Multi-discipline, inter-office collaboration

[Chunk]

Anyone have experience using Revit in a multi-discipline, inter-office collaboration environment? We're researching ways that we can have mechanical, electrical, structural and civil work remotely from their offices on a project that is controlled by architectural either using a Terminal Server or other methods in a trust environment obviously since workset control/security is virtually non-existant. Anyone have experience, ideas or comments?

[Scott D Davis]

I dont know if its a solution yet, but I see Autodesk's Buzzsaw as the future for multi-discipline coordination. It's secure, provides document management and revision information, and is a central repository for files.

I see a day in the not too distance fututre, where the Central File for worksets will reside on a Buzzsaw project site, and the disciplines, including Architectural, will check out worksets from the project site, and then every 'save to central' will save back to the buzzsaw location.

It just seems to make sense that a single building model file with MEP, Stuctural, and possibly civil, landscape, and others, resides in a location on the internet where all design team members can get to it to check in and out the parts they are working on.

[Mr Spot]

In our office we have just set up a VPN where the central file lies on the server and the consultants can access it that way. Haven't really tested it out completely yet, but it looks promising...

[JamesVan]

We tried one project where a remote office of our firm was working on the same Revit model as we were here. Connection was over our WAN, and save to central lag time was a problem. If a local and remote user started STC anywhere within about a minute of eachother, the remote user would get disconnected from the central file.

This was only one project, and we were using 5.1. Since that time we have made various network hardware improvements and are now using 6.1, but we have not revisited that project to retest the WAN STC.

It is my belief that our friends at the factory should focus more on intelligent file linking as a more realistic solution. It would prove to be difficult to maintain communication between all parties every time a different design was explored and it propagated throughout the entire project model. There should remain some sort of controlled gateway between collaborating parties on a design team.

[Prodev75]

If you’re a multi-discipline firm and the design team is in-house it’s great. Now over the WAN is a totally different story. Saving to central over a WAN is horrible.

Revit + (6) team members + (3) in remote office = go to lunch and come back it might finish saving by then.

[Wes Macaulay]

It's a bandwidth issue. Most office environments offer 100BaseT networking which gives 30Mb/s throughput in a hub environment and maybe 60-70Mb/s in a switched environment.

High speed internet connections often offer 200Kb/sec or maybe even 1Mb - 3Mb/s if you're willing to pay the big bucks. So you're talking at best 1/10th of the bandwidth (and often less than that after you factor in latency and overhead for the VPN itself)... no wonder it's slow.

Until more disciplines are using Revit or something like it I don't think you'll have to worry about this much.

[Wes Macaulay]

Also -- at the last AU Phil Read suggested that consultants (arch and struc for now) could link their files together, which would obviate the need for everyone in working live in one file.

[Wes Macaulay]

Actually -- one idea I've had is a Navisworks / Buzzsaw hybrid... you upload your Revit / ADT / Triforma model to a web-based interference checking tool. Wonder if someone has one of those or is working on developing one?

[hand471037]

There's a large firm here that is looking at exactly that: using Navisworks with Buzzsaw to coordinate Revit & ADT/ABS. I'll let you know how it turns out when I can say more about it.

[Prodev75]

Also -- at the last AU Phil Read suggested that consultants (arch and struc for now) could link their files together, which would obviate the need for everyone in working live in one file.


If would definitely decrease the file size. The team members could in fact link their file into one another. I’ve tried that (linking central files together) works lovely. You could do interiors and building construction at the same time. Wasn’t an actual project, just a demonstration.
Here is my scenario…..

1. If you place a beam into a wall it prompts you "A structural framing element is attached to a wall whose Structural Usage is set to Non-bearing " then ask if you want to make the wall bearing. This will not work if the files are linked. Nor can you lock elements to a linked file. If I move my wall (architect) and the beam is 2’-0” from the face of the wall (created by the engineer), I want it to stay that way. The intelligent/coordination issue is now dead in the water with this linking file method.
If that’s the solution back to AutoCAD we go. <<just a joke I’ll never go back

2. Linked files lack visibility control. You can control the category but that’s all.

Solve these two issues, we (bulding industry professionals) could do a lot more with Revit. What do you guys think?

[ilya.bass]

If I move my wall (architect) and the beam is 2’-0” from the face of the wall (created by the engineer), I want it to stay that way.


won't the engineer mind that you are changing his beam?




The intelligent/coordination issue is now dead in the water with this linking file method.


suppose that instead of changing the beam right away, the software tells the engineer that the wall has moved and asks if he wants to adjust the beam. if that's the case would you consider the intelligent coordination alive and well?

[Scott D Davis]

suppose that instead of changing the beam right away, the software tells the engineer that the wall has moved and asks if he wants to adjust the beam. if that's the case would you consider the intelligent coordination alive and well?
hmmmm...could that be a hint of things to come?

[Prodev75]

Yes. Structurally he would need to compensate. If it were a last minute change I probably get a nasty phone call.

If the files were linked and I moved the wall I would definitely want some kind of notification that there is critical relationship or dimension between the wall and the linked beam. He (structural) would need to know that I realized the relationship existed and decided the go forward with the change. Otherwise it’s just like xrefs with AutoCAD.

In a live file (multi-workset environment) it’s easy to get that those types of alerts when changes come.

So I guess the answer is yes. Alive and Kicking.

[ilya.bass]

In a live file (multi-workset environment) it’s easy to get that those types of alerts when changes come.


in a single file sharing environment (using worksets today), you may get the beam to automatically update without any alerts (perhaps undesirabe), or you may get some alerts but not necessarily implying multi-disipline coordination issues or not necessarily at the right time or not necessarily given to the right user.

on the other hand, a single file scenario implies a team that is most likely co-located and working pretty closely, so the engineer and the architect communicate frequently and that compensates for the lack of formal given notification by the software to the engineer.

[vastlld-principal]

Vendors have been aware of these network limitations for quite some time. Apparently, market forces directed them away from this path of development just when we could use it. It's as though we are continually forced to adopt technology which is always not quite right, and just behind the curve. For the last decade CAD has been far off the mark (aiming in the opposite direction), but now CAD is turning the corner with bim. Logically these applications require heavy utilization of network resources. Unfortunately, Revit with it's 100mb/s specification has embraced the "brute-force" approach. Considering the convergence of thick clients and thin clients (e.g. "desktop based applications" and "web applications"), it's hard to conceive of contemporary software not utilizing the best aspects of both. Hopefully Autodesk or Bently will address network based collaboration with a roadmap of solutions and not just hype projectwize or buzzsaw.

[Steve Cashman]

We're a small (7 person) firm with one employ out of state and many cases where we're working remotely (nights, weekends, project sites, etc.). Saving to central is slow on a 20-30 MB file - it takes between 20 - 40 minutes. Our approach so far has been to notify other team members if a STC is required. We do most of it at off hours. It would be nice if you could schedule a STC. In that way, when I'm done working at home at night or our out-of-state employee needs to save, it could occur while we're sleeping.

One test that I haven't tried yet, was to use Revit through Remote Desktop Sharing from my home computer. I use it to run the Portable License Utility when I forget to do it. That might be an approach though a work around.

[ilya.bass]

One test that I haven't tried yet, was to use Revit through Remote Desktop Sharing from my home computer. I use it to run the Portable License Utility when I forget to do it. That might be an approach though a work around.

In my development work on Revit, I use Remote Desktop Sharing a lot. It works, though there are of course occasional graphical quirks, depending on your remote network connection (I imagine you use Cable or DSL?). Perhaps the following combines the best of both worlds: do your interactive Revit work on the remote computer, then save the local file, then copy it over the network to the office computer, then STC from the office computer using Remote Desktop Sharing.

[Wes Macaulay]

I was going to suggest that... but didn't know if more data goes across the network during STC than the size of the file itself. If during a STC less data is written to the central file than the actual size of the central file, wouldn't it make more sense to write that data remotely rather than copying the file back to the office network?

[Phil Palmer]

In the grand scheme of BIM and Revit we are ALL going to hit this problem soon.
The concept of the Single database is great and must be the way forward.
The worrying part to me now is 'collaboration' working with the Revit model.
We are very fortunate here in that we have all design disciplines in the same building BUT this is not the case for a lot of designers and the Factory needs to begin to adress the issues of how we are supposed to work remotely from each other on the single model database.
Within a year or so I can really see this becoming a 'show stopper' for a lot of companies in adopting Revit IF the only way to use it is within a single office.
Line speeds are increasing but can we wait for that to happen ?

[ilya.bass]

I was going to suggest that... but didn't know if more data goes across the network during STC than the size of the file itself. If during a STC less data is written to the central file than the actual size of the central file, wouldn't it make more sense to write that data remotely rather than copying the file back to the office network?

first of all, STC usually involves a step of reloading latest changes from central. this involves several reads from the central file; these reads are faster when done within the office network, because of lesser latency and better speed. secondly, when Revit data is saved into a file, it is done in several steps and at the moment the "buffering" is not optimized for "slow networks". such optimization is possible in theory and we are considering it for a future release. in the meantime, what I suggested can improve the overall time, at least in some cases. If anyone tries, I would be curious to hear if it helped in their particular circumstances.

[Prodev75]

CHAPTER 501
Multi-discipline, inter-office collaboration

Summary

If you are working in the same office, make sure your network is optimized for Revit. If you are working from a remote location, you may experience slower performance when saving to central.

Sound like something that needs to go on the box.

[christopher.zoog51272]

CHAPTER 501
Multi-discipline, inter-office collaboration

Summary

If you are working in the same office, make sure your network is optimized for Revit. If you are working from a remote location, you may experience slower performance when saving to central.

Sound like something that needs to go on the box.sounds like common sense to me

IMHO, most apps that have to communicate with data remotely (over WAN, ...VPN etc) run slooooow.

[ilya.bass]

In the grand scheme of BIM and Revit we are ALL going to hit this problem soon.
The concept of the Single database is great and must be the way forward.
The worrying part to me now is 'collaboration' working with the Revit model.
We are very fortunate here in that we have all design disciplines in the same building BUT this is not the case for a lot of designers and the Factory needs to begin to adress the issues of how we are supposed to work remotely from each other on the single model database.
Within a year or so I can really see this becoming a 'show stopper' for a lot of companies in adopting Revit IF the only way to use it is within a single office.
Line speeds are increasing but can we wait for that to happen ?

Phil, it's nice to hear from you. I am very interested in this topic. There are a lot of ways that the model, the construction documents and the legal responsibilites can be divided.

One approach that we expect to work in many cases is file linking. For example, architects' model a.rvt linking structural model s.rvt (and vise versa -- s.rvt linking a.rvt). This achieves a clean separation for legal purposes (which matters a lot in US for example) and provides a level of control when deciding how one team reacts to changes made by another. We are looking into ways to improve this approach to provide better collaboration experience.

When we are not talking about different legal entities, is there still certain organizational division of responsibilities? Is it not usually based on the location? If so, then the linked file approach may still apply.

- Ilya

[JohnASB]

One test that I haven't tried yet, was to use Revit through Remote Desktop Sharing from my home computer.
We have recently got our Remote Web Workspace working on Small Business Server 2003. I tested this last week with Revit from home and it works real-time enough for a relatively on-site experience (cable modem both sides). Having a box on-site would therefore allow anyone to work from anywhere easily, since the on-site box saves to server at maximum speed.

Here is another software that uses a similar manner to transfer video/keyboard/mouse in near real-time:
http://www.famatech.com/radmin/

[vastlld-principal]

sounds like common sense to me

IMHO, most apps that have to communicate with data remotely (over WAN, ...VPN etc) run slooooow.
Running applications and accessing files through a WAN or LAN will depend a great deal on your network bandwidth. However, performance is not entirely based on bandwidth. How an applications utilizes networked resources (e.g. accessing files, read/write etc) has great impact on the overall applications perceived responsiveness. Since Revit has no server side manager, it's network overhead is very high (with worksets), having to access/read/write thousands of files through a rather inefficient windows file system is Revit's achilles heal.

Streamlining Revit’s networking functionality should be Autodesk’s first priority.

[ilya.bass]

Since Revit has no server side manager, it's network overhead is very high (with worksets), having to access/read/write thousands of files through a rather inefficient windows file system is Revit's achilles heal.


Within one shared project, Revit mostly deals with one file that's on the network - the project's Central File. Revit does create many smaller backup files when Saving to Central, but we have not seen much evidence that having to write these many files is the achilles heal.

I don't disagree that there are environments and scenarios where the user experience can be improved and we are working on these improvements.

A question to all the Revit users who are reading this, and especially those close to CAD manager roles: what effect do you think a server side component will have on the complexity of deployment and maintenance within your organizations? Do you already use some software tools (design or otherwise) that include such server side components? (And no, I can't confirm or deny whether we are working on such a thing, just gathering input :-).

Thanks
- Ilya

[Wes Macaulay]

What advantage would there be to having a server side component? Would we see faster STC times since the server could do the reconciliations between local and central files on the server, rather than over the network?

If there were to be a little server app which would speed up and streamline the process, I guess that would be okay, but in many cash-strapped offices, people host the central file on a computer that someone is working on. People might also not like to have to use up resources on their server of course; I'm sure network admins across the board are happy with the fact that Revit's central file is managed the way it is now.

But perhaps there are compelling reasons to change this...

[ilya.bass]

What advantage would there be to having a server side component? Would we see faster STC times since the server could do the reconciliations between local and central files on the server, rather than over the network?


Good questions. There might be several advantages. The reconciliation though is by far the most difficult to implement because it sometimes requires user intervention. Other than that, a number of improvements in performance might be achieved in a few areas, including making elements/worksets editable, as well as STC (but only to an extent - in the end you need to send bytes over the wire and the bandwidth is the limiting factor).



If there were to be a little server app which would speed up and streamline the process, I guess that would be okay, but in many cash-strapped offices, people host the central file on a computer that someone is working on. People might also not like to have to use up resources on their server of course; I'm sure network admins across the board are happy with the fact that Revit's central file is managed the way it is now.

But perhaps there are compelling reasons to change this...

yes, the little server app you are talking about needs to consume relatively few resources or it won't be acceptable in the environment where it is running on a computer where someone else is trying to other other primary apps like Revit.

My usual disclaimer: this is all hypotetical. Actual plans can't be disclosed here.

[vastlld-principal]

Within one shared project, Revit mostly deals with one file that's on the network - the project's Central File. Revit does create many smaller backup files when Saving to Central, but we have not seen much evidence that having to write these many files is the achilles heal.

I don't disagree that there are environments and scenarios where the user experience can be improved and we are working on these improvements.

A question to all the Revit users who are reading this, and especially those close to CAD manager roles: what effect do you think a server side component will have on the complexity of deployment and maintenance within your organizations? Do you already use some software tools (design or otherwise) that include such server side components? (And no, I can't confirm or deny whether we are working on such a thing, just gathering input :-).

Thanks
- Ilya

Our firm is highly collaborative. We very often collaborate on projects between our multiple offices. This is accomplished though our WAN. A traditional CAD workflow of opening/saving/closing individual files happens in an acceptable timeframe. Now comes Revit. STC takes a while (bit’s need to get across the wire, as you say), but the seemingly simple action of making worksets editable/non-editable is extremely sluggish over any connection that’s slower than 100Mbit/sec.

We currently support Autodesk network license manager software as well document management systems. For me (and our firm) this is a workflow productivity issue that far outweighs the burden required to support server manager software by our IT department.

[Wes Macaulay]

So where is the holdup? Is there that much data flying around the network during STC / workset + element sign outs? (I suspect there must be, since my internal network card blew up on my laptop and I'm temporarily using a USB one, and my port is USB 1.0, so it is certainly slower than my internal NIC.)

[Steve Cashman]

We see this issue of working with our off-site MEP consultants as the most important. The advantages of internal architectural coordination are great, but what we REALLY want is better coordination with our MEP consultants. That is always a point of risk for us. If Revit comes out with integrated MEP tools that are acceptable to us, we going to force our consultants to use the
software.

If the networking issues cannot be solved in a fairly simple way (remember most architects are not techies), I think it will be a huge obstacle. I like the idea of potentially having three or four linked Revit models (civil, structural, architectural, & MEP) if it can all be managed and organized by the architect - the orchestra leader of the building design process. This approach, though, would have to be consistent, understandable to a non-techie, stable, and easy to use.

We dream of the day when there will be just one light fixture in the model (in both the reflected ceiling plans and lighting plans) and when a mechanical engineer adds a smoke damper that it will automatically display on the electrial power plans.

The single file BIM approach is very powerful, but we have to extend it to work between firms and across the Internet (which is how most building engineering is accomplished). We're slugging through using it over a WAN, but it's not ideal. A STC is like a big rat going through a snake.