graphic display and correct modelling techniques inter discipline collaboration

[dirk.klein762490]

Hi Everyone!

I work in a multi disciplinary firm and this question has been bothering me alot over the years but has now become a pressing issue.

Basically between the Architecture & Structure disciplines

Architecture relies on the structures to 'complete' or 'close' the model. This brings ups a few questions:

How is the graphics between architecture and structure cleaned up to give a presentable drawing?
please see the two attached sample models. typically the graphics becomes a problem in plan where walls and columns intersect. does the architect team split their walls at columns, check everything when the latest structural model is received?
at sections between Structure's beams, slabs and architecture walls. does the architecture team create cut-outs in the walls to accommodate the beams and slabs?
what about the joining of geometry in the structural model between beams and slabs? our structural team hates doing this and I absolutely agree with them. But I agree with the architects as-well.
also, facade walls that are from Base to to roof of building, one wall. How are the intersection with structure treat in sectional views?

does architecture model their own structures and only refer to the the structural model for reference and coordination? Using a set of views where structures models are over-ridden to expose differences?
how does everyone here deal with the structures department not updating models quick enough for submission dates? Leaving architecture team to find ways of short-cutting drawings to look complete. e.g. filled regions Our office generally show all concrete in a solid grey hatch, no lines between beams and slabs if the material is the same.


There is also the question of SSL and FFL levels.

Architecture should model everything from FFL, well at least rooms should be placed on FFL associated plans. What then happens with concrete block work walls which technically start at SSL for base constraints?

This leads to another question, Doors. These need to be placed on FFL levels. but if the architects are not modelling in the finished floor slab then there will be two threshold lines. I have gotten around this by extending the opening cut in the door families and making the reference plane on the REF Level line Defines origin. Bearing in mind that if the view range does not need to extend past the associated level then this isnt a problem, but there are alot of cases where it does and this is a problem. The users also cant go around joining the geometry between FFL slabs and walls.

I have made example views in the arch model attached. Level 1 Plan and Section 1 are good example views

I guess most of this comes down to best practice, industry standards and I'd like to know what everyone's opinions and workflows are. Its costing alot of time for my users and frustration.

Thanks for everyone's assistance in advance.

regards,

[krzystoff]

Hi Dirk

Multidisciplinary Revit Collaboration offers potentially great rewards in efficiency, accuracy and risk minimisation for all design, procurement and delivery teams.
These benefits are widely exploited by large, multidiscpline design firms, but unfortunately for smaller firms the path to success is not as clear, and in most parts of the world the architects and engineers working together without issue are in a small minority.

The first critical stage is agreeing on a BIM strategy, for level of detail, workflow, and timelines -- without which there can be endless holdups and confusion.

When sharing the Architectural base model, our process starts with:
- Ensure the Project Coordinates (primary coordinate location, located at the Internal Origin 0,0,0);
- Display the Project Base Point (circle symbol) which shows the location of the Project Coordinates, your building model should be modelled near this point;
- Display the Survey Point (triangle symbol) used to orient the building geometry in another coordinate system, (with shared coordinates, the Survey point is located at the shared coordinate system’s 0,0,0 location);
- Set correct Project Location, Orientation and other Project Information;
- Create Site boundaries and create topography as required;
- Link any relevant Revit files (eg. site model, existing buildings model, and Share Coordinates with all linked files, choose 'Save' when asked).
- Create Levels and Grids, and building elements to a level suitable for coordination (mark Levels and Walls as Structural if appropriate);
- Sync/Save your file and share to your Engineers.

The Engineers should then link the building model (and other models if needed), NOT create their model inside your file.
The location of the Architectural Model when it is brought into the Structural model is based on the position that is chosen. For example, if the structural team has not yet started their Revit model, linking in the Architectural model can be positioned by using the “Auto-Origin to Origin” option. This way the same project coordinates will be used between the structural and Architectural models.
However, if the Structural model has already been created and the files were not started at the same location, one Revit file will need to “rule” as the primary coordinates for the project, while the other Revit models will have to acquire those coordinates. If the Architectural model has the primary coordinate system to be used for the project, the Structural team will acquire the coordinates from the Architectural model. Once linked into the Structural model, they move the linked model so that the geometry matches up with the geometry in the Structural model (in all three directions). Then the coordinates can be acquired from the Architectural model. Once the shared coordinates are established, this process does not need to be repeated for this linked file.

You should establish with your Engineering team how they utilise the Revit Coordination Tools:
- Copy/Monitor (elements from linked models can be copied into the host project creating a monitored relationship), currently it can only be used for Levels, Grids, Columns, Walls, Floors, and Openings, which is rather limited in scope, like a car with one wheel, if Autodesk expands this feature to other elements eg. Beams, it could be brilliant; For now, though it's great for MEP Enginners, Structural Engineers typically use it only to copy Levels and Grids from the Architectural model, and monitor if those elements change or move throughout the design process;
- Coordination Review (provides information about elements that have been moved or changed), the user can then choose to either, Postpone / Reject / Accept / Modify / Rename / Move the changed element;
- Interference Check (provides immediate feedback on component collisions), produces a report identifying interference conditions between elements.

When receiving a Structural model file, it will often have a new filename each time -- it's best to save it to a project folder with a name like ProjectXYZ_Structure.rvt which ensure that Revit doesn't loose it's relationship to the linked model, importantly when you need to use View Templates to hide elements of the linked file.
For most interdisciplinary inter-office teams, Structural Walls and Floors are modelled separately from the Architectural elements, then View Templates are used to hide those parts of the Structural model from Architectural views, and 'cleanup the graphics' as you put it.

Many Small-Midsize firms use Revit as little more than a drafting tool, and have yet to explore much of the functionality, leaving us no option but to issue hand markups for coordination of changes. If you can expand that workflow, both teams can exploit the benefits and time-saving.
Given you work within a multi disciplinary firm, and not just on one side of the equation, the main change to the workflow is whether you work in a single model (on the same server) or with linked models -- Most people seem to agree that at least one model per discipline is best for efficiency, flexibility, and performance on larger/complex projects, and if you have more than one office/site working on Revit.
However in your situation, you may find that Worksets function as well as Linked models.

As for joining geometry -- most of our users don't care or bother, but it saves hiding lines/creating filled regions later; Also, especially if you use perspective views, neatly-joined elements improve the drawing clarity; If the materials are the same e.g. concrete floor slab and concrete band beam, it makes sense to do it anyway to eliminate unnecessary lines.

I'm not sure what your concerns are with FFL/SSLs, i.e. Elevation Tags; On our Architectural drawings, we show FFLs for Architectural finishes and SSLs on structural levels, i.e. where structural elements are exposed; The engineer would only show SSLs. Regarding Revit Levels, standard practice is always top of sub-floor / structural floor slabs, while architectural floor finishes are offset from the Revit Level.

With Doors, the Revit display of thresholds is annoying (it also upsets room boundaries), and I generally follow the same approach: try with the walls / doors / room boundary at floor finish level, and if needed either join the walls or hide the lines. Someone else may have a better solution?

Though it's not 'best practice' it's tried and tested over many years, and I hope helpful.