Coordination review

[Anonymous]

Will the coordination review feature be expanded to include more than just
grids, levels, and columns and whether or not they've only moved?

It'd be very useful to also monitor structural walls, and changes to their
size/thickness, as well as location.

File this under wish-list?

Jos Arpink

[mrwes]

No need to file it, Jos... they will be adding more object types to coordination review in future releases. We heard straight from the developers themselves...

[rlc88]

When I use copy/monitor in a structural column, the coordination review only shows changes if I move or remove it but not when I change the family type or even the family. I tried the same in a structural wall and a structual slab and it worked perfectly. Why is it? I´m working with Revit 2015. Will it be possible in future versions or am I doing something wrong?

Thanks.

[rafael]

We are having the exact same problem.  The coordination for structural columns becomes essentially useless if we have to change the column family types manually, or continually delete and re-copy -- especially when the structural consultant breaks up all columns per-level.

[SteveKStafford]

As far as I recall it has always worked this way. I suspect it is because the workflow they anticipated is:

• Architect places schematic architectural columns (different from structural columns)
• Architect sends model to engineer
• Engineer uses copy/monitor to create structural columns where the architects schematic columns are
• Engineer sends their model to Architect
• Architect adjusts their columns to be masking only (unless they are left uncovered)

The disparity between column types is intentional in this case because architects needs for the column are often different, masking a structural element versus designing/engineering the column itself.

In general, I encourage architects to remove their own structural columns (if they use them) in their model as soon as the engineer is hired. Once the engineer provides their structural model to the architect they can then focus on using walls to wrap columns as required by Design Development and Construction Documentation. Using copy/monitor (the monitor aspect only) can still alert us to major changes to location of the grids/columns.

I can see that you'd like Revit to flag type changes too and I'm sure you aren't alone. Changing it would also affect those who are comfortable with the way it works now. The trick, if they decide to change it, will be to allow for either scenario effectively.

[rafael]

Thank you for the response. I appreciate your thorough answer.

The problem is that the new trendy quasi-design-build set-up that many owners prefer poses a problem. In cases like ours, where High-rise columns are coped-with (not covered) and Owners are constantly pushing design changes to floor plans/layouts on a sometimes weekly basis, we have to respond at ludicrous speed. For this, the Architect is constantly shifting the columns, and the Structural engineers have to wait until the Archs change (the entire building) before they can start designing again. Then, once they receive the new layout, they will inevitably (and properly) change the column sizes as spans change. As such, the monitoring relationship m u s t include the ability to track changes to types. The Copy/Monitor process specifically has a dialogue for either correlating, matching, or copying types. It is a silly things that this capability would not penetrate into the ongoing Monitor process. Nevertheless, I definitely agree with you that this should be an option for those who prefer the current workflow. In the end, we would all love a beautiful and thoughtful design-consultant design-bid-build process, but it doesn't exist anymore (at least not in this market). So, we need our tools to responds to our process - not the other way around.
In general, Revit greatly limits the ability to access the information that it absolutely already "knows" and is certainly, if only peripherally, tracking. To address this, I suggest that Revit be operable in a new-user-friendly "wizard"-type mode, but also give the option to open advance options for configuration, without having to delve into the black hole of semi-programming in the API - aren't we supposed to be Designers? Shouldn't the tool empower us to do this, rather than telling us what we can and cannot do, such that we spend the lot of our time wrestling the bear? I want to ride the bear! 🙂 -- Just a little commentary. I really appreciate all those who contribute to these threads. They have been a great help to a great many - including me 🙂

Thanks and God Bless,

-Noah for RGA

[SteveKStafford]

Since Revit is sensitive to movement, you could agree to move columns that are changed like this. If the architect is redesigning a column they can swap out the type for a new type but also move it off grid by a specific value. This will prompt a coordination review when the file is refreshed in the other discipline's file. When they examine the column they'll see the change is more about the size than position. They can respond to the change and move the column back into position. You could agree that such trigger movement would always be East to West or something like that so each team knows what to expect.

Just a thought...

[rafael]

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll try to remember to keep you updated if this works, or if we find another solution.