How to setup Revit so i can "group" views under multiple phases of the project?!

[samov]

Here is my problem,

Let's say you have a project... a small house...

1. You start modeling it... you reach a certain point... when it's enough for you to start getting the construction authorization.

- You need 10 views on sheets to print. Let's call this phase "AUTH"

2. The project goes on... you develop the detailing and everything to the last detail... and now you get to submit construction drawings.

- You need let's say 20 views on sheets to print. And let's call this phase "CNSTR"

3. and so on...

Q1: Is there any way to set a parameter in each view to give it a "AUTH" or "CNSTR" value and have the project Browser group them under that name...
(for example have the non grouped under ??? and the grouped ones under "auth" etc...)

Q2: Is there any way to FREEZE a project at a certain stage so you can go back for example at stage "AUTH" and see the project as it was...
(There is a small downside to being fully parametric... as you add more things to the model... your "earlier" "auth" "cnstr" sheets and views get modified... no longer having in them what i actually submitted)


THANK YOU!

P.S. i know it's a lot of text and usually the answer to these kinds of questions is easy but please explain it in detail. i have searched through help and i can not get the behavior i want.

ALSO... the questions can be answered separately ... that is... if you have a solution to Q1 but not Q2 or vice versa... or a combined answer for BOTH

[Andre Carvalho]

Q1. Yes. Create a project parameter to your views. Settings > Project Parameters > Add > Give it a name > assign it to the category Views > leave it instance parameter. Now all your views have the parameter that you can write something like AUTH or CNSTR. You can go to your project browser and create a new filter to organize your views by AUTH or CNSTR. Tip. You can select multiple views in the browser and change the parameter to all at once.

Q2. Yes. You have to work with Revit function called phases.

Andre Carvalho

[samov]

Thank you for your response...

I will post the exact combination of "ingredients" that solved my problem. :)

[samov]

1. Later i realized that i needed this parameter to show on each sheet.

Complete solution (almost complete):

Use phasing (see help) to "save" your project progress at a certain point as a finished phase.

Use shared parameters and define a parameter that you later add in your titleblock family and your project for each view.

Possible problems:

I found no way to link the "name" i give the phase in the project to a parameter in the sheet titleblock family.

(i think Autodesk would need to "hardwire" this one... since from what i figured out, it means taking something stored inside the project and linking it to something outside, for example "Drawn By" which i can select in a Titleblock BUT it is not a Shared Parameter)

Any thoughts?

[patricks]

The only way to "freeze" a project 100% as it is would be to save it as a different file. We do this all the time before a major change is made during SD's, DD's, or CD's. We just append file names with DD1, DD2, CD1, CD2, etc. as needed.

[iandidesign]

Given Revit's ability to organize views and sheets it's only natural to consider a workflow that keeps all of a project's history in one file. There are certain roadblocks to that approach however. Revit will not allow duplicate view names. So even if the views could be distinguished by phase, or a user defined parameter, they must still have unique names. This prevents you from having an existing phase First Floor Plan and a new phase First Floor Plan. Not too hard to work around, but a limitation. Harder perhaps is the requirement for unique sheet numbers (sheet names can be the same). If you're like me you normally number your sets the same, but Revit won't allow a permit set A-2.1 and a CD set A-2.1. Again possible to work around, but definitely a workaround.

I see a great opportunity here for Revit to incorporate archiving into the workflow.

[tomnewsom]

Views must have different names, but the "Title On Sheet" parameter can be whatever you like. This allows you to call a view "02 Presentation 1-100" in the browser but still appear as "2nd Floor Plan" when placed on a sheet.

[samov]

I've found a nice way to set it up...

Settings -> Browser Organization -> New

1. I did not want views that are on sheets to show up in the Views list... keeps things nice and clean and you know where to find them. ( in Filter, Sheet name equals <none> )

2.Grouped by Discipline and then by Family. Sorted by Associated Level.

[frankie right]

hey i & i: i stumbled upon your reply to someone else, on a different problem, but wanted to ask you about this thing in particular: "Revit won't allow a permit set A-2.1 and a CD set A-2.1. Again possible to work around, but definitely a workaround."

do tell, what is the workaround? i've got gobs of phases on my project, and would like to call all the first floor plans A1.1. etc.


here's your whole quote from the thread i found:


Given Revit's ability to organize views and sheets it's only natural to consider a workflow that keeps all of a project's history in one file. There are certain roadblocks to that approach however. Revit will not allow duplicate view names. So even if the views could be distinguished by phase, or a user defined parameter, they must still have unique names. This prevents you from having an existing phase First Floor Plan and a new phase First Floor Plan. Not too hard to work around, but a limitation. Harder perhaps is the requirement for unique sheet numbers (sheet names can be the same). If you're like me you normally number your sets the same, but Revit won't allow a permit set A-2.1 and a CD set A-2.1. Again possible to work around, but definitely a workaround.

I see a great opportunity here for Revit to incorporate archiving into the workflow.

[twiceroadsfool]

There isnt an actual workaround for duplicating Sheet numbers. You might be able to do it if you use a font for the sheet numbers with a few characters that are invisible, but its nuts, if you ask me. When i WANT to do different phases in one model i go:

1a2.1, 2a2.1, etc.

That said, i would NOT use PHASES for milestone dates in a project. Phases are Project Phases of construction, not milestone phases of the documentation. On the sruface it might sound like a cute way to circumvent your archiving needs, but thing long and hard about the IMPLICATIONS first: Demolition will have to keep being shifted around between SD/DD/CD accordingly, and as you progress along, certain things that were created for earlier *milestones" will have to have their *phase* altered, or they will show up overriden as existing, during CD's.

Doing a Save as, and saving in an archive directory, as well as plotting everything to PDF for storage is your best bet for recording milestone dates. Its not sexy, its not parametric, but damn is it easy. :)

[iandidesign]

Maybe workaround is the wrong word. You could add an extra character as Aaron suggests or use a completely manual numbering system, which would really be self defeating.

In the end I agree with Aaron that Revit’s current tools are not well suited for publishing milestones. They were not designed for that, and as much as I recognize the need for lateral thinking with BIM, it’s simply not a good fit in this case.

I too am an advocate of creating a PDF record of each published set, and for the time being saving copies of the Revit file too. But I still think Revit can and should incorporate archiving into it’s internal workflow. (This could encompass a broadening of the Revision and Redline tools as well.) As we become more model-centric this will be all the more important. Having all this history embedded in a single Revit file would be unworkably bloated under the current structure. But the world will move to single, centrally served, multidiscipline BIM models eventually (probably when A figures out how to make it pay). Then accessing the entirety of a project’s history will only be a matter of interface design since storage is cheap and overcoming performance issues and achieving network optimization are prerequisite of the move to a model server in the first place.

This is my problem. No matter how good BIM apps get, I’m always pondering what could be ten years hence.

[frankie right]

back at work finally...

many thanks, guys, for your responses. yes, these are construction phases (exterior, whitebox, tenant buildouts, tax credit application, add a building, etc.) rather than documentation phases (like sd, dd, cd). and the client keeps putting different pieces of work in different phases, depending on money available. it's really proving to be a test of revit. i'm trying the 1A.1, 2A.1 approach for now. wish me luck!