Perimeter of rooms in linked model

[FaVarela]

Hi to everyone! 

I'm dealing with an issue I couldn't solved.

I'm working on a project and I've linked another model. I need a list of rooms in linked model, so I schedule them in a Rooms Schedule of a linked model by name, perimeter and area. 

The issue is that perimeter value is wrong calculated in my file, but it is perfect calculated when I schedule them directly in the linked model. 

I have no idea about how can I solve this problem. Any ideas?

Thank you all! 

[Sahay_R]

Have you looked at the schedule properties and made sure that the formulas are in order?

Make sure that the Perimeter field says No Calculation in the Formatting tab in Schedule Properties.

Can you share a file?

[FaVarela]

Thank you! but I've checked all properties in the schedule and they seem right.

Problem is also at the properties bar. 

Perimeter is right calculated when rooms boundaries belong to the same file. When those boundaries belong to a linked file, perimeter is wrong.

[kadmonkee]

the rooms are created in different phases in your models

some rooms are in New construction in the linked model

you will need to match the phasing schemes with the linked views to your views

rooms are created by phase.

[Sahay_R]

Please share a file. I have attempted to replicate this situation - and I see that perimeters from the linked file are being reported correctly in the host file.

[FaVarela]

Sorry, we have already matched phases in Type Properties from the linked model. They are right.

[kadmonkee]

are these a floor plan view and a ceiling view?

the 2 rooms do not appear to be seeing the same things (walls doors etc.)

if you look at a section in this area can you select the room?

does the room extend to height the same in both models?

[FaVarela]

I'm affraid that I'm not allowed to share those models, but I replicate the same issue in new ones.

Here the linked one(COO):

And here the original one ARQ (exterior walls belong to a 3rd linked model LEV in this case)

[FaVarela]

Differences are because there are many others linked models. 

[kadmonkee]

confirm all linked models the phasing scheme matches and all are set to be Room Bounding

there seems to be a disconnect from one link to another as far as room bounding goes.

shell = room bounding = phasing scheme

Interior = room bounding = phasing scheme

your model = room bounding with all linked model = phasing scheme should match 

don't just map the phases in your view, it will not recognize the other linked models phases or rooms

I typically match the Phasing scheme from the Architects working model phase by phase without translating or mapping

[FaVarela]

Thanks! 

We usually work with many linked models (16 models for project) from many different phases, that's why it's kind of hard to coordinate the same name and same phases in all of them. 

Anyways, phasing seems here not to be a problem. Any idea about how to read correctly those parameters?

[Sahay_R]

At the bottom of the Project Browser - double click on the links, and in the Properties dialog box that comes up, check Room Bounding.

The values I have gotten in my schedule are the same as those in your screenshot - 

[FaVarela]

I'm sorry not to explain our problem correctly. 

LEV=outside walls

ARQ= inside walls (LEV as linked and as "Room Boundary")

COO=file empty (ARQ and LEV as links).

Our problem is about reading details from COO model, beeing LEV and ARQ linked. 

I've tried setting ARQ and LEV as Boundary room or not, but perimeter value doesn't change. 

[kadmonkee]

LEV=outside walls

ARQ= inside walls (LEV as linked and as "Room Boundary")

COO=file empty (ARQ and LEV as links).

the walls from LEV are not reporting through the link.

if the walls from ARQ are using room separation lines that should work as long as those room separation lines are placed correctly to the LEV models outside walls.

it will be tough to accurately leverage the info through both links

ideally all walls should be achieved through (1) linked model (ARQ)

I would confirm if all the rooms from the ARQ model are correct and turn off rooms from the LEV model to avoid confusion.

[Sahay_R]

No difference. Exact same values.

[FaVarela]

That's right. Perimeter values from rooms located in ARQ, reading them from a linked model are obviously wrong.

As we can see, a perimeter value of 0mm it has to be wrong calculated. 

[kadmonkee]

all rooms should be independent to one model in this case as well as their Phase.

if I was working on the ARQ model I would use room separation lines to manage my rooms in MY model.

create reference planes that align to the LEV model inside face of wall then create my Room Separation lines and lock them to my reference planes.

this way if the walls from the LEV model move I can adjust my model by aligning the reference planes to the through the link.

now I own all my rooms in the ARQ model and this will avoid the spanning that you are experiencing in your COO model

if I was to open the ARQ model and turn off all links  this should be the result you want

this should gaurantee you reporting all rooms and perimeters correctly through the linked model

[FaVarela]

Thank you! 

That can be a solution, but if LEV change, ARQ should modify all those planes/lines manually. The problem is that, working as we currently do, many of us are working in different models, with different rooms, spaces and areas linked to the same exterior walls (and those exterior walls are changing a lot!).

Since we're are trying to simplify workflow, this solution may not help us.

Does anyone report this issue before? Or maybe revit is working to find a solution?

[kadmonkee]

correct, that could be a down side to this workflow.

there are easier or more streamlined workflows out there that could minimize the overlap and spanning that you are currently dealing with.

by using reference planes and locking lines to them it allows for a quicker fix if and when changes come around.

and yes the complexity of the many models will have a negative impact.

I would recommend a different approach to how your models get set up.

the simplified workflow would be to minimize the amount of models that get linked together

there may be a need for (1) exterior shell model and possibly more than (1) interior model, but this method increases coordination issues as the model progresses.

we have used this workflow for many large projects and have had success in coordinating with everyone

we schedule updates so we are not chasing our tails all the time.

[Sahay_R]

My thought is - keep your rooms as complete as possible - in a dedicated file. If you have to divide and rule, then you can put parts of your building on different files and assemble the building together as a series of linked files. That will give a higher probability of the model regurgitating correct information than a hot mess that you will have to spend time and effort to deal with.