Grouping models vs. Linking models

[Anonymous]

I have been asked to consult on a project that is completed to give feedback. I can see why I was asked to consult. There are so many crazy things going on in this model. One that sticks out, but maybe I am in the dark here, is a "combined" file that has Architecture, Structure, and MEP all in the same file, but with the Structure and MEP models as model groups. I've just never seen this done before, and I can't see an advantage to "combining" these together that way.

My question may sound dumb to some of y'all, haha!, but I am trying to learn a lot more on my own because the company I've started with is cloud based and they are trying to prep me from being what I would call a "power user" to more of a BIM consultant. So any feedback would be greatly appreciated because it's so different than working in an office where you just collaborate with the guy next to you, ha!  

There's a big factor here, and that is there are different results as we publish to A360 depending on how the model is setup.

Can anyone give me thoughts on this Grouping technique versus simply linking the models together?

THANKS!

[chrisplyler · Accepted solution]

I can't be sure that this is what happened in your case, but having a whole model - or at least what one might expect is a whole model from one discipline - as a Group object is what happens when you first link in a model and then bind it. When you bind it, it becomes a group instead of a link.

So I'm guessing somebody linked in the other disciplines' files and then used the Bind tool on them. The advantage (if you consider it one) is that they are now a real part of the main file instead of being links, so sending the file out to others (without including the linked files as well) doesn't result in "missing link" warnings.

[Anonymous]

Oh that is awesome! You just saved me bro, haha! I see an e-transmit as well, and it seems to do the same thing but even more, isn't that correct?

[Anonymous]

Man, I am getting literally more than a couple thousand errors. Any tips on binding?

[chrisplyler]

I'm not familiar with Etransmit, so I googled it. It appears to be a Revit Add-in. I don't think it binds links. I think it just finds the linked files and assembles them together into a new folder with the main project file, and probably resets the links' paths within the main file so that they point to the same folder as well, so that you can be sure to send everything together when you email it and it will be functional for the recipient.

I don't know about any errors involved with binding a linked file. Is that what you mean? I've only ever used the bind function once just to see what it did. I just leave my links as links.

[Anonymous]

Yes mean I encountered thousands of errors from simply binding the structural model link to the architecture. From what I understand, this project has many data errors, I'm on the tail end of the project just consulting on what others have done and fixing some things.

I believe they had to bind the structure at least, because the architect depended on the structural engineering firm to provide column, stair, and floor elements, having no architectural elements for those. Sounds like bad practice to me. So when you upload to A360, you never see a Linked model, such as the structure, from what my research shows, except with the added service of A360 collaboration, then converting the .rvt to a central file, uploading, etc. So without A360 collaboration, and conversion to a central file, an uploaded model must have the link bound before it shows up in 3D views in the cloud.

[chrisplyler]

Well that's all over my head. I've never used 360.

What are the majority of errors? Anything that stops the process? Or just warning errors? Things like collisions? Coping problems? Items overlapping but not joined? That kind of stuff?

[Anonymous]

Ha! I know what you are saying, that's my first attempt at A360. This is great though, because the binding was over my head, you saved me, and now I'm able to share some knowledge with you! I'm really starting to thoroughly enjoy the online community.

See one error report attached. I didn't even spend much time going through it because most could be ignored, and it looked OK, so I just went with it, HA! Hope there's nothing in there too crazy I missed and by boss finds it 😉

A360 is pretty killer. You can get the basic "storage" for free, which then allows you to upload a model, and then literally just send a link, email, etc. to whoever, then they can pop it right up on their IPhone, Android, PC, and do a view only session. See this link for my cloud model: http://a360.co/2cppu9P

You helped make it happen!!!! Thanks Bro!

Then there's the next tier of A360. Paid service where you can actually have a workshared model as a central file on the cloud, and therefore someone in China and the US could be working in the same exact model at the same time!! Pretty cool stuff. It's called A360 Collaboration.

Thanks again!

[chrisplyler]

So your errors are MOSTLY just duplicate rooms and bad grouping of structure elements. Nothing that should really cause any major problems if it's finalized and doesn't need to be changed.

You've got a couple of handrail bits that won't make.

You've got several "joined but don't intersect" concrete items. This may or may not be an issue, depending on how far they've separated.

I'm guessing that somebody brought in the structural link and manually rotated it to get it to line up. I suspect there was some misalignment of 0.0000X degrees that nobody noticed. Just a guess.

[chrisplyler]

Cool model!

I find it curious that navigation in the browser isn't designed like Revit. Scrolling to zoom is opposite. Panning versus orbiting is opposite. Weird.

[chrisplyler]

Can I really climb over my storage unit's wall to get into my neighbors unit? Or will interior partitions actually go up to bottom of deck above?

[Anonymous]

Wow this is great feedback!

Hi, my name is Nathan, and I'm a Revit addict. 🙂

No, but for real, I need to eventually report to the BIM modelers the feedback to improve. So I hear you saying that in essence the project location points needed to be coordinated better so a link simply will come into the other model in the same place therefore bypassing any manual move or rotation commands, correct? I've always had a problem figuring that out. Don't know why I get hung up on that. Do you know any good learning resources specifically for project location?

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the compliment on the model!

As for crawling into the neighbor's storage unit, I'm not sure what they are doing there, but I bet the walls will go up to deck.

As for the zooming default on A360, I don't know who had that bright idea, ha! But it's pretty easy to reverse with the settings button on the bar at the bottom of the screen 🙂

[chrisplyler]

I've found various youtube videos on shared coordinates to be helpful.

I'll share a personal rule I go by... I always model buildings orthographically in their own project file. Decide on a common "Plan North" orientation of the building and everyone model in views set to Plan North. Decide to put the bottom left corner of the building or whatever on the default Project Point, and everyone model that way. Keep it simple like you would have if you were just doing a 2D set of plans without site information.

Don't worry about True North and Survey Point in those building files. Only worry about those in a separate file, the Site file, where you can later link in your buildings and orient them however you want and publish shared coordinates out of it back to those linked buildings.

People model buildings on a True North view after True North has been rotated/set, and then the building has some weird angle like 43.7226 degrees or something, and it causes issues. Remember I'm only guessing here, but if somebody did have to place the structural discipline model and rotate it to line up properly, and that rotation wasn't perfect down to the the zillionth decimal place, then that MIGHT explain why you have so many errors of joined objects not intersecting and structural elements un-referencing their grid lines. Maybe. I can imagine other possible reasons. Maybe the grid lines in the structural file didn't survive the Bind process? I don't think they are something that can be included in a group, so maybe the Bind process (which necessarily creates a group) does away with them? Maybe the concrete joins never "intersected" to begin with, so those errors (which can be ignored if that condition was intended) are just carry overs from the structural model anyway? Like I said I don't have much experience with Binding linked files so that's all just speculation.

[Anonymous]

This is great stuff. Let's say the structural guy just didn't set his location point the same as the architect? What would you do when linking?

[RDAOU]

@chrisplyler How much do you charge for model review? : o) I can send you some clients lol lots here migrating to REVIT due to market demand on BIM and collaboration and many are seeking consultancy services ... If you are interested 

[chrisplyler]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

This is great stuff. Let's say the structural guy just didn't set his location point the same as the architect? What would you do when linking?

---

As long as he modeled it orthographically so that it doesn't need to be rotated...I would link it in using the Manual - Center placement option, click in my view to place it where I can see it, and then manually move it by clicking on a known corner to a known corner or something like that. It's only manually rotating that has the possibility of some decimal point degree mistake. At least that's what I've experienced.

[chrisplyler]

Wow RADOU thank-you for the vote of confidence. But two things...

1. The more I know about Revit, there more I realize I don't know about Revit, if that makes sense. For example, I've seen you answer some question easily that I couldn't have answered or at least couldn't have answered without doing some experimental modeling myself first. I've never received any Revit training, am not Revit Certified or anything like that. I would feel weird holding myself out to be a Revit professional when I know there are plenty of questions I can't answer.

2. I am part owner in a construction business started by my Grand-Father fifty-five years ago, and I've been involved for twenty-five years myself. Unless it went out of business, I can't imagine leaving it.

[RDAOU]

Well 🙂 I can assure you that you know more than 1/2 those who title themselves professional BIM consultants and Revit experts not just here...with or without certification.

And I'm not certified too lol : o) (not planning to either) and Revit was never part of my job description and job title

Sent from my iPhone

[Anonymous]

@RADAOU this new company I started for, completely cloud based, and extremely talented in in BIM, are teaching me soooooooooo much! I know they would love a referral. Their E books and industry report is incredible alone. Check those out http://www.hingepoint.com/hingepoint-e-books/