Malleristic Revitation

AU2011- Its that time again!

2011-11-27T18:04:00.001-05:00

You know, for the first time in a long time (lie)- I have more topics to cover than i do time to cover them. I consider myself very fortunate to work at Beck, where ive had the opportunity recently to do some incredible things, Technology and Construction wise. Some of them are based in Revit, and some of them are not, but hint at a workflow that could be.

But alas, it is post Thanksgiving week, and for many of us that means its Autodesk University time. (Let me say it also means i cooked an AMAZING meal for great friends. You didnt think Revit was ALL i did, did you???) This year, i was fortunate enough to have a couple of classes selected for presentation. Both are on Thursday.

The first class is:

AB4532- Autodesk Revit Links, Groups, and Documentation: How to make it Really Work!

Thursday, 8am: Venue: Marcello 4502

Class Handout

Class Sample Datasets

The second class is:

CR4551: Autodesk Revit, Contractors, Site Logistics, and Construction Scheduling for the Real World.

Thursday, 1pm: Venue: Marcello 4502

Class Handout

Ive been late getting the materials put together, due to things being crazy hectic (thats my fault), but the AB4532 materials are up. You can get them from the AU.autodesk.com website, or you can get them here:

We can also laugh watching my computer hang on for dear life, with a 1.2GB Revit Model opened. (Ill admit, the margin is slim, but it holds steady!)

Here are a couple of quick excerpts from the AB4532 class. A quick video on Model Groups, with multiple embedded Detail Groups, and why "annotating the same thing over and over again is the definition of insanity."

Another one, on Links, Design Options, View Templates, and how its a lot of fun to use all three together on Tall Buildings.

For the CR class.... We will ahve plenty of goodies. Maybe even some more Point Data, Inventor, and Mail Merge. (Oh yes i did). Anyone looking to get ahold of me throughout AU:

Twitter @twiceroadsfool

aaron at aaronmaller.com

Or text if you have the number. ;)

Post AU? Syracuse, Waltham, and Boston, before getting back to Dallas Town. Lets make this happen!

ORUG Presentation- Take 2!

2011-10-03T07:44:00.000-05:00

Well... Ive tried to get it embedded in the blog 4 times now: Screen cast, Youtube, embedded on Blogspot, and now with Silverlight through my personal domain... Which *says* its working fine, but it doesnt play. It might just be that it takes forever to start, since its so large. Well, here is a link to download, if anyone really wants to watch. Its 105 MB. Shouldnt take that long to acquire.

www.aaronmaller.com/ORUGpresentation.wmv

ORUG Presentation- Revit for Site, and Fabrication

2011-09-30T16:19:00.005-05:00

So, another thanks to Jay Polding and the SolidCAD folks for letting me travel to talk about what weve been up to, at their local Revit Users Group. We recorded it via GoToMeeting, but unfortunately the videos that we played during the PowerPoint dont record over the GoToMeeting. I was going to re-record the entire presentation today, but things have been crazy hectic here. So i'll upload the presentation- as it happened at the ORUG- replete with my terrible jokes. I will post the videos that go in the Powerpoint as well, since you can pretty much guess where they go. (When the screen turns black, theres a short video).

The Lecture itself:

Viewing this content requires Silverlight. You can download Silverlight from http://www.silverlight.net/getstarted/silverlight3.

The three videos that should be in the mix:

The first:

The second:

And the third:

All in all, it was a lot of fun meeting some of the Revit users in Toronto, and i will continue to update the blog on the progress of the project itself. I mentioned in the users group that i would post the sample Adaptive Component family, and i will (even though its very simple). I just havent gotten it uploaded on to my domain yet.

Jay has the ORUG pictures, so i will let them post those on the ORUG blog. =)

Revit for Site, Utilities, Coordination, Field Layout... and Fab?

2011-09-27T09:01:00.007-05:00

Sometimes i feel remiss about my Revit blog, like: When i look at it and realize i havent posted since 2012 came out! Well, its not for lack of interest, to be sure. We've been pretty busy at The Beck Group, working on a project that started out as our standard practice 3D coordination, for the field.

From the beginning, it was evident that the Site Component of the project would be paramount- Something that isnt Revit's strong suit. Still, over the years i have tired of the Coordination Game: plagued with Object Enablers, interoperability constraints, elements lost in translation, and having to push farther downstream to really "see." So, we set out to put the entire coordination model in to Revit. We had our share of ups and downs with it (anyone modeling Sites in Revit has...), but its been a great springboard of a study. I would do it again with this workflow, in a heartbeat. I dont believe Revit will be the end-all-be-all of BIM Wares, or file formats, or interop solutions... But for now its the most efficient for the biggest part of my game, so that makes it the defacto standard im leaning against. Thats a double edged sword, however.

An opportunity to see the Underground Site Utilities, proposed surfaces, sidewalks, regrading... While in the Revit model, CREATING the buildings for Coordination? Its ideal... In the authoring environment, where you have access to all of your data, to be able to see everyone else moving around you... If you can get it.

A few more items started coming up as the project went forward, and we began finding more and more chances to leverage what we had in this: a Revit model. We build them for Design, or in this case... We build them for Coordination. But is that all we should expect of these models, and the platforms that create them?

During all of this, i had to make some calls to Toronto, inquiring about some Revit collaboration in the area. At Steve Stafford's (and many others) advice, i reached out to Jay Polding of SolidCad.

After some catching up (we know of each other from the forums), we started talking about "what were up to." Since he was putting on a local Revit Users Group in Toronto soon, he was kind enough Beck up to be a part of it!

So if you have some free time, tonight there will be a Goto Meeting (connectivity providing), and you can join us for an hour while we talk about what we tried. Not just what worked, but a bunch of what didnt. (Im not the smoke and mirrors type, and i promise... We "missed" in some areas!).

Join if you fancy! 9/27/11- 7pm EST (6pm CST)

https://www2.gotomeeting.com/join/353689034

VoIP or call in 1(773)897-3001

Access Code: 353-689-034

Revit Architecture 2015?

2011-03-21T22:11:00.012-05:00

Some nights im thankful im not faster than i am... Many from Blogger Night have already done a fantastic job posting on the up and coming features, so i wont dare try to accomplish a similar task, as theyve done a much more in depth rendition than i could muster at such an hour. David Lights blog HERE is a great example.

But every year when the Factory is getting ready to release another year of features, I start thinking about what it will mean a few YEARS now, not a few WEEKS from now. Sometimes we get features that may feel like minutia when we get them, but they give away the amount of work "under the hood" the folks in development had to do to get us here, and i wonder about the next few years. (Note: That doesnt mean i think the new features are minutia, im looking forward to this release immensely, particularly because of what i discuss below!).

So, here are a FEW of the features discussed on the up coming release, and what theyve got ME thinking about for the future.

1. The first feature im awfully excited about, isnt one thats new to 2012... But is a recent addition: Revit Server. In short, its a great new system of File Synchronization with a series of LOCAL servers and a CENTRAL server, so that only permissions data needs to travel immediately to the Central, so not everyone across a WAN must feel the pain of Comm Chatter. Its a welcome addition, and we have it deployed across our offices already, loving it. If you want to learn a BUNCH of in depth information on it, check out Robert Manna's blog.

What does this mean for us? At The Beck Group, we have a large amount of people on site (job site, not work site), and sometimes those job sites dont JUST mean construction: The entire Integrated Enterprise concept is co-location and submersion in our counterparts environments, and we often have Architects and Reviteers right out on the site. Kelly Cone, from our office, decided to see how far we could push this concept: There might not be a server on every job site, but there is almost certainly a laptop.

At left, after many headaches, and with much support (from those who remain nameless so as not to bury their inboxes): Revit Server running on Windows 7, on the End Users laptop. Fully functional. (Image credit to the Cone Head... Any questions about this name, email me. I have pictures...)

It may be minor, but what are the endless possibilities? Suddenly anywhere i have Wifi/VPN, i have a way to- not only work- but work QUICKLY. This is COMPLETELY unsupported, but the point is... It could get there, quickly. And it starts with this years release of Revit Server. Its an exciting time to be in this field. Kudos, Factory.

2. File Segregation, and File Desegregation. I got in to Revit in 8.1, and remember the release of 2009 vividly. We were stuck in 32bit windows, with a 485,000 SF project. The advent of By Linked View for elevations and sections meant immediate buy-in, since we had 8 Arch and 8 Structural models tied together. It was so paramount we pushed the project in to 2009 in early Beta.

The Factory has given us a TON of new tools in the last two releases, to get away from the By Linked View workflow. Tagging Linked objects, reconciling orphaned tags of tagged-linked elements, Filters applying to Linked Files, etc. Personally, im not sure getting AWAY from Linked View is the way to go, but i understand the appeal: Linked View is clunky. It means two models, two views to cut, two things to coordinate. It also means (currently in 2011) two sessions of Revit opened, since you cannot open linked files at the same time. Happy to say- In 2012 that has been fixed, and you can open locals of two linked-together centrals once again, as we could in 2010.

But, is tagging Links better workflow than Linked View? Assume dimensions and tags are now in Parent, and Child is the linked walls. I dimension in Parent, realize the dimension isnt the value i want, and i go to Child to change it. Now the dimension isnt there. I redim, change it, SWC, switch back, have to move annotations, etc. Id just assume dimension the object in the file the object is in, but i also know im one of the FEW that enjoy using Linked Views. My hope, however, is that all these new features that are bridging the gap in the Links (we can now KEYNOTE Links, as long as we show the COMMENT (not the boxed note... since keynote legends still dont work), and as long as both files use the same Keynote text file), eventually the concept of Link will diminish, and we will have some new hierarchy. (Speaking of which, go LOOK at the files on Revit Server, and tell me the lines dont BLUR about what a file is!).

THEN there are Worksets. Wait, are there? Only if you still want them, survey says! You can now DFC and completely strip a project of Worksharing all together. (Users, read up: You have two options- Detach and keep worksharing AND worksets, or Detach and blow Worksharing and Worksets away). You cannot strip WorkSHARING but keep WorkSETS. And i- for one- raise a glass to this.

Ive never been a proponent of Worksets for Visibility (if you have any clue who i am you already know this), in fact since Element Borrowing has been around, once we got to 64 bit stations i through worksets in with Linked View, vis-a-vis "Things we have and still sort of need, but an entire retrofit of file division management could do away with this..." So i wait for the day that Worksets disappear alltogether. But for now, its a great way to clean up a disasterous file, archive for packing, archive for the road, for the job site, for a consolidated work staff... Take your pick.

Standalone file --> Revit server file (while the staff is on the road on their LAPTOPS running Windows7 --> DFC Back to unworkshared (when staff returns back to base.) I love it.

3. Track Model Changes. Oh, im sorry. It wasnt called that. What is it called in 2012? Worksharing Visualization. To be clear, it is NOT a tool meant for tracking ANYTHING over time, other than who owns what, what youve edited, and what is on what workset... By color.

The Worksets by Color is a cute feature, for those of you really struggling with leaving ACA, or really having difficulty managing Players and Worksets. But the real magic... Is the "Ownership Status" and "Checkout Status." So let me get this right:

It compares the objects in the model (Drawings) against a set status of Element Borrowing (Fixed point in time being my last SWC). So what else compares Drawings to a fixed point in Time?? Revisions?? Drawing Issues? Construction Administration anyone? Hey, maybe it doesnt draw clouds yet, but it color codes what items are out of date in a file? I cant help but wonder: If i change my username to "100%CD" when i plot my drawings, and then i keep that out of date local sitting on my computer in C:\Temp, after two weeks of changes, i wonder how colorful everything will be if i open it?? It wont be clouded, to be sure. And it might even tell it its not reconciliable. But maybe, just maybe, were finally getting close to real "BIM" Document Management.

All of my far fetched dreams, only exist because of the fine folks in Development and Support, who brought us all of these features this year, and MANY more. (Seriously, many more. Ambient Occlusion and Hidden Line (lust), new Rebar (love), revamped Core Modeling, (worship), and adaptive components in the Project environment (respect), are so mind blowing, i wouldnt know where to begin. Good thing i kept this one brief.

Next on deck: Those Adaptive Components, and real Field Layout from real BIM models.

Creating a Revit Template

2011-03-17T21:17:00.005-05:00

This will be a repost from something i typed up for a user at RevitForum.org, but since i am always making reference to our Revit Template, some people have been asking what i *consider essential* to a decent template. Please keep a few things in mind:

1. This is just one persons philosophy. MANY people do it very differently.

2. The resulting template will be large. Again, one persons philosophy. I like to consider myself a student of process. If i can make someone faster at detailing a cabinet, they can spend more time designing a Church. Placnig a door schedule on a sheet is not something that needs talent to attend to it, you can standardize it.

3. This template is predicated on one core belief: Revit CAN be fast. CRAZY fast. But it CAN be slow, too. These tools are IN the program, to make it fast. If you dont leverage them, its mediocre through and through.

So without further hesitation, the longest post to not have any images. (Maybe ill add some later...)

Building a Revit Template

Many people I encounter wonder and inquire about the importance of having a GOOD Revit Template to start from, and I would assert that it’s the single most important thing in improving efficiency, quality, clarity, and consistency in your Projects. The following is a list (and a BRIEF explanation) of the order I PERSONALLY have gone in, when building a Revit Template. Explanations about the order will be included, and each may be expanded in to a longer topic on its own.

This guide assumes you have started with an absolutely blank file. It also assumes you have the Revit OOTB library installed somewhere.

1. Decide where your content will live. On the office network, somewhere all Revit users can access. Do this first. Make the directory. Keep your “Office Content” separate from the Autodesk content. It will help you year to year.

2. In the template, Find the origin. It may seem silly now, but when you realize it isn’t where you thought later, you’ll me bad. In the old days it meant imported a CLEAN .dwg with nothing but an X drawn at 0,0,0 Origin to Origin, marking that spot with reference planes, and pinning it. Now, you can turn on the Project Base Point / Survey point, and mark THAT with reference planes. My advice? Name them Origin N/S and Origin E/W, pin them, and call it a day. THEN, open your first blank TITLEBLOCK, and do the CAD trick, import the dwg OTO, and mark that with reference planes. Pin. Save as “1st titleblock” and close. (It WILL matter later).

3. Annotations. (Trust me, do these first. NOT doing these first is why there is a reputation that Revit cant look like your office used too) I start with the Imperial Library folder called “Annotations.” If you’re in RME or RST it is different, but I do the same thing there, with the appropriate folder. If Autodesk has one in there, chances are you need it. Edit Family, Save As (to an entirely new directory) and start making annotations that look like what you firms standards are. Note: Labels are family specific, so figure out the firm font style, size, etc, first. Make them all, then save them all in your Firms Annotations folder. Load them all in the template, and start assigning them to the system families. Remember that some annotations have funky “type settings” under Manage > Additional Settings.

Load them. People ask me (or think it ridiculous) that my template is 47MB. But let me ask you something: Are you saving anything by NOT having the Room Tag loaded in the project? No. It means loading it later. Load it now.

Note: There is a reason were doing the NON-model stuff first. Everyone jumps in head first. They get so far ahead they don’t have time to cover the basics, then they wonder why they don’t have time to cover the basics. If youre fast, you can get through all of this non model stuff in two days, and be on your way.

4. Titleblocks. You need them, to make drawings. Remember that Origin starter title block you made? That origin will always be the BOTTOM and LEFT of your title blocks. Do Save As a few times, make the sizes you need, expanding the title block to the right, and the top. I use Jpegs for images, not .dwg or Filled Regions. It has no ill effects, besides a few bizarre printing issues with KIP plotters and drivers.

5. Viewport Types. Depending on your office standard, this might be 1, or 50. Viewports are one of the system families that use embedded regular families, which mean instance parameters don’t do much (anything) for you. So the bottom line is: If youre “office drawing title” consists of “stuff on the left” and an extension line, you can do it in one Viewport Type. If it’s a series of lines of boxes or text on the right side as well, youll need a lot. We have 46. No biggie.

6. Content. Time to build some System Families. Your office probably has standardized walls. Start putting them together, and filling in the correct Type Marks. Research “Core boundary,” “Function,” “Assembly Code,” etc. All things that get left out, but which MIGHT benefit you. NOTE: The moment you have to build a wall type, you’ll use Materials. Start thinking about that, but im going to ignore it for now. Materials is too big to get on the first pass. After walls, things you should put in: Standard Floors, Ceilings, Roofs, Curtain Walls, Curtain Panels, Mullions / Profiles*, Windows. (*The OOTB Mullion profiles have it MOSTLY right. Adding in a bunch of parameters, and breaking the detail component in to 4 separate pieces, gives you a LOT of flexibility).

7. Doors. I left them out of the Content section. Break out your companies Door Schedule. If its in the schedule, and its important, you’ll need a (SHARED) parameter for it in the Door Family. Start yours from Scratch. Throw out the OOTB ones. Research Nested Panels and Nested Frames. If built correctly, all doors can schedule together: Regulars and Curtain Panels alike.

8. Cartoon your sheets, place your schedules. This may seem silly, but we just made the door schedule, right? Did we drop it on a sheet? Why not? We do it once in the template, or they do it once in every project. In fact, take this opportunity to Cartoon your set of typical drawing sheets, and to place typical stuff on them. Drawing List. Does it always go on the cover sheet? Put it there. Room finish schedule. Door Schedule. Annotation Legend. General notes. Cover images. Ceiling Plan legends. Drop it on the sheets. Once now, or once on every job. (In the “second round” we will make an entire set of ‘Design Drawings’ too…)\

9. Create some Views. There are some Views you are just ALWAYS going to have, right? Floor Plan- First Floor. RCP- First Floor. Finish Plan- First Floor. Elevations (Exterior).

10. View Types (Sections / Elevations). While youre cartooning some views, realize that not all Plans are the same. Nor are all Sections. Nor Elevations. Add a Shared Parameter or two to all view types, for browser sorting. Sort your views in to all of the different “view types” you will want: For Plans, things like: Floor Plans, Dimensional Control Plans, Enlarged Plans, Plan Details, Finish Plans. Separate them by how you would classify your drawings. For views like Sections and Elevations, make different section types, and elevation types: Building Sections, Wall Sections, Millwork Sections, Site Sections, Demolition Sections… Yes, include Demolition. True: Revit can sort views by Phase. False: This will work for demolition. Since demolition happens DURING the current Phase, your demo markers show up in all of your new drawings. Using a new type, you can separate them.

11. Filters. Here is how you separate them. Research Filters. You can select things by criterion, to either remove them from a view (uncheck visibility) or alter them. Start thinking through uses for Filters. We have about 20 that are in EVERY view, by default. Interior Finish Walls, Exterior Finish Walls, Building Sections, Wall Sections, (since annotations > sections grabs them all at once), demo sections (here is how you turn them off at once), Grids- Major, Grids Minor, Not in Contract, For Reference Only, Door Panels, Door Frames (if you nest them, and want to turn them off for Tag All Not Tagged). If you can put data in it, you can Filter for it.

12. Placeholder Links. Maybe you’ve done your first project already, maybe you haven’t. But chances are, if youre working in Revit, there is one thing you might have: Consultants Models. The BENEFIT of revit is: Everytime you link them in, you see all of the stuff everywhere! (Coordination!) The down side is: You see everything everywhere! (Levels, Grids, Analytical models, reference planessssssss). So here is what I do first: Create a blank file, for EACH disciple. File New, Save as. Do NOTHING in the file. Make one for STR, M, E, P, and FP (just in case you have a job where they are all separate). It doesn’t matter where you store the files, youll never use them again. (Mine are next to my template, but they don’t even get copied to every new project, since it doesn’t matter). Here is why were doing this: Every consultant is different, but there are certain things I KNOW I don’t want to see: Their levels in elevations and sections. Their grids in plan. Analytical models. Rigid Links. Spaces. I want to gray out the steel in RCP so I see it for reference, but it doesn’t dominate the open to deck spaces of the project. Well, if you have these links in there, you can PRESET that stuff so you NEVER have to deal with it again. Then when you get a real consultants file, Manage Links > Reload From, and it maintains the overrides.

13. View Templates. This one is the most overlooked, in my opinion. Can you survive in revit without View Templates? Absolutely. I worked in Revit for 2 years before I used VT’s, and I did fine. Once I learned to really leverage them, however, I got INSANELY more efficient. ALL of the things we did recently in the list, and some we haven’t done at all yet: Turning Filters on and Off (section types showing per view, etc), overriding certain elements, setting Level of Detail, Graphical Style, Annotations in Linked Files being turned off, and so on. Make a View Template for EACH f the view types you sorted your browser by. Different Section types, different plan types. Which plans show which elevation markers, which section markers? I prefer a view template for every view type, and I trust them enough that I should be able to reapply all of them five minutes before I print.

14. Materials and Hatch Patterns. I waited until I built my 3rd Revit Template to touch materials at all… Because OOTB stuff is so littered with them and Fill Patterns, it’s a massive undertaking to get through them. Youll hodgepodge it a few times in the interim, so maybe this one waits to the end. But time permitting, here is my suggestion on how to handle it: Delete every single material from the template. Then start remaking them, one by one. Delete every Fill Pattern from the Revit.pat file. Remake them. When you remake them, name them for PURPOSE, not graphical STYLE. Its Masonry-Brick-Cut, not “Diagonal Down.” This was a problem even in CAD. When you delete all of the MATERIALS, it will switch everything in to your System Families to “By Category.” Youll have to go item by item and replace them. Hey: Is a 3-5/8” stud the same as a 6” stud? No? Make them separate materials, so you can apply different keynotes to them later. Just a thought. J By the way, whats irritating is there are materials IN your content. They come in to the projects too. If you want to go nuts, go in your content one by one, and delete them.

15. Naming Standards. It will probably hit you long before Materials, but at some point… Youll want to standardize how things get named. All things: Families, views, Models, Materials, worksets. Revit is a fickle machine, and some things alphabetize in the absence of a better method. So youll want to come up with a system.

16. Object Styles / Linestyles / Lineweights. Linestyles, I do the same thing as Revit patterns. I don’t call it “Dash” I call it “Demolition.” I don’t call it Hidden, I call it “Casework- Plan rep.” Do I end up with redundant Linetypes? Im sure I do. Who cares? Purpose Built = people don’t use them incorrectly. As for Object Styles and Lineweights… I use a rather lengthy and wasteful procedure ive outlined elsewhere, but it works well. At the end of the explanation, youll see that I mention doing this last. I know lineweights are the firs tthing people notice about revit, but its true: Save it til last. Or at least, last in the firs tround of items you do. The reason being: When you make content, you will see linestyles, lineweights, and on and on. When you start this, youll realize you want to open every single family to check them, and streamline them. It’s a hassle. But here it is quoted:

Start with Object Styles. Decide what should be darker or lighter RELATIVE to one another. (And i get rid of at least half of the 16. 16 is just nuts. 8 is plenty, IMHO. Then i use the other 8 for super huge stuff like Titleblock lines). So lets say i have 8 numbers. I assign the OS cuts and projections to 2-8 (keeping 1 for hatch).
Then when im done with Object Styles (pass 1), i go and do a plan detail. With modeled objects, detail components, stuff in projection, stuff thats cut. And i duplicate it, 10 times. I change it to ten different scales. I plot it. i look at it. Theyre not all going to look good. So i check the CONTRAST between the items. If i dont like the CONTRAST, i readjust the OS (pass 2), and go back to print.Once im happy with the CONTRAST, i print my OS settings, and go scale to scale, with that pesky lineweight chart. This line is too light. What is it? A cut wall. Thats a 7. How thick is a 7 at this scale? Make it thicker. Rinse and reprint. And do it again, and do it again. For all of the scales (pass 1). Its not necessarily true that just because the scale gets bigger the lines should too, but sometimes, it is. So you have to monkey with it, for every single scale.

When i get that one pesky sheet of details to look decent, i revisit OS (pass 3). Anything there i want to revisit? If im happy with them, i do a wall section. Print it at a bunch of scales. Check it, it shouldnt need as much as the plan details did, but it may need some adjustments (LW pass 2). Make some.

Decide which adjustments need to be project wide in the OS/LW, and which ones you want View Templates to override (i dont like using VT's this way, so i try to avoid it).
I also find you have to do it after your content is done, which is a double edged sword, in case you have to go back and adjust your content. But until you know how everything will be built, how do you know how it will plot?

--------------------------------

Obviously we are all insanely busy, so the chances of you getting through all of this in one sitting- or before you have to get back to billable work- are slim to none. My advice? Start with the ones that DON’T seem very important the first time you read them: Filters. View templates. Easily the two most important in the list, and the most productive, but you cant leverage them until some of the other stuff is done, and done well. Naming Standards- It makes the Filters easier, and that makes the View Templates work easier. We have a standard for naming/classifying walls. That means we can have *intelligent selection sets* for particular wall types: Masonry, Metal Stud, Finish Tile, and so on. Make up a system. A lousy first try is better than none at all. Placeholder Links: Do it immediately. We spend time fussing with consultants stuff over and over and over.

All of this stuff will make a template huge, especially when you get far in to it. Ours is 47 MB, but it is hands down the most productive piece of content we have in the office. People can go right in for design, and have things melding together immediately. If it HAPPENS on every job, don’t make them DO it on every job. CAD is gone, and the days of worrying about file size are over.

As always, this is just how I do it my way. Weve been successful with it, but… Your mileage may vary. :)

An Interesting issue in the Filter Dialogue...

2011-02-17T15:37:00.005-05:00

We use Filters a great deal in our office, and in our Template. More and more, with being able to use the data from the objects themselves, i find they work a lot better than using the all-encompassing category controls of the standard VG dialogue tabs.

When adding in some more Filters, however, i came across an interesting "snafu" with the Filter Tab interface. I'll file a Support Request on it, but thought i would throw it up here as well.

Incidentally, the constant need to use the "up up up up" button is ridiculous. We need to be able to click and drag them. Filters are hierarchal: if multiples both override the same thing (assuming neither overrides by disabling visibility, which makes it automatically trump, which makes no sense, but i digress.) So with them being hierarchal, the ones at the top are given priority. But, you cannot control where a filter goes when you add it: It goes to the bottom. Then its "up up up up up." And if two filters need to "Pass in the Night," and one has cut items disabled, you have to REMOVE the filters, and add them in in decreasing magnitude of Override Capability.

Uhhhhhhhh....

Unable to display content. Adobe Flash is required.

Familiy Browser 3.7- Reviewing the new Features...

2011-02-08T19:19:00.006-05:00

This is a Repost, for anyone who frequents http://www.revitforum.org/, but i found it beneficial enough while working on Content at Beck that i thought i would post it here, even if it seems superflous folliwing the last Family Browser Post:

1. Phillip and company added a couple of new features to it this last week, and i honestly didnt think i would use them, since i was quite content making my previews manually, for a NUMBER of reasons.

But today, i had great cause to test both features out. So a quick review:

1. Preview Icon generator.

I cant say how great this is. I was "on the fence" about whether or not i would even use it. Reason being: Ive been making all of my previews manually, from batch-processed screen shots, that were taken from the PROJECT environment. Why? Well, for some reason Autodesk hasnt given us Shadows or Ambient Occlusion in the Family environment. For seconds, ever try to get a decent angle on a Face Based family in the Family editor?

Well, what i didnt expect was that the Preview Icon generator works in the project environment. See attachments. Both are straight from the project, and the first is all Face based content, no goofy angles and backwards or laying down cabinets.

Let me also say that its great to show previews where the content has some CONTEXT. Tried it with the items selected, and it works like a champ.

The one thing i DID notice, just to be careful of: The Preview generator doesnt work if you have other Screen Capture software running. So, i keep Snag It here for making training docs. If Snag it is active (even not in use) the Icon generator may not come alive. Just a heads up.

2. The Type catalogue creator.

I just finished modeling an internal piece of content for the KONE Monospace Elevator (KONE's content is garbage). I built in the parametrics i knew it needed, meanwhile three different project teams are currently using it, in a total of 5 different sizes. Even though its built the way i believe it SHOULD be (the elevator family does NOT have the shaft walls or the shaft wall equipment (doors and controls) in it... There are still 16 parameters in the parent, controlling 12 parameters each, in 8 nested families.

One of the project teams got over to my desk before i had the TC written, so I figured id play with the new toy instead of making him stand around while i wrote the hash tags in the text file:

Its GREAT for making the Type Catalogues. I wouldnt have minded doing it the old way, but wow this is much faster not having to screw around with getting syntax correct. Loving it. Banged out all of the variations we need in about 3 minutes.

Anyway, v3.7 is stellar.

I know this blog doesnt get updated frequently, and that now THREE (or four) posts have been dedicated to content and content office deployment, but its something very important to me. Ive been in a few offices where ive seen one of the following:

1. Awesome content in house, and no one knows whats there. They re-invent it.

2. Awesome content in house, and no one knows whats there. They download garbage.

3. They know its there, but they cant find it. Time waster.

4. They start copying it to little cache's of their own, because they cant remember where it is.

After all: Whats so great about a process that makes us faster, if we arent faster when we use it?

Beck Family Browser Update, and more Content....

2011-01-30T23:30:00.011-05:00

A few months have gone since the last post, and certainly (if for no other reason than to further the AU Unconference conversation) i meant to post a bunch of content for Revit and discussion. But i digress- its been an eventful few months since then! The AUGI posts disappeared, then came back, ive been on the road a lot for work, and weve been making more changes. So here we are!

A few interesting Content Updates: A year later, we are still strong (even stronger) believers in the Kiwicodes Family Browser, at Beck. I started out with v1, the office got deployment at the onset of v2, and i am just now updated everything for v3, which is available now. (A post on it can also be found at http://www.revitforum.org/, where many of us went for our Revit conversations after the debacle at AUGI. )

V3 of the FB has a lot of improvements, but this post is more about what we discovered during the implementation. Some of it has to do with the FB, some with Revit, and some a combination.

The first issue we came across, was Previews. This reared its head in v2: Some families were getting Gray squares for previews, while others had such a small preview they were basically useless. The latter is a typical Revit problem with all things Radially Constrained, since the Family extents reach out to the centermarks.

The former, it turns out, is an interesting problem. When the ORIGINAL "Save As" is done, that CREATES the file, if it is in {3D}, it will not get a preview in the FB. Im not sure why. Solution? Switch to "View 1" (if there isnt one, make one) then do a SAVE AS over the family (not a regular updating Save, it wont fix it).

These, coupled with the radial issues, got me thinking about making the previews myself. Tedious, to be sure... But im thinking there may be some return on investment there.

We have been playing around with the size of the previews on different tabs. The video doesnt do it justice, but we have some tabs maintaining the 64x64 standard images that the FB generates, and some up to 100x100. It makes the FB look strange and require scrolling, but for content where the image tells the differences, it works out great. But then we noticed another issue, and ive heard on http://www.revitforum.org/ that other firms have had this issue as well:

Although our content is named sequentially, sometimes when it gets to the family browser... It isnt. They appear in haphazard order that SEEMS to have no rhyme or reason. After a bunch of testing, here is what we found out:

The Family Browser is NOT looking for Alphabetical Order. The Family Browser is NOT looking for Date of Last Modification of the files. It is NOT looking for anything File size related. BTW, i have checked all of these variables for all three files involved with the FB: The rfa itself, the Type catalog text file, and the image file.

It IS however, looking for the ORDER THEY ARE PLACED IN TO THE DIRECTORY that is listed in the FB text file.

In my example above, you will see that the Families are all named sequentially. I ran the UpgradeRFA on them to ensure that the families were all "created" in sequential order. I used a Batch processor on the images to make sure they were as well, and manually did the same for the text files. Here is where it gets cool:

I built them all on a folder on my desktop. Then i "moved" them to the office library. If i have sorted by Date Last Modified, they populate the Family Browser in REVERSE order. If i sort Windows Explorer by NAME and then drag them to the library, they populate the family browser palette in Sequential order (as you see in the image).

To verify this, i removed all the foles from the office library, and dragged them in, in the order of: B01, B03, B05, B02, B04, B06.

True to form, that is how they show up in the Palette if i instantiate it after doing that.

So if you want to insert a family in alphabetical order, and it keeps putting it at the BOTTOM of the palette, Cut and paste everything AFTER it, to another directory. Place your new family. "Move" the stuff back.

Phew!

A video, if you would rather follow along on the screen. I dont populate the FB in the video, since im tied to the network, but youll get the idea. :) EDIT: I also apologize for the lousy vid quality! But its late, and im not redoing it. Youll get the pint!

I still owe the unconference group a bunch of content posts, among some other interesting things weve been working on. But its been a hectic few weeks. More of my posting has been over at RFO these days, so head over there.

Posts from AUGI- Creating a Standard: Doors

2010-11-11T10:42:00.008-05:00

I am delinquent in getting this post... posted, but it has been an insanely busy time! A discussion was started on AUGI about custom content, and after a somewhat heated debate was had over the successes and/or failures of Revit Content sites like Seek, RevitCity, etc... A few of us were of the opinion that the failure isnt really on that of the content sites, but that of the content standardizers: They arent end users, and theyre not using the software to get the work out the door. How CAN they know what needs to be in the standards?

Autodesk has taken some initiative posting the Revit Model Content Style Guide, but many of us disagree on if it is helpful or not. It often recommends things that arent a value to the PROJECT, in the spirit of helping REVIT.

I would cut and paste my thoughts on the subject, but its quite lengthy. You can read them in this post, specifically addressing the Content Style Guide.

So what IS a successful standard? Well, in my VERY humble opinion: It needs to account for the most complex situations. Otherwise, when those situations DO come up, its a free for all. The beautiful thing about a complex standard that covers all bases, is it STILL works for a more conservative project. So... Whats critical in that standard? Well, here is my hope:

Im going to go category by category, and post what we are using at Beck, as "our standard." Then im hoping others will do the same. By Vegas time or a bit after, im hoping to have something we can share with the 'Desk. If- at any point in this discussion- it becomes useful, ill post our content as samples, along with the Shared Parameters files.

For the first Category, im going to start with Doors... As theyre often the most complex.

Admittedly, at Beck we like our Revit models a bit more Complex than- perhaps- they need to be. This is a diagram of one of our doors, and the Parameters they have.

This includes a series of Offset parameters and if/then statements, allowing the Door to stay "hosted" to the wall, but push itself off of the wall. This is primarily because we model our walls as multiple walls, so the "Revit Wall" cannot drive the size of the door frame in ALL cases.

Discounting that as something that is not necessary in a standard (as its just our desire), lets look at the rest:

Width: Some doors have one panel, some have two. Theyre not always equal. This NEEDS to be planned on. We have two independant Panel Widths. We have other functionality, to automatically make them EQ, but thats all fluff. i think we cal all agree we need to Panel Widths, STANDARD.

Panel TYPES: This starts the debate about Nesting. Though it may be arrogant to assume everyone works like us, ill go on the limb and say this NEEDS to be standard. Anyone whos done a job with the OOTB doors, knows how exponential the number of doors to edit becomes, with Panels arent nested.

FRAME Types: Always a gray area, since some people make the "Frame" families the Door family itself. But, having worked with them as seperate Nested Families, i have to say i think its great. Ill put up a vote for them being Nested. What are your thoughts? This also starts to delve in to Frame Dimensions, and WHERE should they be controlled?

But, if i WERE to desire Manufacturer Built Content, my personal thoughts are it should be like this:

Door parameters(parent family):

Panel 1 Width (Length)

Panel 1 Type (Family Type: Door)

Panel 1 Finish (Material)

Panel 2 Width (Length)

Panel 2 Type (Family Type: Door)

Panel 2 Finish (Material)

Overall Opening Width (Length- formula driven)

Panel Height (Length)

Panel Thickness (Length)

Panel Floor Clearance (Length)

Frame Type (Family Type: Door)

Frame Profile Jamb Width (Length) [for cutting the opening out wider]

Frame Profile Head Height (Length) [for cutting the opening out taller]

Door Panels (shared):

Panel Width (Length) [tied to the Panel widths in the door]

Panel Height (Length) [tied to the Panel height in the door]

Panel Finish (Length) [tied to the Panel Finishes]

Door Frames

Opening Width (Length) [tied to the Overall Opening Width]

Opening Height (Length) [Tied to Panel Height]

Okay, so ours have a bit more than that. These are also just thye basics. Of course the Frames will have more, as will the panels, for variations IN the panel. But these are (i8mvho) what need to SCHEDULE, and be made from a STANDARD shared Parameters File. But im out of time at the current moment. What are your thoughts on the above?

The Office Library (part 2)

2010-08-18T14:01:00.030-05:00

As i mentioned last week, much of what we did on the Wiki is now Superseded by a new content Navigator we got from a third party developer. What we purchased: the KiwiCodes Family Browser (clicky).

This product looks strikingly like the Design Palette from ACA and Civil3D, if youve used them: And thats a compliment. Now, i have LARGELY been a disponent of using third part Add-ons in my Revit Implementations, as you have many more directions you have to think about in terms of Support, Version upgrades, error checking, etc. But this appears to be a banner year, with so many high powered Add Ons coming in to play... The Family Browser, Site works from Eagle Point, and a few others we cant mention yet, that are in the works. My point is, if my goal is to provide the most efficient tools for Beck, the time is finally here (in my opinion, for those of you who thought the previously available add ons were worth it) to let the add ins in to the workflow.

The family browser itself also meant a restructuring of the Office Content Library, since the tool organizes Tabs by File Directory. The OOTB library largely ships that way- with subdirectories upon subdirectories... And i largely UNDID all of that for our office libraries. When you have to manually search for parts in a kit with that many folders, i dont find it is efficient. Plus, a stringent naming system keeps everything organized alphanumerically anyway, so ALL Furniture being in one folder made sense. All Equipment in one folder, and so on. But, i didnt mind subdirectory usage here, since the Family Browser largely means no one needs to browse the library anymore.

The tool also lended itself to Task Based Organizing: Something i was fond of while supporting an AutoCAD Architecture office at QPK Design, who also used Civil 3D. (Shout out to my buddy Lance King, who helped build all of our networked Palettes there). So i went the same route at the The Beck Group, with our new implementation of the Family Browser. The following are the different "Tab Groups:"

...

The beauty of the tools organization is several fold: 1. If you check the names of all the tabs, youll see redundancy again, much like the old Wiki. Well, i can think of several different times i may want to put in Cabinets, be it Interiors Work, general Modeling, etc. Since these are AUTOMATICALLY driven by their directories, its zero maintenance to have the tabs in multiple locations.

Plus, props on the Palettes being auto refreshing. I add content to the directory, the next time someone clicks on the tab (note: they dont have to relaunch revit), the tab is updated. ACA and C3D did it, but i had to manually add the content to a palette config. Here, i dont have to. Awesome.

Here is a short video cycling through all of the Beck Palettes:

Philip at Kiwi codes was also great about tailoring this for ease of use. A TON of features were added between v1 and v2, including Management functions to auto load custom sets of palettes, and a button that launches the URL from the Family Type properties, which we use to take you to an instructional page on the Beck Revit Wiki, for using the content.

A few things to look out for: It generates previews in jpg format, and saves them in a directory. Philip and i have noticed some strange-eties with this, but its not quirks in the FB itself, its quirks with Revit. Heres what weve found:

1. If the *initial* save-as that CREATED the family, occurred in the view {3D}, it wont get a preview. Itll get a gray box. This is also true: the preview wont ever work in Win7. It DOESNT MATTER if you "resave" the file in another view. Doing a Save As in a 3D view named something else (View 1) corrects the problem. No idea why. Maybe the Factory can chime in.

2. The previews it generates are 64x64 pix. I made some manually, since some families are difficult to get zoomed in properly. Make sure you respect the 64x64... The FB will grow with the previews, and get ugly. :)

All in all, its a great add on. Unfortunately, the day i showed it to the office, i had to leave town on a Family Emergency. So im heading back today, and it should be fully deployed by Tuesday!

Next thing i hope to write about, is Site works... It looks really exciting!

Mobilizing an office, and Distributing Information...

2010-08-08T21:05:00.016-05:00

I often wonder... How does everyone filling the role as BIM Manager for many people manage to distribute information about all of the changes made, to all of the users that use them? Template updates, Content creation, content modification, Standard detail updating, etc... Theres a lot to keep everyone informed about.

The running joke amongst me and one of my (now) coworkers, HAS been that over the last few years i would take a position, set up an entire office, and then leave.... Only to have to start over at the next office.(Here is hoping this time i dont end up having to go somewhere, im quite happy!). But whats always plagued me during the implementation trials... Is how to keep everyone informed? Of COURSE, i know how every family works. What every parameter does. Where the constraints are. How things flex. Whats in the template. Which things are ready, and which things arent. Its only natural... I built it all. But thats not fair to the entire rest of the office.

So finally, while setting up a Content and Training library for Beck, we saw the opportunity to do something ive always wanted to do... And we seized it: The Revit Explorer. At least, in my mind thats what it was called. The format of it lended itself more to: The Revit Wiki. But it was/is as follows:

The first and most significant (in my mind), was the Content Page. We have Registered Architects, designers, Interior Designers, Project Engineers, Project Managers, and Interns, all looking for content. Does everyone know what Folders the library is broken up in to? What Revit Categories to check? No. Should they have to? No.

So the content link goes to a very bland looking list. The reviteers will notice its awfully close to a Revit Category list, but its not. While it started out that way, the categories were then broken up further, in to groupings that made sense architecturally. Revit System Families were included (Architectural staff often dont need to know- or care- that they act differently than components).

One of the beautiful things about an HTML solution, is that redundant links can point to the same location. So some things are included under Equipment, that are also located under Plumbing, or Casework, and so on. They all point to the same pages, when it gets down to the content level, and thats a beautiful thing. If three people guess (interpret) that a piece of content is something different... If theyre marginally close (read: if i anticipated that interpretation), they find it anyway!

The pages shown below (Doors) point to families that are stored in the Office Library. The items that are system families, ALSO point to the office library, where systems of Model Groups are saved out. Just because its a "Revit System Family" that plays by different rules, why should it act differently for the staff needing to load it?

The other benefit to this solution is images. I stand by the long and complex naming strategy for Content that ive implored upon people in office and office again. Until the Factory gives us a Component button that functions by category, and sorts in a fashion other than alphabetically, this will continue to be necessary, as a means to circumnavigate chaos in a Revit Model. (Foreshadow: This whole page is still relevant, although someone built JUST THAT: A version of the ACA Design Palette, for Revit. Thats coming up in my next post, as were using it as the new front end for all users, and for this website).

Still, pictures are much easier to understand than a 5 field Family name, meant to declare what the usages are of the Revit Content. From here, the user knew they had the correct Door: Now it was just a matter of knowing how to use it. Considering how parametric a lot of families are, this is a trial in and of itself. So each family had three links: About me, Open for Load, and Find in Library.

The last one, did just that: It took you to the directory in the network that had the content in it.

Open for Load, would launch the family in Revit (in session, if Revit was opened, with their project, presumably), and then they could simply hit "Load in to Project" and be done with it... Never having to bother with finding the library.

About me, was a page (1 per family) meant to tell the users which parameters were meant for them to use, and what it affected. They look as such:

They may seem like overkill, but i cant help but think its a vital necessity: Highly flexible and parametric content- How much of it do you have? I mean, the harder and faster we push in to integrated delivery, and the more advanced and data/object rich modeling we do, the more theyre necessary.

The image at left is a door family. With the advent of reporting parameters in 2011, doors afforded us many new options: Report the thickness of the host, which we then translated in to (user defined) "ignore the thickness of the host," and for that matter "ignore the LOCATION of the host as well." Why?

We derive much better results (both on the architectural detailing side, and on the construction estimating and sequencing side) from having our Wall Finishes and our Wall Structures modeled as two separate walls. Ever see what that does to a Wrapping Door Frame graphically? Yuck. Now our teams have a way to have the frames auto-throat-determine and wrap at interior partitions, and ignore and manually define throat dimension and frame placement, in exterior conditions. Which ALSO means no more skirting to BS typical details for Frame Locations in Cavity walls. Its a thing of beauty. But, its a lot of parameters. So this web page serves to teach the users which parameters control what.

The Page called Office Standards is just that... Things that are Beck Specific. But another of the fantastic things ive enjoyed with this web page, is the Beck Training Page.

The way i look at it, there are two types of people looking for Revit Help documents, and those two groups of people will search in two different ways:

Those who just underwent training, will search by the class they took. (chronological)

Those who arent in training, are looking for the topic they need help with. (systemic)

I normally train with Powerpoint, and live hands on work, afterwards. But i saw the chance here to just do away with the PPT, and build the presentations in chronological order for the Training classes at Beck University. This worked out very well:

In the image above, you see both ways to search. The top four links are by "topic," while the bottom one takes you to the Beck U training schedule:

Much like the redundancy links on the content page, i like this setup because really... The links are all pointing to the same thing. If you go to "Beck University- Day 1- Modeling," somewhere in the slides you will find Levels and Datums. But if- instead of the Training U page- you go to Revit topics- Building a Model.... Youll find Levels and Datums.

The other major nicety of this system, is that the images are all linked from the office Server, instead of embedded in a Powerpoint. Now, im sure thats doable in Powerpoint as well, i must admit ive never tried.

But working with a program in such infancy as Revit, where the UI, menus, ribbons, options, add on's, and whatnot are changing year to year, this makes updating training material MUCH faster.

I dont have to remove an image, and reinsert an image. I just write over the image on the Server Directory, and its done.

Which leaves me to the last remaining item... The one that was toughest for me to grasp the severity and necessity of, as i was the creator of the material: How, and who to, must i alert to what ive changed, every time ive changed it?

For this, we actually had a conversation amongst the offices internal Revit Users Group: Should it be everyone? Just Revit Model Managers? Project Managers? All Revit users? And how often? Template changes? Content Additions? Standard Detail revisions?

In the end, we settled on this: There is no perfect system. If i email everyone at every change, they will all filter their inboxes to delete my email (LOL... Tell the jokes now, girls. "We already do!" hahahahaha). So, we set up a very simple system as follows:

They are four "Document sets" on the site, which is basically Sharepoint.

One for Content, One for Template changes, and one for Standard Details. They are just pages with lists of text and notes on them for what ive changed in each category, but theyre set up as different document sets, so each user in the office can set up an "Alert," if they would like to be notified via email when i make changes. Instantly, daily, or weekly. Their choice.

Its not a perfect system, but it is- by far- the best ive had the change to implement, for disseminating information.

If you read this far, the irony will be the next post: A third-party app provider has made it so: The Content "About Me" pages will live on, as will all of the Training and Office Standard pages... But the Content navigation pages became largely unnecessary with a new application derived from the API.

Imagine.... The Design Palette from AutoCAD Architecture. Replete with: Content IN Revit, thats NOT in the project, that automatically calls from the library (meaning the complete capability to rethink whats natively in the template, since its all available without a load function). That updates in real time. The loads and/or places content. That is office-wide configurable. And....

That connects to this Wiki's About Me pages. To be continued!

Revit and Multi-Language Documents

2010-05-31T12:32:00.014-05:00

Its been much too long since ive written. Its been an eventful year since i wrote last! I went through all of the implementation and content standards at a new job in NYS, right after which point.... I moved to Texas, to take the job as a BIM Manager at The Beck Group in Dallas. Its been a busy but amazing time down here, and im enjoying every minute of it.

On the Revit side, theres a lot of current stuff to write about. But this one struck my fancy. We're doing some Design Work in Korea, and as such our deliverables have to show both languages: English and Korean. We experimented with a few different options for this, and we also found some interesting things (some by accident). Heres how it went down:

There were two items that needed to have both languages: Room Names, and Notes. Room names was a pretty easy one. As most languages arent one for one literal translations, we simply needed another Parameter to put in the Room tag. No brainer there. Where it got interesting was the following:

In doing some experimenting, The room name in Korean had to be typed in a Text file, saved in UNICODE Encoding, instead of the standard ANSI (Notepad) or Western European/Windows (Word, saved as Plain Text). Without the Unicode Encoding, the characters would actually translate in to gibberish, and nothing would work. Ironically, we figured this meant we would also need a Font that had the Korean characters in it.

Initial testing proved this not to be the case, as this screen shot is Korean Text, in Arial. Interesting! However, i went over to a collegues station and his looked a bit different than mine:

The Korean Arial isnt displaying in Revit on his system. Whats the difference? Im on Windows7-64, and he is on Windows Vista-64.

For whatever reason, the Unicode TXT document doesnt respond the same on both systems.

This also made me nervous because of the Revit "Tug of war" that happens with some settings such as "By Linked view." (If youre not sure what i mean, with two users in a workshared project (Parent) with Links (Link), test the following:

Have both users get local copies of the workshared model, and local copies of the Linked Model.

1. User1: In "Link" Create a new view, "View-Link"

2. User1: SWC in "Link."

3. User1: In "Parent," reload "Link."

4. User1: In "Parent," set a view to "By Linked View: View-Link"

5. User1: Synchronize with Central

6. User2: (Who has been working this whole time): Sychronize with Central.

7. Either user- Go check the Linked View VG settings for Link in that view.

The trouble is, the instance of "Link" for User2 doesnt HAVE that "View-Link" yet, so it cannot acknowledge that it is "BLV:View-Link." Where this gets troublesome, is for some reason the local file of User2 acquires editability of those view settings, and UNDOES the Linked View.)

Back on topic, im HAPPY to report that isnt the issue with the Encoding of the Text in the parameters. So, if the Vista user sees it displayed as squares, it will still plot and display correctly, in Korean...... If plotted from a machine using Windows 7. (I dont think its a Revit issue, so much as a windows issue, but i dont know enough about it. Thats only amusing because Revit 2010 (what this project is in) isnt officially supported in Win7. FWIW: We would love to upgrade, but the Foreign Language versions of 2011 werent released in time for our consultants, hence remaining in 2010. But i digress: The inconsistancy in Windows versions and text occurs in 2011 as well.

This brought us to our next challenge: Notes, in both Korean and English. With language being something that we cant just "toogle" because of the indirect translation, we wanted some way to at least assure that the English and Korean versions stayed tied and up to date, instead of "Text note in english" and "text note in Korean."

What we decided on, was Revits Keynotes. Typically meant to show either a Numeric Tag, or the text of a note, we elected to have it show both.... The number, and the tag of the note. Except, we also elected to not have it show a number, but show the English version of the note AS the number, and the Korean version of the note as the Text. So, just as normal in Revit, we made our Keynote file. (Note: We had to save it as Unicode Encoding again, or it didnt work...).

Once the keynote file was created, it was business as usual in Revit. We made three types of Keynote tags. For each language, and both language. Depending on what we want to print.

The only difficult part is having the Project Team know which note was which, since they cant get sorted alphanumerically, given that weve "replaced" the Keynote Number with an actual text field. Along this front, i think it would be great if we could add additional fields to Keynotes and Keynote schedules. We already do something similar when we add parameters and Shared Parameters to Type Catalogs.

The keynote file is nothing more than a Tab Delimited file, so i wonder why it can ONLY be "key number Keyed Note". The more we get in go complex models, and now (in the last few versions) with the advent of multi parameter labels, it seems like were begging for "Key NumberKey Note EnglishKey Note ForeignInstance Based Text Field," where Instance Based Text field is a note that applies TO the Keynote, but in this one location only. BIM-esque or not, its one of the small features Keynotes need that is a hang up for mainstream adoption.

Anyway, its not a perfect solution, and its not without effort. But this is how were crossing the multi-language bridge. How are you?

EDIT: I should add- Because of the users on Windows Vista, we DIDNT end up keeping it all Arial. We switched to Gulim, which is a native Windows font that supports korean Text. That way- even though the enoding was right- all of the project team could see it on the screens correctly. Unfortunately, when youre actually "IN" a Revit room schedule (not looking on sheet, but in it), they still display incorrectly, unless youre actively in the field. At which point, they display correctly. Strange!

Design Options, Linked Files, and Revit Standards...

2009-02-22T13:28:00.005-05:00

To say its been a slow few months would be an understatement, but i suppose thats true for many of us with the economic situation as it is. Ive missed posting, as i really enjoy working with Revit and toiling with its idiosyncrasies as we fight to get productive work done. Im HAPPY to say, it looks like the proverbial end of the dry spell MAY be here, as ive had reason to model a few things recently, and i have cause for hope that a few big and interesting opportunities are on the way: All of which i expect to spark Revit questions for me.

Most people on AUGI know me as a fanatic of Linked Files. Thats not to say i wouldnt prefer one giant model that functioned elegantly, but i find using Linked Files creates wonderful performance gains for the whole team, as long as im steadfast with the model management. Not too long ago, i built this model: A very simple Mixed use 7 storey building.

I found great potential here to use Linked Files with Design options, as there are really only a few variations in the Floor plans. That is, the model only has 1 storey modeled. It then has design options as follow:

-Options Set: First Floor

----Option 1: Yes

----Option 2: No (primary)

-Option Set: Second Floor

----Option 1: Yes

----Option 2: No (primary)

-Option Set: Top Floor

----Option 1: Yes

----Option 2: No (primary)

That file is then linked and copied amongst the floor Levels, and in each view the appropriate design option configurations can be picked. Herein lies my issue, though i may be alone in such a desire:

It makes since WITHIN a file, that Design Options be view specific. Otherwise, how would we show the different options? However, with file links, i personally would like the OPTION to make the Design Options view specific in the Parent File, or Model centric when linked in. Why? Well consider the above file:

The first floors D.O. selections will ALWAYS be : Yes, No, No.

The second Floors Options will ALWAYS be: No, Yes, No.

Floors 3-6 will always be: No, No, No (primary for all)

Top floor will always be: No, No, Yes.

BUT, this needs to be adjusted in VG for every view in the parent file. With Revits penchant for extra dialogue boxes, thats a lot. (1) VG, RVT Links tab (2), Custom (3), Design options tab (4), Select, select, select, Okay, Okay, Okay, Okay, Okay. thats a lot of clicks.

View templates shorten the process, and can be applies ALMOST globally... But they cant for schedules, im not sure why. In a Door schedule with the linked files, trying to apply a VT that overrides the VG: RVT Links tab wont allow the VT to show up at all.

Considering the amount of Schedules i use for QC in my models, thats a LOT of setup work, for something that would simply be to say *these linked files will always be configured in this design option...*. It could even be in the Manage Links dialogue: Design Option: by view or by link instance. Man, that would make my day.

Worth mentioning, with this issue of the schedules in the linked files, if ANYONE on the project team isnt up to speed on the implications of the linked files and the design options, your hands are tied to basically tell the entire team NOT to make new views... Or theyre in the thick without realizing it.

*****

All of THAT said, a post was on AUGI years ago (thats still being updated), about firms SHARING their templates and standards, and i find extreme validity in this. A firm i talk with extensively even has their content posted on their website (they shall remina nameless unless they want to chime in). A FEW offices ive worked for are holding tight to their content,and templates, and standards, yelling "Work Product," and "Intellectual property," and a whole lot of other phrases i personally cant stand. Im sorry. My service is ARCHITECTURE. Thats what differntiates us. If i can share a template and MAYBE help someone else succeed with a tool that i BELIEVE is going to continue to aide and alter our industry, then i'll share it.

There are SO many discussions on standards: Naming conventions, family construction, Phases used as legend band aids, level of Details, View template setups, etc.

We all work differently, and we can certainly all learn from one another.

I have a new venue coming up soon, and it will have space for me to upload, store, share, and distribute. Instructionals on things ive done, or helped with, as well as templates, content, etc. Keep an eye posted, i should be getting to it in the next week or two. As a self proclaimed Process Engineer and Informational Hippy, i prefer to share. Not because i think everything ive done is the best way, but because the best way we ALL advance is to work together. Color me naive. :) I'll report back once the site is set up...

Revit Freelancers, beware!

2008-10-25T13:07:00.002-05:00

I debated putting this on the blog, as i like my blog to not be polluted with personal issues. BUT, i pride myself on "doing the right thing," and i would feel bad if any of you who work from home ended up in this situation too. Luckily, for me Reviteering at home is a side thing of passion, and its not what pays the mortgage.

Its not uncommon for us on AUGI to ask one another for help, and sometimes, people are actually seeking contractual work. In one such instance, there was a Rendering task that needed to be done in SHORT order... (2 days from first contact.) Naturally, not much time to hammer out an actual written contract. That DOES make this predicament my own fault, and rest assured i take full blame for it. But naively, wanting to help a fellow AUGI poster, and wanting to satisfy another end-client that Revit IS the way to do architecture, i put my nose on the grindstone, and hammered out the work. Thankfully, i only invested about twenty hours, during which times 78 emails passed back and forth between myself and the client (which i have saved, email me if you feel this post is inappropriate, and ill be happy to share them as a statement of fact so this post cannot be construed as only one side of the story), and about 25 phone calls. There were several progress updates, and several updates in terms of how much compensation was owed. (Again) naively, i was willing to transmit final images in good faith, as i know how some time sensitive jobs can be, with regard to winning over investors, etc.

Suddenly though, the end client has gone missing, or unresponsive to communication. I have made several attempts to establish communication with him, and in one successful attempt he even mentioned having me do MORE work, but was not forthcoming when i mentioned i liked to settle old business before new.

In any event, i would feel terrible for NOT writing this, if i ignored it and the same thing happened to one of you. So Freelancers beware, here is the contact information, in case he solicits work from you:

Name: Lee McKinney
City: St Louis, MO.
Email address: chando-13@sbcglobal.net (the account states the name of Chandis McKinney)
MSN Contact: chando-13@sbcglobal.net
Project: 514 W. Diversey Ave
Cell Phone number: 773-497-9789

Freelancers beware!

Copy Monitor- How i love thee, but how i loathe thee.

2008-10-22T16:35:00.011-05:00

* thanks to David B. for bringing this one up. Because while i could be relaxing, everyone knows the right way to spend an evening is arguing over the pro's/cons of Copy Monitor, LOL!

One of the great things about exploring tools in Revit, is coming up with new ways to change your processes. Amongst everyone i talk to, Copy Monitor is a pretty hated tool. I think it has immense capabilities (not that anyone argues that), but it certain has its shortcomings. This one, however, i hadn't thought about until i gave it a whirl last night while David and i were chatting about it.

Let us suppose: Project 1, with a few "openings" in a wall. One, an actual Opening. A pair of Single Doors: They are the same family. The family has a Nested Light fixture constrained to the wall, with a visibility parameter that is type driven. Also, a pair of double doors, in the same configuration.

Now, i preface this issue with the following: I don't believe in the *super door family* theory of having every possible combination built in to one door family, with super adjustable frames, panels, sidelights, etc. BUT, that said: Lights above doors are a PERFECT procedural reason for nesting a family. Why? If they're lights for exiting safely, they WILL go above the doors. Why manually chase moving doors through design iterations, with the align tool in elevations snapping light fixtures, when a simple nested light fixture can save you the hassle in one click? Precisely. Now suppose, this file was sent to your Structural Engineer, as this was a Bearing Concrete wall. they will Copy Monitor, to maintain consistency and coordination in both location, length, openings, etc. And CM even has that radio button in the options for walls, to "copy doors/windows/openings," right?

As they proceed, the end result is pictured at left. What appears to be happening, is for the CM feature, it is seeking out the

EXTENTS of the family, instead of the Opening of the family. MORE concerning, is that it is also doing it for Family Types that have the light OFF. As Revit is

WYSIWYG, this is MOST surprising. Until

noticing that, my suggested workaround WAS going to be edit the Family Type, uncheck the box, send to Structural, recheck the box. Not clean, but sufficient. Now, if you built your doors as SEPARATE families, instead of the type parameter for the light, you can do a Family Reload, and select a door with no extraneous items.... But that makes QC difficult, what with Dimension references being eliminated with inconsistancies in families. Not to mention if a door you switch it with has a slightly different origin configuration... Certainly that wont work!

I wanted to verify that it was checking total extents, and that it wasn't an anomaly with the nested family, so i added a few model lines to the Door family, and reloaded, then performed the coordination review in the other project...

Getting back to my first paragraph, I'm finding there isn't much this program cant do. CM is a tool that can help a great deal of trades, and lately I've been appreciating it for Architectural/Interiors collaboration. As an architect, i may want a 4-7/8" wall with gyp on both sides, and end of story. As i build my walls that way, my Interior Designer may want to explore paint patterns or additional materials on top of that wall. For add's, that's fine... They build their own wall and we call it a day. But for painting/wallpapering/finishing? This is a great situation where their CM rules can be set to turn a 4-7/8" wall in to a 3-5/8" stud (wall) and they can then layer they're own version of gyp (replete with different paint or finishes) and be done with it. Could i build just a 3-5/8 in my model, and let them cover the walls in theirs? Sure, but what about tagging/Partition scheduling, and again... How to assert that both parties are content with the QC of their product? Its an issue CM could EASILY rectify... But what if that door has Accessibility signage on the side of it, or room signage? Certainly, this is one thing that needs to get fixed!

While were on the subject, we NEED "Rule Based Copy Monitor." CM works great, if i lay out grids, and send them to Struct, and then move them or delete them. What if i add a grid? its another instance of "you don't know what you don't know" to quote JAB. They have to TELL it to CM, which means if i drop the ball and don't tell them, they aren't CM'ing that grid. Or toilet. Or column.

If I'm MEP, you know what i want? To open my file, after getting a new Arch. Model, and to get a coordination review alert, because Architect ADDED 4 lavs to the men's room. Now i know to get in that area. It could be very similar to what we have now, with a few more radio buttons. Under additional Copy Parameters, it could say "Copy ALL Grids" "Copy ALL Toilets" etc.

Furthermore, you know what would be sweet? I way to Monitor the ENTIRE model. I mean, yeah... we have "Compare Models," but think of it this way: My structural Engineers model is already IN my model. Quick issue in the field, and we start revising drawings. Maybe it was structural first, so they revise and resend a model. CM will tell us what moved... If it was something to CM. But imagine CM's potential in terms of document tracking! I go to open my file after the new struct arrives, and because I've "issued" my permit set, and they have too, i get a "Coordination Revit Alert- Items in instance of link have changed after issuance." I go to a 3D view where "Project completion" is showing everything halftoned, besides the three beams, 6 columns and footings, and 4 pieces of bracing that just changed.

Man, i can dream i guess. :) LMK what you think on the CM issues though. Maybe I'm NOT the only one who secretly loves this tool!

AU 2008- Vegas! (Unconference Topics?)

2008-10-21T18:53:00.004-05:00

Having covered everything in my LAST post, i did not think AU08 was going to happen for me. I really enjoyed 07 and 06 (though 07 happened at a terrible time, so my mind wasn't completely in the game), and i was a bit disenchanted that all of the circumstances would basically mean not participating in AU this year. (After all, who would you ask? The boss you just stopped working for? Or the one who just hired you? LOL)

But MUCH to my surprise, an opportunity to attend made itself known to me, in the form of some generosity from another believer of what i like to call "Revit hippyness." Sooooo, that being said, i will see you all in Vegas this year!

Which brings up AU Unconference. Last year, i found these to be some of the most enlightening and entertaining parts of the entire week. I am hoping then end up as such this year too! I'm contemplating putting a few topics in, but as I'm a latecomer this year, i haven't even looked to see if they're all picked already or not.

But this year (as i read so many others have done) ill be sure to stick my "avatar" in my badge, so I'm easier to identify.

Lets talk shop!

Revit Semantics, AND a job change!

2008-10-21T18:21:00.007-05:00

I discovered something in Revit tonight, when a colleague asked me a question about a specific command, and then i realized i hadn't been here in some time. More so, i realized that my last couple of posts here have all said that i would come back to expand on them, and that i never had. It hasn't been lack of wanting, but in both Revit and Architecture: it has been a long few months.

It started with the tool of Revit, but it didn't end there. Still, in my first post here i indicated this would be more on the journey as i perceived it using Revit, and less of a "how to" in using the tool. There are far smarter people than me to teach you all. :) What transpired isn't all tool related, but since Revit began the journey: Here is my story.

A funny thing happens when you start to use Revit. Well, i digress. If you're using it the way *I* think it should be used, something interesting happens: You either fail, or you learn how things get built. You cant model correctly if you don't know what you're modeling. So, being fairly green in the profession, i asked a TON of questions, and learned rather fast. As the knowledge started to grow (due MAINLY to the two men i worked directly under, who were fantastic for my career growth. Thanks NCG and DEC!) i started to be able to move on my own. I learned the ARCHITECTURE.

As YOU all know, aside from THAT venture, once you start to progress your architecture, you start to see shortcomings in the organizational structure of your REVIT... Maybe in your revit strategy. You modify, you refine, you progress the PROCESS, WHILE you progress the architecture.

You realize you need conventions where your office has none, you need instructions where your office has none. You start to use tools, and that means teaching. You start to brainstorm with collegues, and that means testing. You guys are figuring things out, and talking to the people in charge. There are more meetings, there is more implementation, and on it goes.

But after a while, something interesting happened. I had learned enough from my superiors to move ahead, and help them do more... And on the Revit side, i had started pushing the office pretty hard. I was teaching them more tools, wanting more from the model. The client wanted more from the model, and i knew we could do it... But, as you ALL know, not everyone shares that dream.

Suddenly, something else started creeping in to the workplace: Resentment. Bullying. Sabotage. Infantile, maybe, but after a while we tire of the fight. For a long while i tried holding on to my somewhat advanced position in both architecture AND Revit, but there was a time when i knew it was detrimental to my mental well being to remain.

For a short while, as i considered a job change, it looked very much like i may have been throwing in the Revit Towel, as jobs in the area aren't aplenty using Revit, and with my house purchase and general state of content in the area, I'm not keen on moving. I'm not done here.... YET.

But i lucked out, and have transitioned to another Revit house. I am learning as i go that "Everywhere you go, there you are..." and that every day is a different fight. What i do know is this: I love this tool, and more than that i love doing Architecture. the new gig aside, there are some other things in the works that will hopefully assure that i ALWAYS stay involved in Revit and Architecture... So we will see.

For now, ill let go of my more frustrated tone, and hope to get back in to the geekishly interesting!

Post to come... But i want your thoughts FIRST: "Non Value Adding..."

2008-08-22T10:35:00.003-05:00

Building on the subject of the last post i made, here is a great one to discuss:

Who/What is determining what "elements and/or drawing techniques" are "Value adding" versus "non value adding."

How much are we conceding efficiency for the sake of what traditional standards say something should be represented as, and how much are we changing our standards as new methodologies (model centric environment) come in to play?

A few brief examples to discuss (and ill come back with pics later....)

Phasing: 45 degree doors
Lineweights in elevations
Structure Visibilty
Symbology & note blocks...

Revit and Office workflow... And office hardships.

2008-08-06T21:26:00.002-05:00

This post isn't a glamorous one to write about. There aren't many pretty pictures, and there isn't much philosophy about the Revit content and methodology that we've come to enjoy, on the many many many Revit blogs that are now in circulation.

If you've been here before, you've noticed that i haven't written here in many months. It isn't lack of wanting, or lack of content, so much as it is a different form of hardship with the subject at hand: frustration and confusion.

I got on board with revit exactly 2.5 years ago. I was an ArchiCAD user in a 2 man firm, a Vectoworks user in a 4 man firm, a Digital project user on a 15 person team, and an AutoCAD user in an office of 30. Only in the firm on DP did a similar issue come up, as the one I've been faced with, in a Revit office: Suddenly, strategy matters. (To be fair, it didnt matter in the other firms because we were always isolated in projects...)

Let us take the following example for a minute: A section of "glass block wall". How would you model it? (I anticipated pictures for this point, bit i digress... this entry will be for the hardcore geeks only, no pictures.) I can think of a number of ways to model a portion of glass block wall, i guess it goes back to what do you consider a glass block wall to be?

1. Wall with surface pattern. (it is, after all... a wall)
2. Curtain Wall/System with panels of glass block
3. Window family that has pieces in it for Glass block (perhaps in a parametric array)
3a. NESTED Blocks (families) in a window family
4. Line Based family with a nested array or family (James and i love L.B. Families...)
5. And my absolute favorite (kidding...) an IN PLACE FAMILY, lol.

My point is, very different methods. This got me to thinking: How much does Revit help us, and when does it hold us back? I found the moment i started using this software, that i personally, could do a better job, while i was using it. As long as it wasn't tripping me up (i was lucky, it wasn't) i was free to produce more, produce better, and get more wow results in the process.

Then the "in-fighting" started. In my quest for Revit streamlining and wanting to make a large group of people efficient, there was a sudden and unexpected struggle for power over controlling methodologies. Where i wanted to reign with what we call "Container files" (nothing more than a file loaded as group with a Model group of standard partitions and an embedded detail group of the "partition schedule") some of the "old school" crew wanted to reign with a simple drafting view with lines and text (manually coordinated with the type mark values and construction assemblies of the wall types), as the partition schedule.

Where i wanted to reign with a minimalist and *additive* project template (an argument i will continue to fight to the death), they wanted to reign with every wall type and door type known to man embedded in our project template.

And then there is the Glass Block. And the family content. And the tags. When is it text? When is it a smart Material Tag? Or Tag By Catagory?

My question is not about methods, which are right and wrong. Its not even about who makes those decisions: Yes Dan, i concede... we need a Revit manager. No, my question is about: What do you do, when something as small as Revit (a tool only, after all) can actually divide a group of users in an office? Those of us that believe we are correct in our theories and methodologies, are always willing to have constructive conversations about pros and cons of each method (willing to explain to the head chiefs why minimalist and additive is better, and willing to listen to Dan telling me 3D curved furniture is bad, mmmkay?) but there does come a point, when its just no longer worth the argument.

****

I do architecture. You do architecture. While we wax poetic about the importance of the tool, and how much it CAN change our work, and make us more efficient.... At the end of the day, it is not the end product. It is the means to a Building, and the success of that building will be judged on its own merits. But as a passionate Reviteer, are we to throw up our hands and resign to the fact that it wont be done correctly?

Fatalistic as the question sounds, i put to you this: (And id LOVE to hear your answers, please!) Where do you draw the line ,on how much of this you will fight for? Successful architecture notwithstanding, how hard would you fight to see it done the right way?

Revit, Linking, Scalability, and Nuclear Families (not the Revit kind...)

2008-02-27T23:03:00.011-05:00

Not in the sense of a family, anyway. :)

So by now, everyone has read the press release on features coming in Revit 2009. I'm happy to say i've had the opportunity to play with it a bit, but rather than cover features already covered, id rather wax philosophical on what ONE of the features might mean. I say MIGHT, because this post was coming before i found the feature, because for me... It is a necessity. There are a lot of plusses, RE: revit and scalability. There are some Negs too. Ill try to point them out as i go.

(I may break this up in to several posts over the week, as there is a lot i personally want to cover on the subject of Revit, large projects, and linking.)

Background: Revit, being a large database of objects, is capable of fantastic feats of documentation. In one model, of a 230,000 SF facility, we have 2 sets of full Construction Docs (with two demolition packages), about 60 sets of leasing package documents (6 sheets each), and as many working views and worksets as we felt was necessary to break it apart.

Problem being, a 280 MB file is still 280MB's, and its still slower than all hell on some of our lesser workstations. Even opening with specify worksets, and only turning on pertinent Bldg locations, its slooooooow. File linking presented an opportunity to skirt the issue.

On my current project, we were heading for links, regardless of the 2009 features. At roughly 540k Square Ft, with the amount of documentation we do, it just wasn't appropriate for one file and worksetting. Especially considering the campus style set up seen at left.

My original plan was to meticulously outline the project necessities, and have the pertinent documentation for each building in that buildings files, with the Generic Documentation in a "main" file. This was necessary, circa RAC08, as there was no clean way to document Wall Sections for a linked Building.

Reasons:

1. Edit Cut Profile doesn't work with linked elements.

2. Tags do not work with linked elements (Category or Material)

Regardless of the above two, even if they did, since we had to go in the links to edit the geometry, it only made sense to Document there. BUT, then i read the Press release, and discovered that LINKED VIEWS were now available for wall sections and elevations. (Positive Item 1) At right, a Plan with Linked View, which we've had in previous releases. Document your plan in the link, and in the VG dialogue of the "parent" file, set the "child" file to "By linked view" and select the view you annotated in the link.

Now that i heard i could do this with my sections and my elevations, i put on my Pinky and the Brain even sinister smile, and got in to it. So i hashed it out, and it DOES work every bit as great as it should, in my humble opinion. Now, there ARE some shortcomings, but they are completely subjective, as many people may not WANT revit to behave in the way I'm about to complain about.
So there it is, and it works great. The first shortcoming I've found is pretty obvious in a model centric environment: (Negative 1) You need to place a Live Section in BOTH projects. This doesn't seem like a huge deal, but consider: If you use intelligent Material/Category tags (hell, even if you use text notes), if a section shifts an inch or two, and a sloping roof or a pitched object is cut, now your live geometry is in the wrong place, and your tags turn to question

marks.

On the surface, not a huge issue. But it makes me wonder: Why cant we USE the view from the link, instead of using a linked view IN a view. I know the arguments: View annotations cant show through links, because the potential exists for view "2/a3.1" or sheet "a3.1" to exist in both projects. Herein lies my nuclear family theme: i want to be able to link files, but also get the option to call one a "Parent" of SEVERAL "children" files. Parents can include sheets of children, views of children, etc. ANNNND..... Children have to follow Parents rules.

What in hell do i mean by that? Well, I'm REALLY loving the file linking, but here was my second negatory in this ordeal, and it was one i expected, it just keeps tripping me up.

I'm sure we all have different strategies for modeling, and i wont presume mine is the best. Actually, i will. But it goes like this: I model with generic walls, and then as the project progresses, i create actual walls with the correct materials, thicknesses, coping, etc, as the project documents develop. We also use Model Groups extensively. With things like Wall Types, this gets cumbersome.

Both towers at right are identical Model Groups, but they've been placed in two links. The building on the right has been progressed farther, so the roof is now the actual materials, as are the walls in the model group. Both the roof and tower at left are still generic. So, whats a man to do? I can technically save the group out, and reload it in to the other link, but the roof and wall types too? perhaps, if i make a model group with my entire bunch of *typical parts*, but this doesn't hold very well. I had trouble with reloading a wall type with the same name (exactly) and different compositions. No lie, i could set the walls next to each other, but only one was in the drop down menu.

My point being, what if i want the PARENT file to have control over the CHILDREN files Groups, Wall Types, Elements, Families, etc? One of Revit's selling points over ArchiCAD (to me, when i started) was that once an object is LOADED, its IN the model. It doesn't HAVE to reference the library. This is great, as libraries move, and old models were getting KILLED back when i used archiCAD. But.... But what if i WANT it to reference a library, a la the parent file?

At the risk of being taboo, i always want to imagine my Wall Type Dialogue is an AutoCAD Layer Manager. My list of walls native to this project on top, then underneath it, the list of Wall Types from the PARENT project. So if i draw with a wall type from the parent project, and it gets edited in the parent project, it edits in the Child project. Now, obviously there are hardships there: Warnings generated sporadically when elements join/overlap/whatever, but cest la vie, yes? Organize the project team! And what happens if someone purges it from the Parent? Maybe it the Parent has Children, purge gets more complex, i don't know. But i can DEFINITELY see a desire for this in all things type cataloged. We already know such types can be read, as an element in a linked file can be selected and have its properties listed in a project.

Also, don't we already KIND OF get this with Shared Families? Nest a shared family in to a family, then load it in to a project; edit and repeat... And it WARNS you: The families are different. Which should i use? If it would do that with wall types, materials, and elements, Revit would be unstoppable, scale wise. I mention materials and elements, because the Material tags have been killing my inner child.

I respect their right to not be tied to one another, but they don't respect my right to WANT them to be, haha. Granted, I'll only have to type "STANDING SEAM MTL ROOF" once in every model... But then if i want to change that note, i need to change it SEVEN times. Hmm... Parent/Child would handle this.

And on that subject... I have to believe its getting close. Sheets and RVT link locations already show up in the drawing list... But view annotations and views themselves wont come across for reasons of possible mis-coordination. BUT, this gives me hope that one or two iterations away, its going to be there.

There are more improvements, and more things i want to see pushed further... Ala tagging, Rooms/Areas, and all that those things imply. This was the first layer of the cake though.

What are your thoughts? Currently, all 7 of these models are still flying, because they're much smaller than their predecessors, which ran all in one file, with a bunch of worksets. BUT, its got a price. Training for linking views, training for meticulousness in assuring that whatever you load in ONE model is loaded in SEVEN, etc... And.....

Then there is Model Sharing and coordinating with consultants. I'm touching that one tomorrow... :)

Share your thoughts on this, i'm curious what other end users and developers alike are seeing this as...

"Edit Cut Profile" failure with Wall By Mass- RAC 2008, and Doors in Tapering Walls

2008-01-19T15:28:00.000-05:00

So, until we get the capability to give a Wall a vertical angle in Revit without using a Mass/GM family and a Wall By Face tool, that remains my preferred method for putting walls up in non-vertical orientation.

That said, everyone who's worked with me knows im a notorious hater of Filled Regions, in Wall Sections. Even with the capability to lock/constrain them to the modeled objects, i always take the side of using Edit Cut Profile on the cut patterns of the modeled objects, wherever possible.

Most of the time this is simply for detailing and cleanup in small areas, but it also comes in to play in areas such as beam wraps, where a Wall may be used (built as a chase) instead of walls and a ceiling below, for simplicities sake. In any event, while working on detailing the above pictured tower, it become evident that Edit Cut Profile cannot be used on Walls that are created with the Wall By Face command.

When you attempt it, you are able to get in to sketch mode, and you can work until you try to finish the sketch. That is when you get the ominous "Fatal Error has occurred" window.

This file and a test file were submitted to Autodesk, who have passed it on to development, as it appears to be a code issue. Hopefully they will have it resolved in the 2009 release.

As the self proclaimed "Model Nazi" you can imagine the amount of anxiety i had, at having to concede to a project team that they could detail this portion of the building using Filled Regions, haha.

These walls presented another interesting issue as well:

When i went to place a door in the wall, the door was only able to be hosted at the very base of the wall (Right at the Level T/O Slab). As i was trying to place an Access Door from the roof, this was not useable. It would not allow us to place the door on the ground and raise it up, eiher. We received an error that the door failed to cut the wall, and that it was deleted.

The fix for this was interesting: We were able to place WINDOWS inthe walls without incident, so we used Edit Family to make a copyof the door family. We then changed the families catagory to a Window Family, and then we placed it in the tower. AFTER having placed the "window", we were then able to go back to the fmaily, and change its catagory back to a Door Family. This let it stay placed in the desired location in the tapering wall, while still scheduling it as a door.

Fun times with Tapering Walls!

Two long personal months!

2007-12-26T18:07:00.000-05:00

I must say, writing here about the tribulations and adventures that we partake in while modeling in revit, is one of the few things that i really enjoy totally "rocking out" while doing. Suddenly, i blink, and two entire months have gone by. On the one hand, it would appear i simply had nothing of value to say anymore, LOL! In actuality, its been a fantastically busy couple of months.

The below mentioned trip to Autodesk University happened, which was adventurous as always. A few notes on my adventures in Vegas;

1. If someone asks you if the MGM and the Venetian are within walking distance, ask then to QUANTIFY walking distance. I was yelled at relentlessly all week for that one, but everyone! Be green, people! Walk! :)

2. Trying to continually follow things on the 360 degree screen on the mainstage will almost make you want to throw up. :) Awesome show, as always.

3. It WAS certified on this trip that coffee from the venetian food court CAN be an absolute substitute for sleep. :)

4. AU Unconference is a great idea. I absolutely loved the sessions i attended. I missed a few that i really wanted to sit in at, and i HOPE they continue and even expand on it in the following years. I could see the unconferences running the entire week while the classes are going on. I got some great feedback from the attendees in the session on strategies for dealing with multiple users of multiple skill levels all working together, and i've been meaning to post up about it. Ive been a bad boy, and didn't update the AU wiki either. The family Editor discussion Steve Stafford led, had a lot of great theoretical conversation, which i imagine could have gone on for hours. I would have rather enjoyed that. I STILL don't believe in the "super door" family, but then again, i don't agree with the entire tool that is in-place families, and obviously it serves a purpose. :)

In my defense for not having written in almost 60 days!! WHILE all this was going on at AU, i also had a project under a serious time constraint deadline, and i was in the middle of purchasing a house... My first one! Since i usually try to include a lot of pics here (who really wants to read anyway?) ill toss some in. Its a cute little cape, perfect for little me, all by myself. :) There is also a perfect room for the
computer, where i will spend my evenings geeking out with Revit models, as always. Oh the exciting life of a twenty-something, LOL!

I hope the 3 of you that faithfully read (har har) will still check back often. I DID get a lot of worthwhile table discussion material at AU, that id love to hear thoughts on... ALA DWF/RVT, information exchange, and the need and/or desire for what we all wan tout of our Revit models, and why. I can see DWF as the answer to so many peoples different desires from the wondrous file format that is RVT... but we really have to convince the powers that be of the validity of those wishes, or we'll never see the DWF that we (or at least i) want.

In any event, i will be updating again soon with some of these discussions... After one furious weekend of moving, which is coming up this weekend! Any of you within a few hundred miles are welcomed to the party! :)

AU Unconferences- Check it out!

2007-11-02T08:54:00.000-05:00

Im looking forward to a productive unconference about Modeling strategies with more than one Revit modeler in a large project... Its Wednesday afternoon at 4:20 pm, for those of you attending.

Also, there are some killer unconference sessions! I can definetely tell ull be anntending a lot of the others, instead of some of my classes, hehehe.

Here is the schedule so far. (This is not final, i snagged the image from Joseph W's AU Blog (BLAUGI?):

EDIT: The schedule is already out of date. It changes quickly. Heres a link to where it is: http://au.centraldesktop.com/auunplugged/Schedule

TRIG IN REVIT... TAKE 2!

2007-10-24T17:07:00.000-05:00

So if you recall from two posts previous, the issue was this: We needed the angle "Theta" to generate the arc length in the trig formulas. Now, for whatever reason (can anyone efficiently articulate what we call the "Revit behavior"?) we are able to constrain the Reference Lines to the springpoint of the arc, and to the intersection of the center reference plane, and the T reference plane. This flexes perfectly... Right up until we assign Parameter Theta to the angle dim between the ref line and the center ref plane. Once we do that, it tries to hold the value, and prompts us to remove the constraints. Boy, would it be nice if we could make the constraints override a value that isn't derived by any other incidental. So, we needed to derive Theta in some fashion other than with the angle dim.

James quickly realized that he could obtain Theta as follows: The sin of "Half Theta" is equal to 1/2 Chord, divided by Radius, if we look at the triangle produced. (SOH CAH TOA anyone?)hehe). So, having created parameter Half Theta, he used an arcsin function in his formula for Half Theta "=asin((0.5*CHORD) / (RADIUS)) and achieve Half Theta, and obviously he then made Theta = twice Theta. We obviously could have achieved this in one parameter, but Half Theta came about while exploring potential ways around our math problem. Now, we obviously don't need Theta (or Half Theta) to actually be used as a label in the family itself, as I've shown it in the first image, since its being driven by the math, and not by the reference line now.

What a fun refresher about High school Math this has been. Anyone else starting to think they've lost a little bit in our old age? (lol)

We have an answer!

2007-10-22T11:01:00.001-05:00

Dont have time to capture and post it now... But James (the coworker with the original task) has found a way around the Theta Constraint problem...

Can you say "arc sin"....?

Trig family Broken.... :(

2007-10-22T09:27:00.000-05:00

As much as i harp on my constituients to always "Flex them before you load them," i have evidently been a victim of not practicing what i preach. Something isnt working right in the below mentioned family... Any input on this? Im a little heartbroken :(

As you can see, everything flexes perfectly, including the Reference Lines that need to define the angle/paremeter "Theta." However... Once we actually place the Label for Theta, the reference lines become locked in at that angle, and no longer flex with the rest of the family. See below:

It is trying to hold Theta, instead of holding the constraints to the Reference Plane intersections where i have set up the reference lines. So far, ive tried a few workarounds on this, but havent gotten it to perform the way i thought it was...

So were past the hard math, now its back to pesky Revit Constraint headaches! :)

Shoot me an email or a comment if you have any ideas on the matter. Things ive already tried to circumvent:

An itermediate Reference line, dividing theta by 2, in to thetaby2, and constraining those. (Creating an angled EQ toggle). Didnt work, held them even, and held them constant. :(

Nesting the family in to another family, and trying to get Theta in the nested family. Once i constrained ref lines in the parent family, it wouldnt let it flex at all. Owned.

Deriving Theta mathematically and not tying it to the reference lines at all: Circular chain of references. I need theta to derive the arc length, and need the arc length to derive theta.

Freakin constraints! Someone help my wounded pride!

Trigonometry, Revit Parameters, and Scheduling...

2007-10-20T15:13:00.000-05:00

I do regret that there hasnt been much going on in the last month or two that has been worth mentioning in a Revit blog... Thats a byproduct of a few jobs being at the wrap up stage, and a couple others being pretty early on. I havent had to craft up many things... Until yesterday. :)

Someone in the office was tasked with finding a linear distance around an arc, where the arc was not a full semi-circle. Furthermore, scheduling said distance, around several windows. Now, recently, i know there have been several posts on AUGI asking for "list parameters," or parameters that are driven by the geometry, but dont inflict the gemometry. I suppose any parameter works, in that sense... As long as its formulated by other parameters, which is what we did here.

We started out here: Some basic formulas regarding chords, arcs, circles, etc. As we wanted to create a formula for a parameter that would derive the arc length, we realized we would need parameters and formulas to provide the necessary values to calculate the arc length. Distance "t" (length from the arc's springpoint to the arcs center point) would be necessary. Likewise, so would the Chord distance. We would need the central angle (Theta) of the arc itself. Obviously, we would need the Radius.

A few things worth mentioning:

As with all Revit families and formulas, we quickly realized that we didnt need all these for the calc. We needed them to constrain things. T, for instance. If you work your way backwards from our end result, the parameter for Length T is never used... But we had to constrain the Reference Lines endpoints to get angle Theta. To constrain them, we needed value T to adjust correctly with the radius and chord changes.

Parameter "360": We still may not need this one. But in a formula, i couldnt figure out how to type in "degrees" as a unit, so i made a static angle parameter, lol. Chime in if theres a way to type in a value like "35 degrees" directly in a formula, haha.

Parameter "CIRC": Well, this was stupid. Im looking at the notes now, and the purpose of CIRC was to establish the circumference, for use in "ARC LENGTH" but it looks like in haste, i simply typed in the formula for CIRC anyway. So CIRC was irrelevant at that point, but the point is, we needed the circumference, one way or another. (Also, yes, i know i GROSSLY estimated Pi, and i couldve used an actual formula to derive it to more accuracy, but cest la vie.)

In any event, we started deriving the formulas... Heres where i had to call in help: Mind you, i was a big math geek back in the day, and like to THINK i still am. You can see in the circle formulas (which i got from http://www.ajdesigner.com/... thanks for the page, its great!) that they derive arch Length as a fucntion of Theta (in degrees) times the Radius. Anyone else have an issue with this? I couldnt wrap my head around how i multiplied degrees and Length, to come up with a mathemtatical unit (besides degree-inch, lol). So i called in a favor:

My good friend Brian (last name with held)is a Math Specialist at a local school district. He happened to be out at happy hour with some other math teachers. So i got him to hand the phone around the Chili's bar, which his teacher friend (Secondary Education math teacher) reminded me that i would have to convert Theta in to a length, using Pi. More accurately, i could take Theta's proportion to the overall circle (360 degrees), and ise that proportion times the circumference of the circle (CIRC), and i could then get the "length" of the arc length.

In finished form, it looks so simple, as the formulas (obviously) make all the reference planes end up in such a fashion that it looks easy to obtain. Maybe it is for you, i dont know... This took a few minutes for me to figure out, i might be slow, haha.

This brings up a host of other Revit questions that we could discuss based on this issue though:

When deriving parameters for scheduling such things, you have to wonder how exactly such things get scheduled. I asked the individual who asked for help: "You want a linear length, but its an arc that has thickness. So obviously the length is different on the inner radius and the outer. This was particularly a question of interest to me, as my first attempt was based on a material takeoff: If i know the cross sectional area of the profile used (the casing profile), then i could simply get the material takeoff in Volume, and divide it by its area in the Project as a Calculated value. I did this, but the number seemed off. Of course, i dont know where such a calculation would place the length. The inside, the outside, or somewhere in between?

So how do we (as an industry) decide HOW we quantify, WHAT we quantify, and who and what will guide such arbitrary decisions? Obviously some of these decisions are based on the manufacturing principles, and how the manufacturers will want take offs... But even from a simple Revit perspective, how will you reign in everyone making such families, so that all calculations are consistant, if nothing else? Id LOVE your thoughts on the matter!

Pardon the typos and spellcheck. I biked here, and the sun is going down... Ill spellcheck this tonight. :)

A few more images from Revit and the site...

2007-09-06T21:23:00.000-05:00

As i mentioned previously, rendering wasn't in the scope of the work for the project, so (while we called out materials in the CD set) we had not produced any accurender materials inside the Revit model, nor had we gone to any other app for imagery.

Well, i had some downtime this week, and i wanted to take a shot from the hip to see how they would come out. Ive read all the arguments about accurender... Its slower, it looks cartoonish, etc... And i don't disagree with any of that. But, there's no denying (in my opinion) that there is a perfect elegance in NOT having to leave the program, to get the rendering.

On a process level, i look at it like this: Often times i'll work right in the Revit model while i client is standing behind me. Or, we will be in a conference room with a laptop and a projector. Seeing is believing, you know? Sometimes its great to change on the fly, add in a family here and there, and hit the lo-res-go-button so they can get a feel for it before too much time is invested. I know leaps and bounds have been made with the DWG compatibility, but sitting in the conference room and saying "Hang out for ten minutes while i STC, then export to 3D DWG, open up Max, reload the link, THEN set up a camera, and get around to your rendering. Oh, you wanted the window WHERE??? hang on a second, let me go back..."

The other woe i have with these images... The hardscape. I managed a little down the promenade, in the form of RPC trees, and an RVT light fixture that i had modeled for the job anyway. But renderings really show off what consultants modeled on the team, and which ones don't. Right in front of these buildings is a very nicely done canal, with some ornate site work. If we had it modeled, we could show it off... But alas...

I will say, i have great faith in the Development team that a better renderer is on its way. And if it isn't... I'm plenty fine with Accurender for now. The following are all quickies... I spent a coupld of hours on the whole model attaching materials, a few minutes throwing sun angles at it, and let them render for about 10 minutes each (the larger ones).

Here is a shot from the other side of the canal, which isn't shown. Below is a picture of the actual tower, as it stands. The colors are still slightly off, but i didn't spend too long tweaking them... All in all i like this one. I think i may have a colleague try to photograph the site from this spot, so i can PS the canal in place...

Here is an overhead shot of one of the restaurants. This begins my RPC rant: We have a TON of RPC content, but evidently its not compatibly with Revit. I dumped it all in the standard RPC content folder, and went to make a new RPC family, but only the standard 6 or 8 show up. Then i was heartbroken to find out what RPC peeps cost, LOL! I know, i could PS the people in... But you have no idea what a pet peeve it is of mine to go out and come back in... See above, lol. I know, those paver's are terrible. They were a quickie ground plane. If i get time this week, i may actually model some of the 'scape in.

To continue my ramble... These images (not these specifically, but images of 3D models in general) are very important to me on a personal level. When we all got in to architecture, we spent years in school "learning" about the things that thrust us in to the realm of architect/designer:

*Wanting to see things in section

*Wanting to profess how much sleep we didnt get

*Coffee

*Starting over an hour before the deadline after *12 hours straight of work

*Wanting to mesh sections/Plans/Elevations in to one single drawing with abstract construction lines everywere

*Wanting to sketch on garbage

*Demanding sharp pencils (and ill have you know, they laugh at me at the gym... When i go to pick up a pencil to mark my reps, i pick up the entire bin of pencils at once and turn them upside down... They make fun of me now...)

Does anyone see where i'm going with this? lol... I think its so programmed in to us, to understand that wall section means this space has good lighting, or this space has a tight ceiling. And yet, we show plans, and we show elevations, and we show sections... And who EVER sees an architectural creation in plan or elevation? To an extent, i believe there is a language breakdown between the graphical language we've all been taught to speak in, and the language of the space were creating, which is what our clients are after. My favorite times with Revit, have been showing Revit models to a friend of mine who self-proclaims "I have no idea what I'm looking at when i see a plan... at all." Because when i show this person the models, i do it solely with camera views. In a language they can understand... Eyesight. I know 3D models are nothing knew- as face based visualization models have been around for quite some time- but now that they ARE the Construction Documents, they are no longer as easily sacrificed on the lamb of budgeting.

After all... I walk around my apartment with my eyes. I don't have a plan of it with me... Not all the time, anyway. :) Your thoughts on the subject are always welcome. :)

Autodesk University 2007

2007-08-29T09:07:00.000-05:00

I was on the home page for AU07, and i saw this flash animation that said "Schmoozing like a pro," and it made me think: Man, we should all start getting the word out about going to arrange some get together's!

I registered towards the end of last week, along with two of my colleagues from Dal Pos Architects.

This year, in addition to the classes and the lectures, i think it would be great to really mix it up with any of you that will be attending. Certainly, we've all had our struggles in Revit, and we've all come up with fascinating need-based solutions. it would be great to know what others are up to, where their struggles are, and to "share notes" if you will.

I know there is also talk of some extracurricular meetings, that would be great to organize! Steve Stafford has mentioned setting up an Advanced families venue, which i think would be awesome! Joseph Wurcher has mentioned possibly showing Users projects at the Welcoming, which i think would be a great opportunity.

I could see us setting something up for one night on our own, as well. Maybe we could all bring a model to show, and put them up on a wall somewhere with a laptop and a projector? We could do it over a dinner or an after hours thing. If nothing else, it would be great to trade cards and have people to bounce ideas off of when were sitting at our desks the week after, trying to figure out how to model something, and AUGI is having a slow day. We've all been there :) Not to mention, effective ways of sending out the awesome information we get to the rest of the office. Im always looking for better ways to teach! :)

So far, here's what i have going on. Everyone else should post up what time is good, if you want to have a get together of some sort!

MONDAY- I'm arriving at 10am, should be at the venetian by 11ish. The LUG Conference is from 1-5, i believe.

Dinner mtg somewhere on premises...

After 8pm(ish?) is open for whatever...

TUESDAY- Just Reg classes so far.

WEDNESDAY- Just reg classes so far.

THURSDAY- Reg Classes until 4pm

4:30-5:20- Titian 2204- AU Unconfered- Multiple Modeling Strategies

FRIDAY- I think I'm leaving Friday after the sessions, although that's not set in stone yet.

Ill update this as things progress and/or get set up. If you're interested in any kind of a group get together, post up! :)

Ways to contact me:

Email: arm@dalpos.com

ARMaller@gmail.com

Skype: arm@dalpos.com

AIM: Roadspoet

MSN: armDPA@hotmail.com

Pics of Model / Project continued...

2007-07-28T12:42:00.000-05:00

The Food Court. :) The Food Court was fun to model in Revit, as it came about pretty late in the project. It originally wasn't in this location, and it looked nothing like this. As you can see, the FC originated from one of the typical Canopy Concourses. I think it was a great example of what Revit can do. Typically, when drafting in AutoCAD, i would have just done a "Save as" and ripped in to it. With a phased model, i was slowly turning the model back in time, before making the alterations

Another fun aspect (for me, in a masochistic way) was the floor tiling in this area. While arranging the floor tiles and the pattern around the GFRC's, we made good use of Revit and HatchKit. We assembled the tile patterns in Hatchkit, and modeled the tiles in as floors, to see how the patterns would mesh across the length of the Food Court. The real photograph doesn't show it, because they had the tiles covered up, but they followed the modeled tile pan almost to the 'T', only deviating by splitting a few tiles to compensate for an EJ, and in one other area where 2 rows of 4" tiles had to be made in to a single row, plus two rows of half tiles, to get the extra joint space.

While on site, i was checking out the FC, and someone saw me with the tile drawing, and they complemented us on it, saying it made laying out the tiles very easy for them. HatchKit was a life saver for this, with Revit. I wasn't patient enough to figure out the txt file for making the tile.pat's. HatchKit was great, and paid for itself in less than an hour of use, imho. If its drafting tools within the program get updated in the new release to be a LITTLE more friendly, i think it will be a huge asset. Currently its lacking a few things like Circular lines, and the snap feature is a little awkward. Still WELL worth the hassle.

*(Here is the Food Court with the seating installed...)

Here is a shot from the wings, where the actual vendors are. (My left side is to them, but there wasn't much to see there yet).

Its tough to see it all, as they didn't have power yet...

You can get the idea here... BTW, parametric Families and scheduling FOR THE WIN, when it comes to something like Seating. A chair in a table family (shared), plus a parametric Bar that automatically adds stools and counts them as the bar gets dragged longer... Such simple little tools that make seating counts so much easier. I know this can also be accomplished with an Area plan and a Calc. value (as shown at AU06), but we had the furniture selected, so why not ...

Here's a shot of the typical Corner Tower from up on the roof. Nothing exciting going on here, but this made me wonder about my other post on "Punchlisting with the Revit Model." This entire project made me think about that, especially as we get in to the concept of a revit model for the LIFE cycle of a building, and not just for construction. For that to work, i believe its important to have an accurate model when the building is completed. Its a minor issue, that the Access door got placed on the opposite side of the tower as was called for in the plans, but it gets me to wondering if there isn't a better way to document these changes in the field, other than writing them out in horribly scribbled shorthand, only to return home, retype them, and then tear through the model updating things to their as-built condition.

I know the better answer is right in front of our faces, i just haven't seen it yet. Between our export and import capabilities, and the API, there's got to be a better way.

I have a bunch more, but i haven't gotten all the model images yet. Its just more of the same though, so ill stop, hehe.

Here's the final shot from the site... Its the existing Mall next door, part of which was a part of this phase, and the piece you're looking at is the entire NEXT phase of construction, which we just wrapped up the Revit model for. That is what the Mall used to look like, with a normal roof over the concourse. (That's just the

temporary wall where they already demo'd a wing of the mall, however). Photo take from the roof of the new building next door, part of the phase included with all the pics above...

Here's the same area from the model. That line in the roof right by the Canopy End Wall, that's where the temporary wall is in the real photo. We used Phasing on this one... Worked great, until the model got too big for some of our stations to handle it. We learned a lot from it, and i cant wait for the next one.

Lots to go still! :)

Pics of the Project / Model finally...

2007-07-28T11:15:00.000-05:00

So in my last post i was getting ready to head down to Orlando for the punch list... Lemme tell you, it was HOT. It had to be 100 degrees, and we were up on the white roofs, yow! Needless to say, i came back tan. :) I got some great shots of the mall, even though heavy rains caused some delays on site during the last few weeks...

After coming home, i took a quick shot at approximating some of the pictures i took from our Revit model. I was personally surprised, when i arrived there, at how much it looked JUST like the model. When i used to do AutoCAD documents, i used to always think the projects looked different... But maybe that's because i never saw the projects in 3d beforehand then. Flat 2D elevations are a pet peeve of mine. A necessary thing in Construction Documents, perhaps... But looking at presentation images in the flat 2D realm... gah! Dont get me started. :)

I withheld the rendered images, as it wasn't in our scope, so we didn't have proper materials and textures applied. I have a few renderings where everything is simply a couple of soft colors, so the clients could see it in something other than wireframe... But its a lot of time to get all the images rendered.

Here is the Vending Alcove the occurs at a few places throughout the project.

We modeled these a few different ways, as the project went on. A few of them looked better than the image represented from our model, but this is the actual location in the picture.

Ive discovered modeling areas like this just takes some good communication throughout the project team. IE- If the wall is changing finishes, something in the wall itself should change. Either split face and paint, or use a different wall type (with a different finish material with the appropriate surface pattern, etc.

For the most part though, it worked well. The one pictured was much better explained in the documents, with Detail Lines/Items showing the differentiation in materials, which is lacking in modeled items here. But, i wanted to approximate the camera angle as best i could, so i gave up the Detail items...

Here is a shot of a typical Concourse taken from up on the roof. The GFRC's are missing from the End Wall of this particular location, I'm guessing because they still need to get the generators out of there... In the far left you can see the light fixtures mounted to light up the canopy roof. We modeled these lights working with the Electrical Engineer to verify that they couldn't be seen when standing in the upright position (not shown). We didn't put them in every canopy in the model, so they aren't shown in the modeled image. We used the widest concourse to project a worst case scenario for visibility...

This particular Canopy also represents an Expansion Joint where the Renovated Existing Building meets part of the new addition, which were different projects. As that's the case, this also represents the joint between two of our Models. We used Revit's Phasing capabilities where possible, but in this case the scopes of work remained completely separate, and simply juxtaposed.

We modeled in the structure for the canopy as it was an architectural feature. Our structural engineers were also working in a 3D model using RISA3D, but unfortunately this was not a collaborative 3D project. We transmitted documents and coordinate through 2D export to DWG. Hopefully next time we can take advantage of some better methodology... I would have loved to have brought their model and ours in to Navisworks Jetstream...

Here is a shot of a typical corner condition at one of the Concourses. This tower assembly was both a great learning exercise, and a great opportunity to play around with new features in RAC 2008 (near the end of the project, haha). I built one of these towers immediately after first learning Revit, and until "Wall by face of mass" occurred to me, making the chamfered wall corners was a pain! DOH!

This tower condition occurs about 10 times throughout the 5 Revit models. Once we upgraded to RAC 2008, i took the opportunity to use the new Group features to assemble this tower in its own RVT file, as a group. This brings up another interesting point (for me, anyway):

The groups, and the ability to transfer large assemblies built out of System Families is great... As long as all of your System families are congruent across multiple files. As i mentioned in one of my first posts, this troubles me. If i have a wall assembly in each project, that are the same physically, but are named differently, this becomes a nightmare (in my opinion). 2 or 3 different versions of the same walls, which generate Warnings if they have the same Type Mark, plus its redundant work to update things. So now, i place the Group in to a neutral blank file, and then also copy and paste the wall types and other system families from both projects (or all projects involved) and make sure the items in the group are appropriate for the project I'm shoving it in to. It seems tedious, but well worth it from a file maintenance perspective. In the last phase of the project, after the CD's were done, we swapped from Stl/Mtl Stud to Tilt-up Concrete, and not having duplicate wall types made it much more efficient of a change.

Continued in next post, because the formatting of this entry gets tweaked everytime i paste a picture, lol...

Revit Model and Punch List...

2007-07-07T15:34:00.000-05:00

So im flying down to Orlando Monday, and ill be there through Thursday. I'm going down with a few other people to complete a punch list on the project I've been working on for about 18 months.

As far as it pertains to Revit, I'm hoping to grab a lot of pictures so that i can compare with the Revit model I've been a part of creating, i think it will be great to see the side by sides, even if we didn't Render our model with accurate color schemes for the real project.

Then, i got to thinking about the actual punch list, as myself and the crew going down got to talking about organizing what items we need to check. Now, I've got my Toshiba Tecra M7 Tablet laptop, with Revit on it, that ill be taking with me. Obviously we aren't all taking computer hardware with us in to the field for 3 days, but it got me thinking:

First, a disclaimer- I love technology, obviously. Ive had a lot of conversations, however, hinging around the subject matter of technology as more of a liability than an asset. RE: What happens to our overly-connected-lifestyles when/if the technology craze explodes? But i digress, its here for now, and I'm enjoying it.

Anyway, the model and our Punch list: As we move on and on with revit, I've been trying to incorporate more features that i pick up from the AUGI boards and elsewhere in to our implementations. Obviously, Filters are a great tool. In my latest Model for the Orlando project, I've been working in RAC 2008, which I'm loving so far. A few simple filters have made the documentation a breeze. I needed to space plan for a few rooms that are "by others, at a later date," and filters were great for this. No confusing the Contractors with the information (Filter on, set to not visible), but its there for dimensioning in working views where i need it (Filter on, Graphic overridden to Hidden line Style). Its amazing what you can do with a simple entry in to the comments field of every object to read "Others".

We have a similar filter for Fire Rating: Graphic Override Filter for objects with a Fire Rating, and its a nice Plan to make sure our Fire rating Envelope is everywhere it needs to be.

This got me to thinking about this weeks trip: It could obviously be done with a simple Parameter field or two, such as (yes/no type: "PUNCH LIST OK" and text type: "DESCRIPTION"). I could walk the job site, broad stroke selecting items and checking the yes/no in their properties, and typing in the descriptions for faults as we moved along. A few simple views set up with Filters to only show the objects with a "no" in the field, and a few schedules, and we have a quick way to document the Punch List in our model. (To be specific, i would probably use a filter to NOT show the objects with a YES in the field... This way you'll get any objects you missed during the visit/data entry).

I'm sure the API could make this even slicker, because lets be honest. A tablet running on battery with a 200 MB Central File opened is going to last about how long... 2 hours tops? Plus, selecting objects with a tablet pen in the heat and accessing the properties dialogue could get cumbersome. But i can imagine it! Maybe the objects to be punch list-ed get certain parameters, to be scheduled, and maybe its gets exported to some 3rd party simpleton software. If you wanted to dumb it down, I'm sure Excel could handle it... But id prefer it be something ala PDF / DWF viewer, so you could scan the model or plans while you worked. You select with the tablet pen, and click the "okay" tool button, and it marks those items as completed, and at the end of the day, through an API function it back loads that parameter data back in to the model.

It goes without saying, i am a very lousy code writer. If i wasn't, id try it. I'm sure someone out there could do this with ease though, its not very complex at all. Imagine how much easier to convey what work is still not completed. Open a 3D view, activate the filter for "PUNCH LIST 07-09-2007" and see whats on the screen. Send a few images and a schedule down to the field...

Alright, enough from me. Long posts, no images... that's no fun! :)

Classes at Autodesk University...

2007-06-12T20:34:00.000-05:00

I attended AU2006 at The Venetian in las Vegas, and everything about the experience was great. I met a lot of great people, loved the atmosphere and the energy of the presentations, and i was and am looking forward to going back this year.

Its been a big year for me, having just started with Revit 18 months ago. ive come a long way, and have been helping people along in our office as best i can, as well as fighting hard to (try) and get a Revit program started at the Local universities.

Much to my disappointment, i will not be making a Lecture debut at AU07 this November. I had a couple of proposals in, as i just love to teach and i find the methodlogies surrounding BIM and Revit to be extremely fun conversation pieces to discuss. Still, i can imagine the number and quality of the proposals from very talented people had to be extremely high, and so i am greatly looking forward to seeing the selections when they are released.

I am absoultely hoping that if i cant be there in an teaching capacity, that i can make a convincing argument to go back this year, and sponge from the best of the best. :)

Congrats to everyone who had a proposal accepted, i cant wait to see the class lists. :)

Revit in Academia: Take 2

2007-05-31T20:57:00.000-05:00

Another local architect and myself (both adament Reviteers) have been trying to persuade a School of Architecture to introduce Revit to the student body, as part of the curriculum. I remember the (not too long ago) CAD class i took at UB, with AutoCAD Polyline extrusions, exporting to Max, and rendering... A lot of work for just an image, nevermind intelligent data. At first whisper of it, the Schools we approached were (sadly) not extremely enthused about the idea, to say the least. Understandbaly so, as it may appear that we were two people wishing to promote our software of choice in a University setting. The letter below is a correspondence i sent back to the university, hoping to pursuade them. As ive said in the past, for me its not just about more intelligent Construction documents, i believe we can change the way work gets done in the field, and i think the first thing necessary for us to do is spread the word. Here is the primarily unedited (my email didnt like copy to clipboard, so the spacing of words had to be fixed) communique:

I know this corresponence is lengthy (and believe me, this is the edited version!) but i would greatly appreciate it if you could spare me a few minutes of your day.

In recent years, I have had the pleasure of working with many graduates from the Syracuse University's School of Architecture. Since relocating back to the CNY area almost 2 years ago, I've been immersed with many of your graduates, as they educate me through the early years of my career in architecture.

Having graduated in 2005 from the University at Buffalo's School of Architecture, my time in the field thus far has opened many doors, affording me the capabilities to work with a myriad of new technologies that have asserted themselves as placements in theArchitectural industry. I have been working with Dal Pos Architects,working on advancing our use of the Building Information Model throughout the architectural process. Through my exciting travels at DPA, I met (remaining nameless here), an Architect who shares my passion for the changes that Revit can bring to the field of architecture.

These changes are best described in Stephen Kieran's and James Timberlake's Refabricating Architecture. (Find it here)

They delve in to a process where:

Architects are no longer limited to the fragmentary representation of physical ideas; we can now fully pre-form them. This composite understanding of architecture before it actually becomes substance offers a deep understanding of the elements of architecture that affect our daily lives. Refabricating architecture leads towards a new humanism. (Kieran and Timberlake xii)

While their book speaks of the specifics as related to the manufacturing industry, their point is driven home in the comparison they make of modern architects and architecture, to that of Brunelleschi and St Maria del Fiore: "The master builder was a person who combined the roles of architects, builder, engineer, and scientist... Brunelleschi was such a man." In a chapter-long diatribe about the current state of affairs, they go on to discuss how our current industry trend to try catching up to more advanced industries have removed the architects from many of the decision making roles, proclaiming that there is an "art vs.commodity" battle taking place, where commodity is the ease of interoperabilitybetween all of those involved in the AEC industry, and where we (as DESIGNERS, as architects) have the disconnect with the rest of the industry, because of our antiquated methodologies.

It is my contention, that (while only a tool to communicate design intent and design iteration) THIS is where the capabilities of a software like Revit can put architects and designers as a whole back into their roles as Master Builders. With the capability to accurately convey the roughest design iteration to everyone involved in the process, Revit puts the Master Builder in the middle of the entire driving force that creates architecture, making US the translators(not only of OUR designs), but of everyone else who's designs will come to interact with ours. When the simplest of forms and designs can start generating intelligent data, which can then drive our consultants and collegues to make educated decisions WITH us rather than AGAINST us, our collaborated final product can achieve a higher degree of closeness to our original intent. Software as a whole is generally seen as a tool of efficiency, of production, and of profit. While Revit may be these things, I have seen its potential to communicate, and to inherently break down a wall that I personally believe exists between designers and clients: That wall being an education we have received to visualize and conceptualize a space, while trying to communicate it to an individual without those capabilities.

It is for the above listed reasons, why I have a great passion for seeing Revit make it in to a Higher Education's program in a School of Architecture. I have (enthusiastically) discussed this with (name of other enthusiastic Reviteer), and I have told her that I would be willing to teach such a class, if such an opportunity were to be made available and if the students were to display interest. I am aware that Syracuse University has the seats of Revit licenses available, and that some of your gifted students are already using it for some of their projects. (I have also had the joy to work with a few of them already, and see some of the magic they have made with it!)

I would love to see this come to fruition at the University. If nothing else, I implore you to put it to the student body. I would be more than willing to bring a presentation and a short lecture (an hour or so) on its effects in the DESIGN profession, (and not just the production profession) to the university, so that the students could get a feel for what kind of class we could theoretically give to them. Iwould love to hear back from you, if such a presentation and/or such a class would be of any interest to you. Please feel free to contact me at anytime regarding this matter.

Im happy to say that shortly after distributing varying copies of this letter to a few universities (honest variations, i havent worked with students from all the schools, so i had to edit it, lol...) we actually had a bit of positive feedback! The professor at the School of Architecture is interested in sitting down to discuss a potential class, and a professor from the school of Engineering has said he would attend as well, if it would be beneficial. I think it would be GREAT to get the students to do one assignment with collaborating somehow... The School of E here uses RISA-3D... All in all, it may end up never coming to fruition, but im happy about it. At least tonight i know we tried, and at least a couple of people will listen. :)

Revit Plan vs RCP Visibility... Do you want both?

2007-05-15T14:40:00.000-05:00

Another short note i sent in using the Product Feedback page at:

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=1109794

I may be the only one wishing for this, but its something that seems (in my very limited knowledge) easy to accomplish.

The Visibility conditions for geometry in families-

Plan/RCP
Elev.
3D
Plan/RCP when cut

These all work very well, but Plan and RCP would be much better if they were separated. Often times i build items that i would like to see in the RCP, but not in the Floor plan (Light sconces, some generic models, Louvered awnings over doors, etc.) and i am not able to, unless by chance the item is cut by the cut-plane of the RCP.
Then i have to spend a few hours explaining these shortcomings to the Project managers, haha.
Also, i have a door with transom windows, and because of the transom it is cut by both plan and RCP. This makes the symbolic lines for the door swing show up on the RCP as well. Now, i can go in to VG and disable them, but with 6-8 RCP's in the project (plus enlarged) this sometimes takes a large amount of time. Also, i may not want the frames and such to show. If there Plan and RCP boxes were separate, i could affront this much easier in the family editor during content creation.

Revit, Random, and different platforms...

2007-05-10T21:40:00.000-05:00

One thing i always "ASSumed" about 3D modeling and Consultant Coordination, was that in some way shape or form, everyone would "see" your model, and could derive object locations based on it. So when i heard that (for some reason), we had to provide actual coordinates for a floor opening that is (somewhat) random in design, i was curious. "Aren't they working with our model overlayed?" "Well yes, but..."

I digress. Its not the point anyway. A couple of people in the office began wondering how an object in Revit would report coordinates relative to a structural grid. Granted, the Spot Dim. tool reports coordinates, but our structural grid was not aligned with the coordinate system (and we couldn't adjust, there was another coord. system, etc...) So anyway...

My solution was a simple one, its been done many times. We use Parameters to Drive geometry, so i thought id just reverse engineer a family, so the geometry could drive the Parameters, giving a dimension. Its NOT a 100% intelligent tool, and its certainly not "user-proof," but i don't believe we'll ever be "User proof" :-)

All the family entailed, was two Crosshairs, which i just made from Specialty Equipment Families to be consistent. (The whole assembly is a Spec. Equip. family so it can be scheduled...) In any event, the Distance Parameters have to be shared, obviously... That way they can be reported in a schedule.

Where its UNintelligent, is in the smaller crosshair. Ideally, we could intelligently have it report where it lies, but i dont know of a way to accomplish this. So the accuracy of this tool rests in someone aligning the smaller crosshair to a common "origin" from which to report. With Revit's Multiple Alignment tool, this takes about two seconds. :) The DIMS go to the reference planes, which the Crosshair is locked to. In the project, this gives us pull tabs, which are great for this application.

For ease of use, i prefer to insert them and copy them around so they're already on the "random" points i need coordinates for. You can put them on the "origin" first, and stretch/align them, but then you have a number of points in different locations to deal with. Since they're all connected to the same Critical Origin, i like to get the random points out of the way when i drop them in. Then i can multiple align to the "origin". (I'm using the term in quotes because its not an origin, its just a base point... Just wanted to clarify). the little "legs" hanging out in space are what need to be aligned to a common point. Because of the pull tabs, you can literally just "align" with the Crosshair.

There are the pull tabs, if you choose to go that route... I prefer the align tool for this application, but i can see why it may not be ideal. The align tool is tough if your object isn't parallel with the Crosshair, so i was using a Component that was just an empty crosshair, that i placed on all the Floor Edges ahead of time. Again, not a perfect solution, as it requires of you to accurately pick the points to be located and scheduled.

I think a better solution could be had of those Spot Coordinates... I don't believe we can schedule them, but if we could... Wow, that could go places. Calculated values accounting for the grid orientation shift and/or the "origin" in use... And it would all stay live... BUT, you'd still have to clock the points. So I'm not sure its possible to eliminate us from the game. I guess we all get to keep our jobs today. :) So anyway, i put a bunch of them in, and did the multiple align to the two grids I'm using as my Benchmark.

I have to admit... After a few years at UB doing Ink on Mylar of obscure objects, part of me wanted to print this... for no practical use. But alas, save a tree, hit Print Screen, lol.

Those are all the markers after having the crosshair aligned to the "origin." About ten minutes of work, then i tagged them. That took a while, because we cant specify in the family, WHERE the tag goes in, so it defaults to the center of the family... Which makes me cry in this instance. I had to move the tags, which also is a liability in the fidelity of the model... But, since the coordinates and the schedule will always be right, its a visual mis-cue, if anything.

In the family, i put in a Visibility Parameter for the Connecting Line, so i could shut them off in the end. Here are the markers, with the lines disabled. Pretty simple, really.

Here's the schedule with the values reported. Some of them are horrible numbers (Rays rule for precision...), but that's what it actually is, right? Id like to play around with something similar in principle, but much bigger in design. Maybe take something like one of the Morphosis Buildings, and try breaking it down.

Gehry Tech.'s Digital Project is great at documenting complex relationships, where structure is based on form, which is based on some mathematical algorithm... But one has to wonder: What happens in a case like this, where someone ELSE'S software, that DOESN'T read the formulas, needs values for location off something like that? I liked this exercise for that reason alone... Its easy to say CAD standards are heading by the way side, and Schedules are live, and information now has to be displayed and conveyed in a fashion that doesn't compromise the integrity of our models... But with ArchiCAD, Revit, DP, RISA3D, Solidworks, and on and on and on... There is obviously a communication breakdown, save for things like IFC (which i know little about at this point). So what do we have to look forward to, in terms of breaking down information in to values everyone can appreciate? Because at the end of the day, I'm betting that a gorgeous 3D model isn't turning in to a building unless the Structural guy knows where to put the Steel. :-)

Bentley Architecture?

2007-05-01T15:34:00.000-05:00

I haven't gotten a chance to even DL the trial yet, but I'm going to. Its based on Microstation, i suppose, since you must have the latter to try out the former. Ive never used either, but in the spirit of staying Objective about Revit I'm going to Download it this weekend.

Granted, i haven't spent a great deal of time with the various platforms I've used... But I've used a few, and i prefer it that way. So far I've been the happiest and most successful with Revit, for a number of reasons. Yet, having been down other roads always offers perspective, and from it, appreciation for the things we have. :)

Anyone try Bentley Architecture yet?

Additive Information... And the Human Implication.

2007-05-01T13:42:00.000-05:00

I'm working on an Egress Plan on Revit, and awhile back i took my best shot at automating it. For this particular job, we are taking the SF, calling 90 percent sales, 10 percent stock, and calculating the number of exits based on number of occupants, based on the SF.

Now, it was fairly simple to do, until i decided i wanted a check in place in case i didn't have the correct number of exits. This wasn't difficult, more than irritating to set up. And in the end, while it works, every person must now know how it works: Exit tags by doors are really Area Tags, that way the value of Door Capacity can be a property of the Area. This lets a string of formulas and calculated values all stem from the area of the "Area", which works nicely.

There is a schedule on our drawing sheet, that only shows up if some of the values are not correct, warning you to go to your automated schedule to check the exits and such. This was a great idea i got from Steve Stafford. (Works great Steve!).

This method hasn't let me down yet, unless.... I simply never define an "Area." Maybe there is a space that was "Area 2c03", but somewhere along the way it got bisected by a demise wall, and the origin for said Area is on one half. Well, if i never place an "Area" entity in the other half, all of the calculations are moot, yes? Depending on what platform you work in (I'm in Revit obviously, but that isn't the point of this post) there may be options, depending on how different platforms work. Ours treats Areas and Rooms as objects, and they have to be placed.

This instance aside, it got me thinking about the subject of Object Omission: BIM, 3D modeling, Live scheduling, yadda yadda... They do wonderful things for us. But along the same lines of garbage in garbage out, what happens when its NOTHING in = ________ out?

I'm not sure its far off, but i DO wonder: With everything that used to be done longhand, and everything that isn't now, when is the time coming when smarter programs like Revit can tell us when we completely forget something? Already, if you try to fill out an application online, and you miss a text field, they will not let you proceed. I could see us building enough intelligence in to a program like Revit that it knows you've...

*placed the components to establish a space.... But you didn't include a way in. (How DO you get in those rooms we model and forget doors? LOL)

*Defined a space with geometry, but never with a "space" object (Room, area, etc...)

I know there are already Programming Programs (haha) out there... Trilligence Affinity comes to mind... That can establish the "Space objects" and criteria ahead of time, before the geometry takes form... Is this the start of a program that can warn us when we simply forget to complete something? I'm very interested to see... So far we've been able to schedule everything, and calculate anything.... But we cant do much with nothing, can we? Share your thoughts...

DESIGN OPTIONS... Is it just me? Or do you guess what to include?

2007-04-24T14:59:00.000-05:00

The following is just another thought i had during a frustrated moment, while trying to add an object to a Design Option. I know for reasons like this many professionals hate Hosted Families, but i believe they are there for a reason, and love them. They make moving walls and the like very easy. They KILL me, however, when i need to insert a wall in to a design option. The same is true for Wall Sweeps, etc. What do you think? read on...

Design Options - Wonderfully powerful tool! I use them all of the time, for showing my clients different variations of facades for Retail work.
One thing i would LOVE to see chnged (as it would save me literally hours), is being able to place elements in an Option, which host elements int he main model. I understand why we cant (i could delete it in the option...), so maybe if i TRY to place it in an option, instead of telling me i cant, it should ask "do you want to place all hosted objects in the option as well?"
This would save me HOURS. I use a lot of Hosted objects(wall hosted families, wall sweeps, walls attached to roofs (top or base), and while i love design options, they are sometimes lengthy (time wise) to initiate, because i have to guess and be sure to get anything with a relationship to an object, or it will not go in to the Option.
I have 2 window awnings that MIGHT have to be deleted, so i want them in the Options right now. They are wall hosted. So i cannot insert them without getting the wall as well, which means the wall sweep (Cornice and base) which is continuous around the building. That means needing all 4 walls, with all 30 doors, every wall mounted light (in between all the doors), etc.
In the end, because i cannot mentally track which items i need to grab, i will end up simply deleting the awnings, and putting them back later.
An option to automatically "would you like to include all related hosted elements?" would save me hours, and able me to use this tool with the utmost in efficiency, something i already love about the Program. :)

Why we need Track Changes

2007-04-19T09:38:00.000-05:00

Track Changes:

We need the capability, in my opinion. Have you used it? In Acrobat and Microsoft Word? I use it when im proofreading peoples papers for classes or for work. The beauty of Revit is it updates things automatically. But that beauty is killed when we have to chase down all the automated changes by hand, to mark them as changed, during the Revision period. Not to mention, getting back in line with my original post, what happens to keeping track of changes youve made, if and when we ever get away from a standard set of documentation? Suppose hypothetically, that im leading a team of ten. No sheets in a document set. Instead, we have hyperlinked files, some showing Axons, some showing details, some showing plans, etc. Its ahrd to imagine it not being "sheets," but try. Now, if its hard to track revisions NOW, when we have standard sheet layouts, what will happen if and when we have to intrinsically "know" all the fancy knwe views we have? Already Revit lets up put 3D views on sheets. Well, everytime someone puts a 3d view of a building on a sheet, do you remember to cloud it AND the plan AND the elevation AND the section? It seems restricting, that a program lets us avoid hitting every sheet for change, but we have to check each sheet on our own, in case it needs a cloud or change tag. Let me know what you think?

The reasoning is as follows: Where Revit is great, is making change. The entier model updates at once, its amazing. BUT, we tend to use a lot of Working Views, that arent in the drawing set. I may make a change on "Floor Plan - Aaron Working", and it may actually "revise" 4 Floor Plans and Elevations in the Drawing set. Even with this automation, i have to manually look at each drawing, to see if there is something i need to cloud. Its not feasible to Cloud things automatically, but maybe it could have a dialogue that lists what VIEWS have had things change?Maybe they just highlight in the Project Browser until someone right clicks and says > Revision noted? The beauty of this would be clouding could be done much faster at the end of the Revision. Right now, we spend hours again, checking to make sure we have Clouded and tagged all the right sheets.

Arrays Less than 2?

2007-04-18T20:05:00.000-05:00

NOTE: Nice... I got the layout adjusted to 820 pix wide. If you use revit, i cant imagine you work on less than 1024x768 anyway...

Recently someone on AUGI was looking to array an element in a family, but the array kept collapsing when the value got pushed down to less than 2. It is unfortunate that Revit will not "store" a dimension between the first element and the hypotehtical second (in case the second goes away) but cest la vie.

This is obviously treaded ground already, and there are much better explanations for how this works. But below is a quickie i used to explain it on AUGI:

Okay, ill go through the steps of what i did, and you can try it unless someone else has an example for you to reverse engineer. Sorry about that, but my home computer is demo version, it wont save.In IMAGE 1:

1. I made Family 1, just the one piece sweep.

2. I made Family 2, and loaded family 1 in to it. Family 1 is then arrayed, and i put in aparameter for COUNT and DISTANCE. I then assigned the param. COUNT to the label of the array. I dimension the First blade to the second, and assign the label DISTANCE to that dimension. (i went bottom to bottom...)

3. I loaded both families in to Family 3, and placed them both, one on top of the other. The parameters are then set as follows, as shown:

F1V: (Yes/No instance) This will control Family 1 visibility. For the formula, input COUNT = 1. Go to Family 1 that you placed, and go to its properties. Click the gray area at the end of the Visible field, and tie it to F1V.

F2V: (Yes/No instance) This will control Family 2 visibility. For the formula, input COUNT > 1. Go to Family 2 that you placed, and go to its properties. Click the gray area at the end of the Visible field, and tie it to F2V.

Now, make a parameter DISTANCE (length) and ARRAYCOUNT (integer). Go to the Properties of Family 2, and click the gray box at the end of the COUNT field, and tie it to ARRAYCOUNT. Also tie DISTANCE in Family 2 to DISTANCE in Family 3.

Make the Formula for ARRAYCOUNT the following: if (Count>1, Count, 2)What that is doing, is saying if the Value input (for COUNT) is greater than 1, use the value input. if its not greater than 1, use the value of 2, so the family doesnt collapse on itself. This wont matter, because the visibility parameter F2V will make Family 2 not present anyway.

**Peek at image 3. It demonstrates how the if statement, and the visibility parameters will behave. If the value is 1 (for COUNT), the if statement will save the arrays geometry by defaulting ARRAYCOUNT to 2. It will not display Family 2 in the project, so this is irrelevant.

When COUNT is greater than 2, Family 2 shows up with the actual value, and Family 1 is hidden.

4. Load Family 3 in to your project.

Now, in the properties of Family 3 (the actual "FAMILY"), you have a COUNT and a DISTANCE. Through the nested families, the ARRAYCOUNT parameter will make whichever one visible that should be, given the conditions.

If you decided to SHARE the families 1 and 2 (under fmaily catagories and settings, at the bottom) when you loaded them in to 3, (see image IN PROJECT).Both Family 3 AND Family (whichever) will schedule if you made them shared. In my opinion, i wouldnt, because Family 3 is your "actual family" and 1 and 2 are just necessary evils. (Thats more an argument about what youre doing though...)

Also bear in mind, much like Parameters DISTANCE and COUNT, any other parameters you wish to be flexible from the project will have to be nested. For instance, if you want to control the width of the Louvers...Family 1 Parameter WIDTH and Family 2 Parameter WIDTH must both be tied to FAMILY 3 Parameter WIDTH through their properties dialogue, before you load Family 3 in to a project. Because Family 3 is the real family.I hope this makes sense...

Autodesk Product Feedback 04-17-2007

2007-04-17T15:02:00.000-05:00

I don't know about you guys, but as i stated below... Now that i have the product feedback submittal address, id like to keep up with telling Adsk what i think works great and what i don't. In my opinion, no one has any right to complain about tools lacking, unless they have spoken up.

I'm just putting up a submittal i sent them, about the Imported Objects tab of the VG dialogue. Its a bit ambiguous, in my opinion. We should be organized ourselves, without relying on the tool, but it wouldn't hurt to be a little clearer... :)

"VG dialogue - Imported Objects tab.
The VG dialogue is for Items in a specific view, yet imported items appear in the Imported Objects Tab, even if they have been imported using "This view only" in another view.
This makes isolating imports and keeping track of which consultants drawings are imported on which views difficult, and time consuming.
I may import a Site plan from the civil engineer for a key plan, and then in another view for a Composite Floor Plan. If I've used "This view only" for both views, i get confused often, when going to replace them with updated versions. For the key plan it may not matter, but for the floor plan it does. It is ambiguous figuring out which instances are placed where, if they all show up in every VG dialogue.
Also, when items are not displaying, it is hard to tell if someone has adjusted the VG settings, or if the imported object has been deleted. If someone goes in to the Comp. floor plan i mentioned, and does not see the Site plan, they do not know if the import has even deleted, as it is still in the VG dialogue (from the key plan). So they tend to import another one, bogging down our Revit models unnecessarily.
I don't want this to be a negative submittal, so ill say you guys are doing great! RAC 2008 is wonderful! : )"

Updates! : )

2007-04-15T22:45:00.000-05:00

I finally got to finish the "Methods...." thoughts i had the other night, in Post 2.

In post 3, i alluded to losing a communique that i wanted to share here. I contacted AutoDesk, and im HOPING they can retrieve it for me. Someone told me they were looking in to it, and would let me know. Ill take a second to say thanks to the people at the Factory... :)

Third... Man, this layout annoys me. I like the dark color (i have sensitive eyes), but the narrow body bothers me. Ill try to fix it...

THE WARNING DIALOGUE....

2007-04-12T08:25:00.000-05:00

Tools > review warnings. Its big. For model performance, its huge. This may be ar aguable point with everyone, but numbers dont lie. I had three models i was overseeing, and when i did a Compact Central File, they werent shrinking down like normal. Then i went on a weeklong Warning Dialogue Cleanout (resolving the issues), and the results are below:

RVT BEFORE AFTER
"Model 1": 253MB 104MB
"Model 2": 269MB 113MB
"Model 3": 214MB 121MB

Mind you, they were much larger before, becuase they didnt seem to compact. BUT, maybe there is a correlation? Do outstanding issues being checked for resolution by the program keep it from compressing itself? Anyway, the team of 6 people unanimously felt a performance increase after the fact.

This got me to thinking... The review warnings dialogue is obviously important, but is cumbersome to use. Its a pain to get in and out of. I had some thoughts on this, and submitted them using the link http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=1109794 to autodesk.

I was about to post the message here, with my ideas, since it took awhile to type. Then i realized (just now) that by copying and pasting that link, i lost the contents of the message that i had copied from my communique to them. Nice. Maybe i can get it from the history, or maybe they will respond. Ill post back...

Does a method to the madness count?

2007-04-11T12:43:00.000-05:00

I can recall fondly, back in my days working with AutoCAD, i was pretty confident (arrogant) that i had a faster method of drawing than some of the people i worked with. I used "fence trim" while they clicked individual lines, i would array while they would offset and offset, id do this vs theyd do that... And in the end, the end result was always the same. We had all drawn the same door, the same wall, the same window.

So it didnt matter, that i used P-line, and they made 4 lines, then used p-line>join. We both ended up with the same p-line.

Now, in an object oriented environment, I'm left wondering how we bridge the gap with the fact that the "how" might matter now. Objects have information, behavioral tendencies, scheduling criteria.... Objects have implications.

So, when a particular element is in need of modeling, what repercussions lie in wait for a team of three, where one person elects for an out of place family, one person elects for an in place family, and one person elects for a combination of wall sweep and line based component, with some drafted lines in elevation?

I'm discovering that it is imperative that the work be fairly close to uniform, for reasons of efficiency as well as performance. If all three members on my imaginary team are modeling in different fashions, then I've bestowed ANOTHER task on them come revision time: Autopsy. Assuming Wall-Sweep-with-line-based-and-detail-lines guy is on vacation when the design changes, what happens when out-of-place-family guy goes to change it and is dissatisfied with the methodology?

How much time will be spent deconstructing and analyzing (to figure out) and then redoing the same work? How many times are the families getting duplicated, copied, edited, that aren't adding value to the end result?

Ive been thinking about this one for awhile, for a variety of reasons:

"Office standard" families, and families in projects/ or project specific families.
Generic content families, vs families that have been modeled from actual Product Cut Sheets.
"Wall Types and wall types naming conventions"

These are a few areas that I've seen some redundancy tendencies, just in the general work flow. Ive got some ideas on it, hopefully i can get some images and some thoughts up later tonight...

TBC... ...

This is the first example that comes to find, but (at the risk of being long winded) there is something worth mentioning: There are plenty of ways of achieving the goal. While i contend here and forward that there SHOULD be a uniform way (for a teams benefit), I'm not saying my way is best. Ive conferred with a lot of great modelers, and a lot disagree with how and what I've done. But, for this discussion, these examples will suit fine.

Its a simple building, with some Lights, some EIFS reveals, some Quoins, and some Columns. How do we model it though? Here are the issues i see redundancy in:

The reveals: I tend to make them as a Wall Hosted family, for a few reasons. Maybe they're all horizontal at first, and then are wall sweeps. The client changes spacing, and we adjust. Again. Another adjust. Then he turns them in about a radius, as pictured. Now i have to make a family anyway. Its a toughie, but for the situations like this facade, where there is a Canopy, a raised Band, and the reveals, i try to make them all as one family, for ease of editing. I know a lot of people hate hosted families, but i love them, and use them everywhere. What ill do though, is nest a non hosted family, IN the hosted family. Ive found it makes constraining easier, and gives me a safety net if (for whatever reason) i need a non hosted variant later.

The methodology here, is what i think becomes an issue. Before i showed my colleagues on my team how i made the Reveals, there was an uncertainty when they had to be edited. Surely, someone else found a way: Making the entire wall (solids and voids) as in-place elements. Now, they wouldn't schedule as walls, and they weren't hatched in section. But therein lies the issue: given the opportunity, 5 people may find 5 solutions. How do we combat this? I don't suggest i have an answer, but rather... I'm aspiring to find one...

OBJECTS...

Well, were Object Based, right? Is that ALWAYS a good thing? One issue I've been struggling with, is certifying the integrity of such objects, as they pertain to our Model. Certainly, with items like Wall lamps, the measurements of the geometry may not be pressing, save for a mounting height. In this case, the client wanted to see them in a rendering. that's neither here nor there. BUT, its another reason i love Nesting families. From the manufacturer, the lamp has several mounting possibilities... Wall mounted, floor mounted... I like the nesting, because i can get a count of how many I've used.

Here's another one pertaining to this. Have any of you run in to this as well? The columns in the first image... They are GFRC column enclosures spec'd out from a cut sheet. We have them in various sizes, but when i made them originally (my fault), i simply called them "GFRC -24inch" for the family name. So no one had any idea if it was a generic placeholder (for schematic design), or if it was an actual Spec'd piece from a specific manufacturer. later in the project, someone else needed a 24" GFRC in a different model (spinoff project on same campus) and they went to remodel it from the cutsheet... Because they weren't sure that mine was off the cutsheet to begin with.

While it seems like a communication nightmare, i suspect this happens a good bit on large projects with large teams, and large numbers of families. Do any of you use a naming convention to keep track of such a thing? I'm proposing one currently, for our use. I haven't got the nomenclature firmed up yet, but something like this:

GEN - DORIC COLUMN - 24INCH DIA, 16FT

SPC - GLASSWARE COL - MDL 24-16 - WHT

CON- BLDG D - EIFS REVEAL - NW FACADE

To signify: GEN = Generic Content, Schematic Design, No integrity in actual tolerances.

SPC = Manufacturer and model selected, item modeled for Docs (dimensions verified)

CON = Modeled elements that aren't items (like EIFS reveals made in to families...)

Its a toughie. Especially considering the the amount of "I" in your BIM, you may never need an SPC level family. But, when Project Managers come to ask if we can verify that Steel sizes fit in the GFRC's, I'm of the opinion it should be in there.

So i wonder, if the methods to the madness need to all be laid out on the conference room table before the mice hit the pads. It makes for interesting coffee maker conversation with 6 people modeling, that's for sure? Thoughts? Fill me in, i KNOW some of you run in to it too... :)

First Post about my Revitation

2007-04-06T17:50:00.000-05:00

This is going to be a loosely corralled storytelling, about the revitation, and the things I've learned through it. There are many Revit blogs out there, and many of them have a lot of great information in them: Advice, tips and tricks, release and version information, etc...

I'm not sure exactly what the intent of this one will be, other than to start an informal documentation of my experiences as i traverse Revit usage.

To start off, I've been using Revit for exactly 15 months and 3 days. Certainly not the longest of times, but I've come a long way. I had a mild background with building modeling, having used a few other platforms before taking my current position at DPA (Dal Pos Architects) in Syracuse, NY. (The website can be found at www.dalpos.com). Previously, i used Gehry Technologies Digital Project (V1, R2), Vectorworks, ArchiCAD, and of course... Good old AutoCAD/ADT. Each platform had its ups and downs (although admittedly, i spent a VERY short time with Vectorworks... longer with the others). Since starting with 3D Modeling, ive become VERY enthused about where i see the profession of Architecture going:

I could see architecture (for one) going paperless. And by paperless, i do not mean setting up traditional sheet layouts, and then sticking with an easily viewable file format that reduces paper waste. While that's a worthwhile goal, my thoughts are this: If we have object based software's, capable of so much data storage and display, then why are we even limited to the standard format that HAS been Construction Documents? With 3D visibility, detailing, hyperlinking, and modeled Revit Families and Catia Parts, etc... I think the descriptions and construction information necessary for our end goal (the building) could be displayed in a myriad of formats... With there not BEING a specific sheet style layout. This may be a long way off, but its something I'm curious about nonetheless.

Anyway, in my 15 months with Dal Pos and Revit, I've discovered some interesting things, disregarding the previously mentioned goals. BIM, and 3d modeling (notice i separated the two, as we should) have implications that are VERY far reaching. More so than having to teach people to model, instead of draft. 3d modeling and BIM mean a new way of Project management, from the top to the bottom. A new way of marking up document sets, if at all. A new way of teamwork and communication, and maybe even a new way of design workflow.

Maybe this is why i do not know where the blog will end up going. Every day is a new challenge, and i look forward to sharing the ins and outs of them. And who knows... Maybe someone will read them. :)