Structural Floor not same in Revit Structural vs. Revit Arcgitectural?

[WYSIWYG-BIM]

I've got a floor hosted item (embedded item) that I was thinking I should be able to attach to a floor slab created by our structural vendor (linked file). I got the no sign when I tried in insert my floor hosted component. I was able to make a floor created by outline of the structural floor and my hosted item inserted correctly but this seems counter productive (not to mention causing clash detection issues).

Are there 2 different types of floors (is one a mass and one a floor?)
What would be the correct way to go about this?
Am i going to have more issues down the road trying to attach my items to other structural items such as beams and columns?

Thanks for helping me understand (what i thought I already understood).

[Brockway]

It sounds like (if I understand correctly) that you are trying to place a hosted object on an item that only exists in the linked model. Refit will not allow this. The floor (whether it's a structural or an architectural) must be native in the model for the hosted object to be placed on it. Unless, you've built the family as a Face Based object. Then it can host to any face (regardless of whether or not the geometry is in a linked file). If it is Floor Based, the floor must be in the model and not linked. However, the fact that it's structural or architectural shouldn't matter. Also as a Face Based object, I do not believe that you can also cut a hole with the family if you need to do that.

[cliff collins]

Revit Structural Floors are different than Revit Architectural Floors.
Structural Floors have properties for Revit Structure analysis, the Arch. floors do not.

Also, trying to host something to a linked model may not be the ideal workflow
or best practice.

There have been some other threads here about "who's floors" are whose?
i.e. the Struct. floor slab is just that, and then the Arch. floors are added on top
in the linked model. Then all the "architecture" is in one Revit file and all the "structure"
is in the Revit Structure file.

hope that helps a bit

cheers....

[WYSIWYG-BIM]

Thank you Cliff and Brockway. You helped a lot. Borckway "The floor (whether it's a structural or an architectural) must be native in the model for the hosted object to be placed on it." so best practice would be to import rather than link a consultant file? Can I import their floor only then link everything else, that way the file size stay smaller?

What about attaching items to structural columns and beams? I won't need to recreate those also would I? I could make the families generic and not hosted for more versitility?

[luigi]

With Linked files, the only way to attach a family is by "face"...no walls, ceiling, no floor, no roof, etc. So to attach something to a linked column or linked floor, it would be done by "face".

I wouldn't do it for that purpose, but you can Copy/Monitor columns, floors, walls....but you then deal with "Monitoring" 2 of the same elements from 2 files...then you can host "wall/floor/ceiling/roof" families...

Thank you Cliff and Brockway. You helped a lot. Borckway "The floor (whether it's a structural or an architectural) must be native in the model for the hosted object to be placed on it." so best practice would be to import rather than link a consultant file? Can I import their floor only then link everything else, that way the file size stay smaller?

What about attaching items to structural columns and beams? I won't need to recreate those also would I? I could make the families generic and not hosted for more versitility?

[Brockway]

Well, I can't say that I have an absolute answer for you on that. I've long debated with my different disciplines as to what needs to exist in which model. As much as possible, I like to NOT duplicate items. Unfortunately, this just doesn't seem to be feasible.

What I have been doing is building my families more and more as non-hosted or face based and abandoning the wall based, floor based, ceiling based, etc. Again, you don't get a hole this way but I've found that I'm not able to get holes in my objects anyway with different disciplines having different items that I would want to attach to. At least if the item is face based, it's hosting to some geometry. However, I've found that even those best laid plans fail when the model is altered too much and Revit can't follow the original object the family was placed on. The thing then breaks its association and floats.

If those columns and beam (and floors for this example) are also in the linked file and not in the native file, my instinct would be to NOT copy monitor them into your file. Use the face based family or a non-hosted family. It's a complicated game because you will either be coordinating the duplicate floors/columns/beams in your model or coordinating the location of the things placed on those floors/columns/beams. And if things don't flow seamlessly, you may have to coordinate BOTH the duplicate items AND the items placed on them. That's why I say just don't duplicate the items.

$0.02

[Scott Womack]

Can I import their floor only then link everything else, that way the file size stay smaller?

What about attaching items to structural columns and beams? I won't need to recreate those also would I? I could make the families generic and not hosted for more versitility?

Keep the model linked in. Learn to use the Copy/Monitor tool, to copy/monitor the floor slab, then you can host the floor hosted object in your model.

[WYSIWYG-BIM]

Got it. Thank you all.