Generic Family Rebuild/Regenerate Time

[Irich]

I have a rather complicated Generic Family that I built with a number of different parameters that are entered and drive other parameters through a series of formulas. This particular family have nested families and work as a unit. It works great but the challenge is that changing a single parameter is followed by a minute or more of rebuild time. There 10+ parameters that are changed in a single instance of this family and each one take a minute or more of rebuild time which means there is a significant amount of time spent watching the spinning wheel waiting for it to rebuild. I know that the cause is because of the amount of information that is built into the family but there has got to be a way to shorten reload times.

Any ideas on how I might be able to speed up the rebuild time, ideally eliminate it?

Side note, unfortunately, I am unable to share the family due to vendor NDA's and Company policy. But I can provide additional details to help explain if needed. 

[ToanDN]

If you can share the family, can you at least share a snapshot of how it looks like?

[Irich]

I started testing out some thoughts I had. The attached is a copy where I deleted all the families and just left the planes, parameters and formulas to see how much space those took up. 

In my fully functioning family, all of these parameters are set up as shared. However, in this copy, I started going through and setting them as family parameter to see what sort impact it would make since most of them I do not need to populate a schedule. 

[mhiserZFHXS]

Are there nested families within your nested families? This is something that can have a pretty significant impact.

[Irich]

Thank you for the responses.

I do have multiple levels of nested families. So it kind of works like this...

Top level family; the Panel gets used in project > smaller "assemblies" are a nested family, for example, the Stiffback > within the Stiffback family, it has lumber and multiple instances of an Anchor Lock > the Anchor Lock has the Anchor Lock itself has a nested family to prevent the part from getting inadvertently changed from grabbing one of the faces and moving it. 

If I am understanding you correctly, going down those multiple levels are possibly what is causing the issue. If I can avoid that, I certainly would like to but each piece has a visual parameter built into it for different family instances. 
The only level I see as being eliminated is the last one where the Anchor Lock is loaded into its own family.

If that is not super clear then I will try to provide a screen shot. 

[ToanDN]

---

@Irich wrote:

I started testing out some thoughts I had. The attached is a copy where I deleted all the families and just left the planes, parameters and formulas to see how much space those took up. 

In my fully functioning family, all of these parameters are set up as shared. However, in this copy, I started going through and setting them as family parameter to see what sort impact it would make since most of them I do not need to populate a schedule. 

---

Yeas the amount of parameters and formula is excessive.  Without any geometry, it is already lagging just to open the parameter window and switch family types.  Changing from shared parameters to family parameters is not going to improve the performance. 

[mhiserZFHXS]

This sounds like way too much. I almost never go deeper than two layers (main family and one layer of nested families). Pretty much the only time I'll go three layers deep is if I need an array. I NEVER go deeper than that. The first solution would definitely be to just simplify the family, take out some of these elements and parameters. If you absolutely can't do that, you need to pull some of those nested families out and put them in the main family.

[Irich]

So what are my options? I am going to work on simplifying the formulas and maybe consolidate processes. Since I have nested families, would it work better to have the formulas working all on one level or having the nested families running their own formulas? 

My goal is to provide my team with a packaged family where they only have to enter lengths and check boxes for different hardware parts. 

[ToanDN]

---

@Irich wrote:

So what are my options? I am going to work on simplifying the formulas and maybe consolidate processes. Since I have nested families, would it work better to have the formulas working all on one level or having the nested families running their own formulas? 

My goal is to provide my team with a packaged family where they only have to enter lengths and check boxes for different hardware parts. 

---

I would say break it into different families.  However, it is impossible to say where the breaking points are without the actual family.  You would have to figure them out with your own testing.

[barthbradley]

It would really be helpful to know what you are actually trying to build parametrically.  Giving us a bunch of Reference Planes driven by Labeled Dimensions doesn't help us to help you.   Maybe the solution is a heck of a lot simpler than you are making it.  Revit is pretty darn smart and conversant with many disciplines.  It's not unlikely that you are re-inventing something that Revit can already do - or close to it with a few tweaks.  I see it all the time.       

[Irich]

I know this would be a lot easier if I could upload the completed family. I might have to start asking questions to my superiors and see if I can get permission to upload it. For now, maybe screenshots will help with the concept. 

We design concrete formwork so what I am building out here are the formwork panels. Here is plan view of a recent job - 

Each panel around the inside and outside of this core is the top level family.

Here is are the elevation views of one of the panels - 

We worked with some tech support at one time who suggested trying to use it as a curtain system but we couldn't build in enough flexibility for all the various conditions we encounter. 

I have tried to fun all of the parameters and formulas to reference planes and simply align the various parts and pieces to their respective planes so there are minimal changes to the parts themselves.

[barthbradley]

Looks to me like you aren't using the "I" in "BIM".  Maybe the solution would be to use the "I".  That's what you are paying for.   

[Irich]

Oh please educate me! How am I not utilizing it and how can I utilize it? 

[Irich]

Here is the finished family that we have been using. 

[barthbradley]

---

@Irich wrote:

Oh please educate me! How am I not utilizing it and how can I utilize it? 

---

Sorry. That might have been a little harsh sounding. What I mean - and what I see - is something that can be done natively in Revit.  The other person you spoke to saw the possibility of using Curtain Walls to accomplish it. Maybe with a few tweaks, Curtain Walls can be employed -- or maybe Beam Systems.     

[barthbradley]

---

@Irich wrote:

Here is the finished family that we have been using. 

---

Honestly, I would model this whole construct in a Revit Project with components.  I don't think you'd need to go beyond the Structural Ribbon tools.    

[Irich]

@barthbradley I was not offended by your comment. No worries there.

If I were to piece these components together on the project side, that presents a new set of challenges. Perhaps Revit has tools for it and just have not found them yet. So again, please educate me! 

On any given panel, we could have 3 or 4 different pieces or hardware, so that would mean that I would have to enter all of my parameters for plywood, lumber, stiffbacks (one time and then copy), hardware (3 or 4 separate times). I would be looking at, up to 8x that I would have to enter the same information. Then to do that for each panel, using the screenshot I posted above as an example, 15 panels. Probably looking at reentering the same information over 100x to piece it all together inside the project. Which then cascades cause there are multiple stairs/elevators, shear walls, etc.

So to that end, do I end up saving any time? OR is there a way in Revit to have all those components inside the project look at a single set of parameters and "automatically" resize accordingly?

[mhiserZFHXS]

Do you need to show all of those individual components though? That is the biggest issue here. The model portion of a Revit project doesn't typically include that much detail. That's usually saved for detail drawings.

[ToanDN]

---

@mhiserZFHXS wrote:

Do you need to show all of those individual components though? That is the biggest issue here. The model portion of a Revit project doesn't typically include that much detail. That's usually saved for detail drawings.

---

Agreed.  

I would model the formwork panels using curtain walls and create typical condition details.  Details can be drafting or 3d assembly views.