Re-order Phases

[raddis]

Ok,
I thought I'd have a little more fun with the Revit 9 Retail Building tutorial and add phases to the project for each step - sort of like real world construction.
So I started with a Steel Framing Phase for the columns and beams, since that was first in the tutorial, then added one for Braces.
Then, Pile Caps? OOPS! That Phase needs to be BEFORE the Steel Framing Phase right? So now I'm stuck.

Is there a way to reorder Phases once they are created? I can see how to combine them but not how to reposition them.

TIA.

[patricks]

You would have to combine it with a previous phase, and then recreate the phase where you want it.

I would not ever use that method for a project, though. The building is constructed all at once, with various trades going and coming at different times. The shell building at least needs to be all on one phase, and then you can do a separate phase for each tenant fitout if you want.

[raddis]

Yah, but then you'd need to delete the elements and start over.
Oh well, Wish List Item.
I wouldn't really expect or want my users to do this necessarily.
Just thought it would be an interesting academic exercise.
I've settled on 3 phases for the Project Template file:
Existing
Demolition
New Construction

[christopher.zoog51272]

You do not need a demolation phase, if you use the "demolish" tools. A demo phase is reduntant and will often lead to confusion among users. I suggest you stick with Existing and New Construction.

-Z

[Steven Campbell]

Why not create a new phase in the correct position with a temporary name, select all the elements on the old phase and re-assign the "phase created" parameter to the new phase, then combined the empty phase into another and rename the new phase to the old phase name... or may be I did not read it correctly...

Steven Campbell
Autodesk Revit

[LRaiz]

I think raddis' entire exercise does not correspond to the design intent of phases. Phases in Revit are designed for long-term phasing but not for a day-by-day or week-by-week construction sequencing. People do take Revit phasing beyond its original intent and use it for construction sequencing but then some aspects of software behavior may be not optimal.

[patricks]

You do not need a demolation phase, if you use the "demolish" tools. A demo phase is reduntant and will often lead to confusion among users. I suggest you stick with Existing and New Construction.

-Z

I agree on that. However some users say they need a separate Demolition phase to make certain graphic overrides work correctly. I stick with just the basic two phases, though.

Unless you demolish parts of a building under a separate contract from the new construction, and the newly constructed elements don't need to relate directly to both existing and demolished items (instead only need to relate to what is existing, so the new construction contractor doesn't need to know what was demolished) then a separate demolition phase might be appropriate.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

I think raddis' entire exercise does not correspond to the design intent of phases. Phases in Revit are designed for long-term phasing but not for a day-by-day or week-by-week construction sequencing. People do take Revit phasing beyond its original intent and use it for construction sequencing but then some aspects of software behavior may be not optimal.

I thought I'd have a little more fun
He was just trying to have fun Leonid :cry:
Although I agree with Leonid I think in the early stages of Revit education , especially if you're just going through the tutorials, trying things out is a great way to discover that the Revit design team got most things right when they sat down and thought this stuff through. Playing with the software and seeing how you can break it is often the best approach to finding out what works best for your particular workflow situtation.

[Justin Marchiel]

Playing with the software and seeing how you can break it is often the best approach to finding out what works best for your particular workflow situtation.

A little of topic but I agree.

I was once applying for a job as an it assitant in an architectural firm and one of the questions was "how many times have you crashed your computer?" The reason that i was asked was that if you crash it, you must have been able to fix it.

I agree that playing and "breaking" is the only way to figure out how to use the software. I find that "power users" often take the tools that are at hand and use them for new creative uses and come out with a better product in the end. I find that some of my guys stick to using tools as they are intended and get confused when i tell them another way to create things if the original tool doens't work. I find out really quick who knows what they are doing, and who is just getting a paycheque to show up.

Jusitn

[David Haynes]

I think raddis' entire exercise does not correspond to the design intent of phases. Phases in Revit are designed for long-term phasing but not for a day-by-day or week-by-week construction sequencing. People do take Revit phasing beyond its original intent and use it for construction sequencing but then some aspects of software behavior may be not optimal.
Lenoid - could you further expand on the "may not be optimal" part of your response. We are finding many firms are wanting to extend the data farther through the design/construction process. Your insight would be GREAT! Thank you.

[Steve_Stafford]

Seems to me that a "haphazard" reordering of phases could create a "time warp paradox" for the objects that are part of a phase. What happens to a demolished object when the phase it was demolished in is now in front of the phase it was created in? Reordering phasing might be easy to allow if objects have not been created but what about after?

Also there are only four states an object can be in Revit, New, Existing, Temporary or Demolished. All the graphic overrides presuppose that everything that happened prior to NOW is existing, which typically is true but in the week by week phasing of construction that might not be the right way to think about it? So if we'd like to think in "normal" terms New, Existing etc but also depict construction phasing one will eventually impact how well the other works, the broader concept meeting the specific.

Just musing...

[marty_rozmanith]

Still, Steve Campbell is right. Just make a new phase, move your stuff, and you'll be all set.

-M

[iru69]

R9's new Filter tool could be used for something like this.

[raddis]

Thanks for all the feedback.
Yah, I figured out Steve's thought on Phases. I created a dummy phase before the Steel and braces and moved the pile caps to that phase. Next I combined the Pile Caps phase with whatever was adjacent to it, and finally renamed the dummy phase to Pile Caps.
Would have been easier if I could just relocate it ;)

As for Demolition Phase, without it, how do I create a Demo drawing?

As for the Phasing, the exercise was a bit boring, so I thought it might be interesting to be able to show "a client or contractor" the process of "constructing" the building. Perhaps this would help thinking about what needs to be ordered when, a sort of visual CPM chart.

And you know, the CAD Managers "just wanna have fun" (they wanna have fun, the managers....")

[crarchitect]

As for Demolition Phase, without it, how do I create a Demo drawing?

Exactly what I was thinking. Here's an example from my work: It appears the only way to phase a Demo'd slab area is to make several (e) slabs, one complete, one with the cut out. Then you can display one or the other- by phase- and add the infill pieces in the new phase. It is a pain, but then again we can't yet phase Openings (slab cut outs) can we?

I have a demo Phase in ALL of my renovation projects so I am confused as to how we could eliminate this. Me thinks I am missing something here...

Great discussion though. FWIW I love that Demo Hammer.

[raddis]

Hmmmm....
If I had a hammer??Hummer??
Haven't tried the Hammer.
Didn't he leave Congress (or soon)?

Thanks all.

[David Haynes]

Demo Phasing is unnecessary, but many people still use it.

New construction phase should include demolished objects (Remember a phase is a period of time, not a snapshot in time).
1. If a separate demo phase is created, you cannot see both demolished and new objects in the same view.
2. To get a view of only demolished objects, set (or create) a phase filter to show only demolished objects.
3. When you demolish something, that is the last phase in which the object can be shown.

Many people use the demo hammer (because it is easy), but limits the view possibilities.