Revit content desired by family users

[davehenderson44]

Hello group,

I am creating Revit content for a manufacturer of motorized equipment as a contractor using Revit 2011 Architecture.  There are many product lines that include hoists, various blocks, arbors, tracks, etc. 

Initially I used the company catalog and product and part drawings and models for the information to build the families and the type catalogs.  In the family I used the applicable ordering options that someone would use to make a selection, like Recommended Working Load, Gross Capacity, Motor Horsepower, Motor Speed, the electrical stuff like Voltage, Frequency, Phase, Motor FLA, quantity of lift lines, line diameter, and sheave or drum diameter.  The type catalog was similar in the content used with the above parameters, except for the electrical stuff, as the first column headers.

After I was well into the project, I was told that all the designers want and need are “place holders” for their designs, and would also not read instructions how to use the families.

Now, I am going back through the created families to remove things to make the families only “place holders”, but am struggling with it because I don’t think that is really what will be required by all.  I know what information / instruction was needed at my former employer, where I also created product families and with the required parameters in the families using Revit MEP, and was trying to match that content.

So the first question I have is: What detail is suggested? / What parameters would be suggested?  The geometry on the models is very simple for the obvious performance reasons, but from there it was Building Informational Modeling, with what I thought was appropriate parameters. 

Would you say for the most part, those using these models will only want “place holders” and not the other BIM information?  Then, what information / parameters would you say would be required?  Then, what instructions do you think should be offered?  I bought a table saw, it came with instructions.  I bought a drill press, it came with instructions.  We bought a new TV, a better router for our home computer, and a coffee maker, not all at once of cource, but they all came with instructions.

Is there a reliable source for beta testing, someone who would do their due diligence to test the families and provide the, possibly detailed, feedback needed to make this content “top shelf”?  Does Autodesk provide such a service?  One of the beta testers used at my former employer was a “top shelf” tester who provided that type feedback.  I believe I read he went to work for Autodesk but don't remember his name.

Thank you for any advice given, it is greatly appreciated.

[Alfredo_Medina]

I have read that Autodesk Seek provides some kind of service in regards to checking if a family meets a set of standards. You may want to ask Scott Davis, who is surely more informed than me on that.

It seems that in this case there was a lack of communication between you and your clients in regards to level of detail. That needs to be talked about very clearly from the beginning because that affects your time and your profit. They just needed place holders, simple objects with correct dimensions, and you created families with complete information, both in model and data, that they did not need.

About the instructions, I have never seen a family for which a user has to read instructions. Probably you could separate the stuff that you have done so far into levels of detail (coarse, medium, fine), so that if they want "place holders" they would see a simple box in coarse level, and if they want more, they will see the rest in fine mode. That applies well for the model part, not for the data parameters, though.

[davehenderson44]

Thank you for the information about Autodesk Seek possibly providing service for checking Revit content, families and data files. Does Scott Davis work for Autodesk and do you have a way of contacting him? There has been a drastic lack of communication and direction in this whole endeavor. The nuts and bolts questions get answered, but some of the higher level questions requiring higher level people do not. "I don't have time right now", has been the response. I created the instructions because at my former employer I was also part of the 'Feedback Team' responsible for the answers to customers with questions using our content and know of some of the questions we got. Also, some of the product lines I am currently working on have so much variation that those families are more of a template approach. There is variation in the number of motors, number of lift drums or lift lines, motor location, motor orientation, distances between drums and motors, set mounting orientation, etc. There would be no end to those families. The user has to enter some data / dimensions to position the motors and to adjust the total length of the set. The only other way I saw to model those would be to do 'one-offs' of each set of motors and drums, which could be many one-offs for each project. Does anyone have another solution, excluding hiring another firm outside the US to do the one-offs. When my term is up here they would be on their own. The "model part" of the families is very simple, a couple boxes and cylinders with the dimensions to size them, like you suggest. There are a couple product lines that are a little more complicated and I'm using levels of detail as you suggest. The data parameters, the BIM part, is what I am removing. There is also a concern that people will change parameters to values that are not available and expect to order those units. I wrote a disclaimer warning customers against that. .

[Alfredo_Medina]

Yes, Scott Davis works for Autodesk. Please use the search function of this forum and you will find one of his posts.

Based on what you said, it seems to me that you tried to do one of those "all-in-one" families that contain all the possible combinations for a family, hence the need for instructions? The consensus about that in the community is that it is better to have simpler families by type than super-families, precisely because the latter ones are complicated and have a long list of parameters.