Linking Files versus Combining them?

[ktracy.194130]

Hi,
We currently have our file organized into 2 parts- interior and exterior. One is about 100mb and the other about 50mb. We are considering combining the 2 files because that's the only way we have the ability to 1) tag elements (walls) from the linked file, and 2) have section cuts made in the link appear in the other floor plans.

I am using a 64-bit machine with 8GB RAM but not eveybody on the team has the same machine.

Is the impact on performance such that combining files would be a horrible idea? I am testing this in a separate file but wanted to get some opinions one way or another from other's experience

[clog boy]

Hi,
We currently have our file organized into 2 parts- interior and exterior. One is about 100mb and the other about 50mb. We are considering combining the 2 files because that's the only way we have the ability to 1) tag elements (walls) from the linked file, and 2) have section cuts made in the link appear in the other floor plans.

I am using a 64-bit machine with 8GB RAM but not eveybody on the team has the same machine.

Is the impact on performance such that combining files would be a horrible idea? I am testing this in a separate file but wanted to get some opinions one way or another from other's experience

I think RAM is your friend here - there's been mentioned a rule of thumb in the Hardware thread. The rule of thumb is 20:1, so when the file grows to 200MB you're going to need 4GB of free RAM.

Performance will increase as linked files are a major memory hog, especially reloading linked files or opening the file. So yes I would seriously consider it, group where appropriate (repetitive floorplans etc) and try to keep the library to a modest size.
Regular save-as is going to work well for you too - can save up to 30% in file size (that's my own experience - actual savings will vary from file to file).

[twiceroadsfool]

Ktracey-

So you know, those are not your only options.

We put projects together with linked files all the time, and you can tag elements and detail sections in the linked files, and then have the same views in the host file and under VG you set the link to By Linked View, and all the annotations, tags, and whatnot show up.

The toughest thing about it is getting used to the workflow, and getting the section markers in the same place. (You have to create the section vies in both files, but only annotate them in the link). Then the one in the host file gets placed on the sheet...

[ktracy.194130]

That is the biggest problem- creating section/elevation marks in more than one file. This is inherently destined to cause coordination problems between the 2 when you have 50+ wall sections and just as many elevations.




Ktracy-

So you know, those are not your only options.

We put projects together with linked files all the time, and you can tag elements and detail sections in the linked files, and then have the same views in the host file and under VG you set the link to By Linked View, and all the annotations, tags, and whatnot show up.

The toughest thing about it is getting used to the workflow, and getting the section markers in the same place. (You have to create the section vies in both files, but only annotate them in the link). Then the one in the host file gets placed on the sheet...

[twiceroadsfool]

Once you get in to the system of organizing and naming them, it really isnt unmanagable at all. The only issue is the wall sections, and only where things are altering elevation as the location changes, like sloping roofs. For those elements, i just make sure i Copy > Paste Same Place, the section markers.

You can copy and paste, or bind the link if you want... But youre going to lose all of your annotated views that way. Unless you go one at a time and copy > paste same place in the recreated views in the host file anyway.

Either way, you have to duplicate all those views. Its just a matter of if you want both teams playing in the same file or not. But make no mistake about it, youre going to have to recreate those views anyway....

[Scott Womack]

Hi,
We currently have our file organized into 2 parts- interior and exterior. One is about 100mb and the other about 50mb. We are considering combining the 2 files because that's the only way we have the ability to 1) tag elements (walls) from the linked file, and 2) have section cuts made in the link appear in the other floor plans.

I am using a 64-bit machine with 8GB RAM but not eveybody on the team has the same machine.

Is the impact on performance such that combining files would be a horrible idea? I am testing this in a separate file but wanted to get some opinions one way or another from other's experience

Aaron is right, you may have waited too long for this to be painless. First Archive a copy, next, purge both files, aggressively, compacting each on the save. Then decide which file will lose the lease amount of work in it, that is the one you would "bind" into the other. Provided there are no bad groups, your machine will have to be the one to process this information. After this, you'll need to take some time, and go through the families in the browser, since a number of them will be "duplicated" to new names. You'll need to think about going through this list, selecting all instances of one, and changing them to the original family name. This will pick up speed again.

I have personally worked on files a little over 200 meg. Much beyond that and even a gigbit network can start to be too slow.

[johnf.77896]

Ktracey-

So you know, those are not your only options.

We put projects together with linked files all the time, and you can tag elements and detail sections in the linked files, and then have the same views in the host file and under VG you set the link to By Linked View, and all the annotations, tags, and whatnot show up.

The toughest thing about it is getting used to the workflow, and getting the section markers in the same place. (You have to create the section vies in both files, but only annotate them in the link). Then the one in the host file gets placed on the sheet...

Aaron do you have any documentation on how to do this?

thanks
John Fleming
GMK Architecture, inc.

[twiceroadsfool]

I have a few documents that ive written, but theyre at home and im at the office.

Its simple though.

2 models:

Linked Model
Host Model


Linked Model: Go to "Floor plan 1- link ref" and annotate, place tags, dims, notes, etc. Save.
Host Model: Link in "Linked Model"
Host Model: Go to "Floor Plan 1". Go to Visibility Graphics > RVT Link tab. Click the Custom Button, and set it to "By linked View." In the drop down, pick "Floor Plan 1- link ref" and hit okay. All the annotations show up, etc.

Make sure theyre the same scale or it gets goofy.

Watch things like crop regions, etc, as a lot of it is maintained from the HOST file, not the linked view... Which can also be controlled through that Custom dialogue...

[patricks]

If both files are shared and linked into one another, can you not have all documentation, including elevations and sections, in one file and have the other file just be model elements and perhaps level and grid datums (if that)?

I have only worked on one project so far with interlinked files, and that was a project with a building file and a site file. The only annotation I could not place in the building file was the site topo's contour labels. I had to place those in the site file. But otherwise everything, including the topo's spot elevations, were placed in the building file. The site topo showed up fine in all plan, elevation, and section views, and it actually made my building sections go MUCH faster as I had hardly any drafting to do on top of them.

[twiceroadsfool]

You cant tag objects in a linked file, IE: Doors, Walls, windows, materials, etc...

[johnf.77896]

Thanks for the info Aaron, something we can hope for down the road maybe in Revit 2011.

[johnf.77896]

If both files are shared and linked into one another, can you not have all documentation, including elevations and sections, in one file and have the other file just be model elements and perhaps level and grid datums (if that)?

I have only worked on one project so far with interlinked files, and that was a project with a building file and a site file. The only annotation I could not place in the building file was the site topo's contour labels. I had to place those in the site file. But otherwise everything, including the topo's spot elevations, were placed in the building file. The site topo showed up fine in all plan, elevation, and section views, and it actually made my building sections go MUCH faster as I had hardly any drafting to do on top of them.

And you have to have 2 separate sessions of Revit running concurrently to make changes to one or the other.

John Fleming
GMK Architecture, inc.

[twiceroadsfool]

Thanks for the info Aaron, something we can hope for down the road maybe in Revit 2011.

Im not really counting on it, or hoping for it.

While i no very little about programming, i can only guess at the reasons it doesnt work, and here is my LIMITED theory:

Its like calculating room volume, or having Linked Files be room bounding. To be able to tag things in linked files on the fly, EVERYTHING in that linked files "database" has to be readily accessible. Granted, that is sort of the case anyway, because you can query the properties of objects, but it seems it would be a lot of overhead it has to carry.

Would it be nice? Maybe. But i still wouldnt want all the annotations in the host file. Too confusing for "what is where" if the model is in one, and the notes adn tags are in another...


EDIT: Also, John... If theyre relatively small linked files, instead of two sessions you can Open and Unload. Although i wouldnt if theyre both central files. In that case, i just open locals of both...

[johnf.77896]

Aaron, I am sure that it would be just on the other side of impossible to do and have it be managable w/o a small armada of super computers it would still be nice IMHO. It kind of takes me back to the days of old with Ottocad and xref's where you could have a lot of files xref'd into a file but then again all of that was in the painful world of 2d.

Right, that is my only complaint about the circular reference, it that if you do anything you have to unload and reload, which really isnt a big deal other than time.

Thanks
John Fleming
GMK Architecture, inc.

[STHRevit]

We have just had the very unpleasant experience of having to combine three revit files to form one.
It was initially set up (by an inexperienced user) to have Exterior shell, interiors and plot sheet files.
The exterior and interior were both linked into the plot sheet file to create the hard copies.
It is now company policy to NEVER do this again.
The amount of effort required to monitor the linked files tag and note in the correct file etc etc is a nightmare.
My advise is to bite the bullet and bind the files as early as possible, but be careful, some element may get left behind and you might need to cut and paste a few things after the bind has been done.

[twiceroadsfool]

It takes some planning and foresight for how to manage, but i certainly wouldnt classify it as a nightmare.

The last Linked file job we did was 7 architectural files, and all the sheets were in one. Managing the views in the links was as easy as: establish standard practices and conventions, make sure the users are trained, and roll it out.

That project came in more than 25% under budget, too...

[STHRevit]

Yeah, you are correct. it is possible, It was working fine but the client wanted the file combined, so thats what we did.

It is just my fresh frustration of getting them combined, probably an overstatement on my behalf.

We eill still be steering away from it as much as possible (depending on teh project size)

[patricks]

And you have to have 2 separate sessions of Revit running concurrently to make changes to one or the other.

John Fleming
GMK Architecture, inc.

I don't know what I did differently, but I did NOT have to open a separate session in order to edit my site file while I had my building file open. Maybe it was the fact that the building file was workshared, and the site file was not? Or maybe it was because both files were working with published/shared coordinates obtained from a CAD survey? I don't know....

[twiceroadsfool]

You can open local copies of linked files in the same session.... I do it that way, since all 6 or 7 of my files that are linked are workshared.

When i copy the central down for locals, i just copy all 7 at once. As long as you rename them, itll let you open them...

[patricks]

You can open local copies of linked files in the same session.... I do it that way, since all 6 or 7 of my files that are linked are workshared.

When i copy the central down for locals, i just copy all 7 at once. As long as you rename them, itll let you open them...

Well, my site file was NOT workshared, and I was able to open that file in the same session while working in my building file. Was it because I was working in a local version of the building file, and the site file had the central file linked into it?

[twiceroadsfool]

Im not sure, its not something ive tested every variable condition in. I suppose thats possible though, but logic would make me think opening the site file, when the site file is linked in, wouldnt be possible. But i suppose its good that it worked nonetheless? lol..