Linking Repeating Building Parts in Multiple Projects

[rudolfsWC9MK]

Hi everyone,

I need some advice on a project setup in Revit. We have two projects with a significant portion of the building that repeats in both. To manage this, we’re considering creating the repeating part as a separate file and linking it into both main project files.

This approach is new to our office, and despite some research, I still have a few questions about the best way to proceed.

For one project, should I:

1. Create two files: one for the repeating building part and another main file for the rest of the building, including all annotations, grids, etc.
2. Alternatively, should I create a third file specifically for annotations, grids, sheets, etc., and link both building parts into this third file?

Which setup would make it easier to manage wall, floor, and roof specifications?

I’d appreciate any insights or suggestions from those who have experience with splitting buildings into separate links.

[barthbradley]

Group the portion of the Project that you want to use in other Projects and then use Save As to save the Group out of the Project as a stand-alone Project (RVT). You can then load this Group/RVT into other Projects via Load As Group on the Insert Tab.  Doesn't sound like a scenario for a Linking workflow to me. Linking would be a little too cumbersome and restrictive. But, you can always convert Groups to Links if you want.  Or Links to Group via Bind.    

[barthbradley]

You know, if the fundamental aim here is to minimize work, you could just keep both in one Project.  You can always "break up" a Project into two or multiple Projects if need be.  

[handjonathan]

Hi @rudolfsWC9MK 

Thanks a lot for posting your question to the forums!   Has the solution suggested by @barthbradley helped with your issue?
 
We look forward to hearing back from you with more information so we can help you as a community! 

[rudolfsWC9MK]

Thanks for the suggestion!

I apologize for not providing more detail initially. The challenge is that the repeating building part contains numerous apartments, each defined as its own group. If any changes are made to the apartments, copying them to other project where the same apartment groups already exist could lead to errors. This complexity is why we were considering linking as a potential solution.

[SteveKStafford]

Groups are superior to links for managing repetition of design elements because the elements that belong to them can interact with the model because they are actually part of the model. Linked files cannot be altered in the hosting model and the elements that are in the linked cannot interact with the hosting model. Some might consider this lack of interaction a benefit.

My primary objection to linked models is the amount of time that Revit takes to process them. I worked on a project recently with about 200 links for unit design and it could take an hour to just open the model.

Groups can be tricky too because often "this design is exactly the same everywhere in the project...except in this location" which often expands into more exceptions. This is true whether you go with links or groups.

If you use groups you can organize all the groups "off to the side" of the project itself and copy them from that location into where they are used in the building. You can also keep the groups as separate files and use Load as Group. This permits multiple people to work on the unit design and then load/reload as they evolve.

[barthbradley · Accepted solution]

---

@rudolfsWC9MK wrote:

Thanks for the suggestion!

I apologize for not providing more detail initially. The challenge is that the repeating building part contains numerous apartments, each defined as its own group. If any changes are made to the apartments, copying them to other project where the same apartment groups already exist could lead to errors. This complexity is why we were considering linking as a potential solution.

---

Not sure what you mean by "If any changes are made to the apartments, copying them to other project where the same apartment groups already exist could lead to errors." First off, I didn't mention Copy. I said Load As Group. Still, in both cases, if there is a conflict, Revit will alert you. Nothing is going to be overwritten without user permission. Now, I imagine somebody could still screw up by ignoring or mishandling the alert, but that's another unrelated matter.  Having said that, you might consider Worksharing and Worksets.  More "screw up" safeguards that way. 😉