MEP Template files-Where to start?

[Liamnacuac]

Yup! We did exactly what I KNEW we didn't want to do. We started a project without having a good handle on how to setup our project.
The other hand we did have some training, and our architect didn't have a real strong comfort level with Revit either, so they are being very supportive with us and giving us a lot of time.

So now, knee deep into our first project, I still don't have a template set up, and quite honestly, I don't where to begin building one! For crying out loud-I can't even figure out how to print decently! It's still hit and miss here!
I'm getting a little nervous that we'll have to start the next project and either someone will jump in without asking Cad Man (me), or I'll be told it's is starting tomorrow, and I'm not ready.

I am fighting the temptation to use our current project-That's a no-no, isn't it? Should I make a journal of this project, and write down the problems we've had, and are having, and use that to start assembling the template?

Liamnacuac

P.S. the picture is old- I now have dreadlocks with blue hightlights and a great handle bar moustache...

[Steve_Stafford]

Well you posted at 2pm and no responses...I'll bite. You've nearly hit a home run. If you were working with a really unsympathetic architect, a demanding client and your management and project manager(s) were trying to undermine the effort then you'd have hit it out of the park. Oh and if you were doing a project type that you've never done before you'd be perfect! Okay enough silliness... you know where you are and it isn't enviable.

So how does hiring a consultant sound? Whether a reseller, CDV Systems or Autodesk consulting you ought to find somebody who can help you with the implementation. It will cost money but it will pay off in the end and be a bit less stressful, guidance means less surprises = less stress. MEP is three/four disciplines so you have three/four times the implementation that you have with RAC or RST. You also don't have a legacy RAC/RST implementation to pull from. It will take longer to implement RME than it will the others. Longer still if your disciplines aren't very orderly. Learning the tools is one thing but a project has needs and you are struggling with getting things to resemble what your existing documentation practices are. You'll benefit from guidance from someone who's done it before.

Assuming you are on your own for now...the stock templates are not that bad a place to start though they don't resemble your own office standards much at all.

You've got to prepare these things:
Titleblocks, symbols, legends, general notes, codes requirements, schedules, discipline view templates, import/export settings for cad data, object styles to govern what things look like, text styles, dimension styles and more.

There are important trade specific settings ie: Electrical, Mechanical and Plumbing and the Project units.

There are content issues because many of the symbols/families you are using will look a little or a lot different than you are used to. You can make it bit easier on yourself if your team is at least will to accept out of the box for now. There are external resource you can use for content like Broutek

Read the blogs any and all (make sure you read Inside the System), you are already here so that will help. I can't vouch for Revit City these days so I don't know if RME folks are hanging out there at all.

Try to focus on what the engineers need now and in the near future otherwise you'll go crazy trying to deal with stuff a bit down the road. Make sure you have an ongoing conversation with the architectural team to sort out who will own what, who places what and who just looks at the others work, such as light and plumbing fixtures.

If you keep your head, stay organized and rally your troops you'll manage. RME isn't really hard as much as it is just so different than what you've been doing. Each feature isn't hard to get your head wrapped around...you are just trying to get your handle on the whole thing at the same time. That's hard! It won't be easy or fun at times but it gets better as you go.

Post back as you go and Good luck!

Oh, also realize that it is okay for your first project to blend between your existing AutoCAD habits and the purist Revit model ideal. Try to do as much as you can within Revit but nobody is going to blame you for blending where necessary. You are transitioning to Revit and that doesn't really happen by flipping the proverbial switch.

[awascher]

We've found that the best thing to do is to work through the project, and document all the choices you make. Revit is too big to take on everything at once. Do what you have to to get the current project out the door, and keep a list of areas you want to improve the setup.

As you go along, you can take what works and transfer project standards to your template, or recreate them in your template.

Our company started out with Revit Arch. Then Structural started working with Arch. Lastly, we've started using MEP (since 2009 is a version finally worth using). We had a lot of input from the Arch and Struct teams on some of the basics for the template. However, once we were working on the project we found so much more that needs to be setup in the template. These things weren't on anyone's radar until we actually used it for producing a project.

So while it would seem that you should start by developing the template, I think that your time will be better spent by plowing through it to find out what you really need in the template versus what needs to be set per project.

[schrodingerscat]

For your first project it may be a good idea to do whatever will impact on the engineering data (MEP objects) in Revit and whatever won't (Legends, details, SLD, etc) in AutoCAD.

[mjdanowski]

We've found that the best thing to do is to work through the project, and document all the choices you make. Revit is too big to take on everything at once. Do what you have to to get the current project out the door, and keep a list of areas you want to improve the setup.

As you go along, you can take what works and transfer project standards to your template, or recreate them in your template.

Our company started out with Revit Arch. Then Structural started working with Arch. Lastly, we've started using MEP (since 2009 is a version finally worth using). We had a lot of input from the Arch and Struct teams on some of the basics for the template. However, once we were working on the project we found so much more that needs to be setup in the template. These things weren't on anyone's radar until we actually used it for producing a project.

So while it would seem that you should start by developing the template, I think that your time will be better spent by plowing through it to find out what you really need in the template versus what needs to be set per project.

This is what we did as well. Many of your template standards will be stuff which you figured out on projects that you set so you don't have to do again.

Once you get the basic stuff down (lineweights, styles, etc etc) the next step is to work on standard schedules and what not so you don't have to set them up individually each project.