!
chris

[Melarch]

I am not sure what junk we are referring, but if we are talking about accessory structures, versus variations of the main building model then I generally create the additional buildings or improvements in a separate Revit project file and import (combine/reference) into a separate site development project file.

Mel Persin, AIA

[cparsons]

hi mel,

it was more like the scratch pad analogy. one specific application would be for developing unit plans. as we have run through schematic design we have been developing them in separate files and then grouping and copying them into our model. that process has not been optimal and so one idea was to develop the units out "in space" in the same model as the building. the units would be grouped so that when the "space" units changes the units in the model would change.

I suppose an alternative would be to save groups out to a library and re-load them. just one more step...or to keep copying and pasting...

throughts?

chris