Linked Architectural model - do we copy/monitor All levels?
If you deleted your levels then it will be necessary to create new views associated with each of the levels that were produced using C/M. When a level is deleted all the related views and elements that are hosted by that level will be deleted so that's a particularly bad result if much modeling and documentation has been done already.
The purpose of copy/monitor (C/M) is to help us stay coordinated between our elements and theirs (certainly levels & grids and lesser cases for columns, walls & floors). The copy part of C/M is meant to make it easier to create levels where there are none in my model. The monitor part of C/M is to let Revit know to watch our levels and theirs. If we copy their levels the monitor relationship is enabled automatically. You can also just use Monitor to identify our existing levels and establish a relationship between ours and theirs.
All templates have at least one level if not several. You did not need to delete your existing levels, should not have deleted your levels. You should have adjusted your levels so they shared the same elevation and naming (if desired) as theirs and then used the Monitor portion of C/M to define a relationship between levels. Then the Copy part of C/M could be used to create any other levels in their model that your project template did not have already so the end result is your model and their model have all of the same relevant levels.
For example, a three story building should have at least one level for each floor or story of the building. Each discipline's model should have those same levels. If, for example, the HVAC model template has two levels defined in it already then those two levels should be adjusted to match the elevation of the first two levels in the architecture model. Then C/M could be used to create the third level. Monitor would be used to define the relationship between levels 1 and 2.
In some cases a model can have more levels than the other disciplines really require. One level is all that is required for each unique building story elevation that will host building elements and that views will be required and/or created for.
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.
As long as you're selecting the levels inside the crop boundary of the view Revit should see both levels during the monitor process. It shouldn't be necessary to pull back the levels to reveal the others.
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.
In my MEP model, I use the linked architectural elements (walls, floors, doors, etc.) but don’t copy them or create equivalents. I’d like to monitor these elements to be alerted if the architect moves or deletes them (so I can fix any hosted elements). But it seems I can only monitor items that also exist in my model. Is that correct? Is there any way to track changes in the linked architectural model?
The C/M process requires one of yours to compare against one of theirs. If you have wall mounted equipment and if that wall moves you really want to be alerted to it then you can use C/M to create a copy of it in your model and use it to host your elements. Or you can draft your own wall and use Monitor in the same way as for levels or grids. It was also anticipated that a structural model might use it for a bearing only version of a wall overlaid on the architectural wall so the structure discipline could just show the structural portion of a wall alone.
Technically it can also watch one of yours against another one of yours if you select current model instead of a link. For example, two parallel walls that must maintain a certain distance from each other could be Monitored so if one or the other changed their distance from each other a coordination review warning would be created.
The architectural model is a central workshared file on a network drive. Since we don’t use BIM360, I open their model, "detach," discard the worksets, and save it as a regular (not workshared) model before linking it into mine. If I don’t discard the worksets, it opens as a central model. I’m the only MEP designer. Is there a better way to manage this? For future projects, would using BIM360 or ACC improve this workflow? If so, what specifically would be better, and how can I justify the change to management (cost, efficiency, collaboration, etc.)?
The eTransmit tool can remove worksets as well as removing sheets so you could use it to make a version of the architecture file for linking. Unless the file is huge you probably don't really need to bother with that. You can just put the copy of their file in a folder and create a link without re-creating the central. You only need to create a new central if you expect to do work in their file. There might also be advantages to keeping the worksets intact so you can selective choose to close some of them, especially if they've been very organized about using worksets well. Unless you override a view to use By Linked View you only see model elements in the project anyway.
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.
So, is it "standard" or "best" practice to generally C/M all relevant architectural and structural elements? I think that would avoid my model breaking if architecture changes (i.e. delete a wall). But it would require me to manually edit my model if they make changes. IS there an option with C/M to "automatically" propagate the change the architect implemented? For example if they just changed elevation or type of a ceiling, or moved a wall, or changed the type of wall?
Short answer, no, don't start by using C/M on everything. Use it for levels and grids and maybe a few key items that you're concerned about that might change and you'd like to know about, assuming the other discipline(s) might not remember to tell you.
I rarely find anyone using C/M on much else besides levels and grids. I've joked doing training that the tab order of element categories in the C/M settings is the order of how likely we are to use it on them, Levels, Grids, Columns, Walls and Floors...from most likely to least likely. If you use it to watch walls and then they move you'll get a warning but you'll still have to discuss the change with the other discipline to either get them to put the wall back where it was or move yours to match the new location. Without C/M you'd have to notice that there is more or less room available for your equipment. For hosted elements that follow their host it might not be as immediately noticeable compared with elements that are no longer completely inside the room as they were once.
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 often get a model update with some walls delete and create again (by other type) in the link model, so C/M works not well for me.
So I C/M grid/levels only, too.
For example, walls were edit by the picture.
When I got tens of warnings , it's helpful.
But when I got thousands of warnings, it's useless.
