Hi,
How do Revit architects re-use the structural engineers Revit model?
For example, do they re-use the .rvt objects that the engineer creates (linking etc), then use face-based architectural families to apply surfaces to structural floors, wall and columns - or not?
Do architects just remodel everything after the engineer has updated his Revit model and published - like they say - faster to redraw than modify the existing!
I'm an ACAD veteran, so the thought of re-modelling what the engineer has already modeled is not so appealing!
I suspect the problem is in the layers in compound objects. Simply put, the engineers wall is 'inside' my wall, but Revit doesn't really recognize this parametrically through the linking process (unless I use face-based families right?)
Thanks in advance!
Dav
try exploring the copy/monitor process from within the collaborate menu. instead of re-modelling, you should be able to copy the wall and change the type if needed. i am not entirly sure how the process works but it may be a start.
Hi Alb01, many thanks for your reply.
Thanks for the thought - Copy / Monitor is the (only) way to keep track of linked data , quite true. What does remain unlcear however is while we may copy through some elements to our architectural model - most we will only reference.
The advantage of this is that engineers really don't need to issue Revit files - but could issue IFC's (can't be changed, innovative family objects are protected from further distribution).
The only things I can think of that an architect would need from an engineering model would be beams/ joists type elements, but walls, floors etc are major design team agenda items I would have thought and are perhaps better modelled as compound objects (rather than non-hosted or face-based).
How does this sound?
I always work on the principle (rightly or wrongly) that if an element is load bearing or required for the stability of the structure, then the engineer should take ownership of that element. In the case of a reinforced concrete building, although the architect sets out the desired location of the walls, they would be a structural element as they need to support the building and therefore designed by the engineer. I would expect the architect to initially model the walls and then the engineer would copy/monitor these, make any changes to structure then pass back to the architect. The architect would then monitor the walls to ensure they meet their requirements.
Just my opinion and i am sure there are many others
Thanks Alb01, great opinion - and fair enough. What's more , you could actually copy monitor the imported IFC or the native Revit file. Either way, it's just geometry that the architect is tracking - material grades, even profile types aren't critical.
Where we do seem to end up though is that there is actually precious little shared between the architect and engineer - what's key here is referenceing.
I have heard of cases where people have said that the engineers elements are used in architectural documention but to do that, you need to think very long and hard about what happens when those updates come through and how they impact your own work - no?