I've ran into something strange pertaining the file size of a project.
The original size (after purging several times) is about 576MB, it's an office building with 35 stories.
I wanted to know which elements in the model make up the size of the Revit file.
So I went about deleting all the elements of one category and save-as to see how much the size has decreased.
I go back to the original and repeat the process with a different category.
In almost in all cases I get logical results: walls (19.947x) are 49 MB, floors (962x) 43MB, framing (10.696x) 57MB.
However when I delete all the structural columns (5.475x), purge the model, and save-as, I get a file size which is 33MB larger than the file with all the columns.
Does anyone have an idea what could cause this inconsistency? I've tried several times, even auditing the file when opening, but I keep getting the same results.
When you done the save as, did you check the options and select compact file?
(In the database world deleting is not equal to removing from the file, it is just not visible to the user anymore.)
Louis
Please mention Revit version, especially when uploading Revit files.
Yes, the compact file option was checked. This is checked by default actually when you save-as.
File size isn't just a simple math equation of all elements added together equals big file. There are relationships between elements like join behavior, cut/not cut, align/lock, pinned, attachment and so on. When elements are part of underlying relationships merely deleting them might incur a penalty of warnings for example. Delete all the walls and suddenly rooms are no longer bounded properly and a warning is created for each room.
As such the quantity of elements might have been reduced but the number of related concerns increased. A record in the database counts for something even if it is tiny. Death by a million tiny cuts so to speak. You may have observed that sometimes the number of Review Warnings increases as you fix some warnings. Fixing one thing can sometimes reveal another issue, one step forward two steps backward.
Columns can affect room and volume calculation so removing them increases those values, calculation being rerun. If a column is along the perimeter of a room and counted on for that boundary then it too could generate a warning related to room bounding. Can't forget the Undo stack either. Deleting something doesn't mean you won't just tap Undo. They may be gone but you might want them back...so they aren't completely gone.
Were you working on the file all alone? File size increases the more users that participate because their activities create records for element borrowing and actions. As users leave the project and synchronization occurs (and Compact Central) the file size will fluctuate.
I rarely pay much attention to file size, definitely not alone. It is just one thing among many I consider. I look at the more subjective behavior of the model. How long does it take to open a view? How many views are not on sheets? Are they using cropped views with reasonable far clipping? Is detail level used effectively? Are worksets allow users to be selective about how much model to work on at a time?
How many linked files are there? Are images imported? DWG files? External data imported into a project can have a more 1:1 impact on file size. I've seen huge file size for a modest house project before and performance was fine. Most of the size was related to presentation images they were using.
All that to say it is difficult to assign a direct correlation to this file is big and it is these elements.
Steve Stafford
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
I'm the only perosn working on a file, all the links (Revit and dwg) were removed before I started.
Room bounding is mainly done by walls and room seperation lines, so this shouldn't be the issue. For the rooms we're only calculating the area's, no volumes as this really slows down our models.
I agree that file size is more than just the geometry in a model, there's a bunch of relations between the elements.
But given the fact that there are +5000 columns being removed, an increase in file size isn't logical. Deleting walls, which does mess up the rooms, results in a file which is 30MB less than before, means the room bounding doesn't affect the file size that much.
But I could try to delete all the rooms as well, and see what happens then.
If it is purely an intellectual pursuit then by all means. I've got clients with "empty" project templates that are larger than 30 MB so up/down by that much probably doesn't really mean much regardless.
If you're chasing down a performance problem and users are struggling to cope and everyone believes file size is the metric, it isn't. It's just one aspect of many that contribute to what we consider performance.
I assume the building can't go without columns? Probably can't practically delete them from the project right?
Fwiw, I encountered a column family once (for a very large luxury home) that were around 1.2 GB when I used Save Library and saved the families out of the project. They had imported geometry, a lot of it but it wasn't visible in the project environment. Deleted it and used Purge Unused on the family and it was much more reasonable 400ish KB.
Steve Stafford
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
Curiosity struck...
Using the stock Default (architectural) Imperial Template from North American content and stock Concrete Rectangular Column and Beam I ran through the following sequence with Level 1 at 0'-0" and Level 2 at 10'0". The columns base and top are constrained to each, beams were placed at Level 2, supported by columns. I chose concrete because of join behavior. File sizes listed are all KB.
KB Task
3612 - Stock Template (empty model) - Save
3688 - 1 Column created - Save
6632 - 5,000 columns created - Save
3732 - Delete 5,000 columns - Save
3840 - Create 2 columns and 1 beam spanning columns - Save
3868 - Delete 2 columns, beam remains - Save
3888 - Undo Delete - Save
23708 - Create 5000 Beams spanning 5200 columns - Save
10176 - Delete 5200 columns - Save
10436 - Enable remaining available structural analytics - 4800 warnings reported - Save
4064 - Delete 5000 beams - Save
Got tired...posted results...
The file size increased and decreased as we might expect based on creating and deleting elements. The file size did increase slightly a couple times when we'd have thought otherwise. When I deleted the two columns supporting the beam the file size went up slightly (28 KB). That probably captured the unreported status of being unsupported. Then it went up a little more (20 KB) when I used undo. It also increased by 260 KB when the warnings were created (roughly 18 KB per warning).
At the heaviest load on the file the 5,000 beams and 5,200 columns of the types I chose (at 10'0" tall) accounted for less than the 30 MB you observed your file increased. The families I used are 288 KB (column) and 312 KB (Beam). The file size change suggests that Revit regarded the 10,200 elements as contributing an average of 1.9 KB to the model (23708-3612 / 10200) at first. The two family files themselves average out at 300 KB so presumably that (their file size) is their initial approximate contribution to the project file size, the result of being loaded into the project. Then the instances that were placed contributed a little less than 2 KB each.
Obviously your model has more going on it. It was interesting to see how the file size changed as I ran through it.
Steve Stafford
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
Hi
Here is an article which touches on a lot of reasons for slow performance in Revit. There are some steps to try such as disabling add-ins that you can try.
You may also want to check out reducing file size in Revit and improving performance
http://bim4scottc.blogspot.com/2016/05/reducing-revit-file-size.htm
If you find posts have solved your problem, please click on 'Accept as solution' to help others with similar questions. Likes welcome.
Regards,
Jayhar.M.J
Having the same issue, and not sure why.
Previously we were receiving relatively compact file containing only openings from the electrical planer. The file started at about 60 MB and we could script it down to about 20 MB.
I just received a file today which was 400 MB and can't get it below 180 MB. It only contains openings.
Any ideas?
Was able to get the file size reduced using a more complete purge via Dynamo.
I'm working on an open BIM project and if I had to guess, it was probably an imported 3D DWG from MEP.
Sie finden nicht, was Sie suchen? Fragen Sie die Community oder teilen Sie Ihr Wissen mit anderen.