Architectural Column Monitoring, and issues...

[Calvn_Swing]

So, I've got an interesting situation...

We've got a project broken up into two files. One represents the "existing" building and the second file is all the new renovation work we're doing to it (all interiors). There are a number of reasons we've chosen this, so for the sake of argument, assume we should have them as separate files for now...

We have in the existing file the structural elements, and all the core and shell elements. This includes some architectural columns (acting as column covers). We have new walls we're making in the second file that need to be cut by these column covers so the end condition is "correct."

Tried the following things:

Copy/Monitor the architectural columns: Doesn't work because Revit will only let you copy/monitor an architectural or structural column as a new structural column. You can't have the copied object be an architectural column. Why? I have no idea...

Edit Wall Join: Well, since there is no join, this doesn't do much. I just want the end mitered at 45 degrees. No way to do that it would appear.

Align the ends of the walls to reference planes to get it to cut the wall end correctly - don't know why I tried this, but it did do some funky stuff, just not what I wanted...

Create structural column void family to cut wall - Edit: Doesn't work. Seemed to work, but I can't cut the walls with the column void. So, this doesn't work either. I'm a little frustrated...

Create in-place wall void family to cut wall - worked, but I can't copy the void form to any other columns, and I don't want to re-create it each bloody time. Not to mention scheduling, etc...

Anyone else run into an issue like this and have a better solution?

Thanks!

[olakahahola]

Hey why didn't you use phasing? That would solve your problem right!!

[Calvn_Swing]

We are using phasing. The issue is that we are not responsible for the core changes. So this includes the fire protection around the columns (which we can't change). Since we have a host of new users in the file, not to mention a separate set of documents, specs, etc... that accompany any of the core changes, we have broken the project into two separate files. One containing existing core and skin (the stuff we aren't responsible for) and another for all the stuff we are responsible for. The issue is basically Wall Joins across linked files. (And that's what I should have titled it in retrospect.) But, I can't edit that part, so here we are.

Anyway, since Revit won't automatically clip the wall off at the architectural column, I'm having to find a workaround again.

Any other suggestions?

[dhurtubise]

I would honestly revert to everything within one file.
Put the stuff you arent responsible for on a separate workset, check out that workset with a fake username.
That will solve a lot of your problem

[eldad]

I have to agree with Daniel here, move all to one file and use phazing and worksets, you are creating headaches otherwise... :)

[dbaldacchino]

I agree too. And here's another question....what difference does it make whether your end wall cuts/trims/cleans up perfectly or not? You're going to include details to tell the builder how to do it, so don't try to manage all those cleanups in a 1/8" drawing, you're not getting squat out if it.

[Calvn_Swing]

Well, we've had issues with things joining across the files in unpredictable ways. I guess my response to the single file mentality is that if everyone on the project was an expert user, it would probably be fine. But when we do these kind of situations as a single file in practice we spend so much time cleaning up mistakes that are a result of a beam joining to a wall, etc... that we have made it a policy to keep structural information and the architectural separate. In this case we've added the existing building information to the "structure" file. I get what all of you are saying, I just don't buy it. I can't check out all the stuff under a fake user name because we do have to access that information pretty regularly when it comes to doing our phasing work. We're asking the building owner to demo some walls, doors, etc... so we can bring it up to code. So, we're producing the plans, but we don't do the work. The other piece you're missing is that we're a design build company. So, it IS important to have things we aren't working on separated in ways that might not matter if you aren't building it. As much as I appreciate the suggestions, the reason I had the "assumption" the separate files is the right strategy is because we have reasons to have it that way, and these reasons are pretty complex (and numerous) and I didn't want to have to explain them as well. It would take several pages, and several responses too... And, I want to reiterate that we are using phasing, across both files. So, back to the assumption, are there any other ways to make the walls clean up correctly without changing our file structure!

I had considered loading the skin and core file as one big "group" since that might fix things? But, we haven't worked with groups like this, and I was hesitant to do it without some experimentation, and I just don't have time to do it this week.

In terms of wanting the walls to clean up correctly: I can see them on the 1/8" half size prints, so it matters. We are the builder, and we will include details, but that isn't an excuse for ****** 1/8 scale drawings. Even being the builder, we will get a lot of questions back from our own staff, not to mention the subs, when they see the discrepancy between the plan and the detail, and those are questions that can eat a lot of time answering each question individually. If I can spend an hour and the drawings are just right, then no questions, and the time paid for itself. Also, we use the model to schedule, estimate, and do clash detection. So, having them clean up right is important on other levels. Seriously, I don't take OK is good enough arguments very well, and this seems to be one of them...

[dbaldacchino]

Seriously, I don't take OK is good enough arguments very well, and this seems to be one of them...
In no way is "OK is good enough" ok by my standards and in no way did I imply that I'd "bend the rules" unnecessarily just to "get by". Your arguments about being the builder and all the things that you're extracting from the model, etc. are good arguments and you surely have a point there. The point I was trying to make is that sometimes, the energy & effort expended into making things right (being extremely meticulous) does not come close to the return on that investment. Drawings tell stories....a 1/8" plan is a gobal view to show overall dimensions, etc. and a "keyplan" to show locations of details, sections cuts etc. If you want to build a particular wall condition, you'll give accurate instructions in that detail. That's what I'm trying to point out....focus on the detail if things are unnecessarily complicated to get the cleanest look you're after in larger scale drawing.

I've spent countless hours (as have others around me) cleaning up wall joins that won't work right etc in ADT (Revit does a better job). What was the return on that investment for us? Zero....by the way, we're not builders, so I might be missing something really important. The point is, our time could have been better spent focusing on solving the detail and comminucating it better to the GC rather than fiddling with irritable joins.

One thing that my seniors have taught me about drawings (which is of a somewhat lost art) is that when we produced drawings by hand, you were limited by what you see at that scale. Unfortunately, the computer can zoom in on the fasteners, even though when printed, these details go away at certain scales. Now granted that we are modeling information, but the example you illustrated doesn't seem to hold the information I'd deem important. If I get questions about the look of my drawings, I'd spend a minute (not hours) to just point the builder to the relevant detail. I think it's that simple. There's a reason why we represent a building in a hierarchy of different scale drawings.

Anyway, keep 'em coming. It's educational to see other points of view :)

[Calvn_Swing]

I've spent countless hours (as have others around me) cleaning up wall joins that won't work right etc in ADT (Revit does a better job). What was the return on that investment for us? Zero....by the way, we're not builders, so I might be missing something really important. The point is, our time could have been better spent focusing on solving the detail and comminucating it better to the GC rather than fiddling with irritable joins.

I didn't mean to imply that Ok was good enough for you - sometimes I post things in a hurry and don't read them through enough to make sure everything I say can't be misinterpreted to mean something less than polite. I certainly hope you didn't take it that way! And, I must admit I was a little frustrated because I really had a specific question, and I've yet to get an answer related to that question. Even a flat out no would be appreciated at this point. I think the discussion that's been going on (File Linking vs. Worksets vs. Phasing, etc...) is a good one, I'd just also like to talk about the thing I had a question about...

The reason I am trying to get suggestions is to make precisely that judgment - is it worth the time. The project manager is rightly meticulous, and it is going to be a battle to get him to accept it being wrong, and that will also take time. So, I'm balancing a few plates on this one. The construction issues aren't directly related to these wall joins. The differences in material quantities, etc, are way below the waste threshold, and are irrelevant in that sense. It is a little annoying on the clash detection side because these "clashes" are not really there, but you try and explain that to the computer! This is solely a graphics issue. Some of the possible solutions to this graphics issue are not feasible because of the construction issues. (Put it all in one file, etc...)

Anyway.....

Does anyone have suggestions, or have I covered them all?

Thanks!

[dbaldacchino]

Is it possible to post a file with the particular wall and column wrap in question? I think I'd be in a better position to asses it and offer a solution....and no worries about your post :)