Revit - Is there an alternative to Groups and Families?

[scot3813]

As far as I can tell, a detail group takes up about the same amount of space in the file as a simple detail item component with few parameters ( a little less than 500 kb). A block of linework should therefore be a group or a family component if it's used more than once. I can see these Revit files become fairly weighty regardless of what kind of repeated elements one uses. Too many groups or too many components increase the size of the file. Groups and families are an implied commitment to use the elements again. In other words, why should you take up the space in the file if you don't intend to create multiple instances of those elements? Furthermore, I see the value in differentiating between groups and families. Groups are repeating elements in a project-specific context. Detail components are repeating elements used in most projects. They're what you'd load into a template file for example. Components seem to be more flexible but require more managing on the back end: saving the family to a folder, intentionally loading into projects when updated, etc. I find it hard to justify the use of groups, however, because components exist. 

Where I get caught up is my desire to create blocks of linework, as you would in a group or a component, but with no intention to create multiple copies or instances that update simultaneously. Example: I draft uniquely shaped metal flashing around a window opening in a drafting view. I don't plan to use this element anywhere else in the project, but it'd be nice to move the little bit of flashing as one piece. Example 2: In a wall assembly legend, I want to create "groups" of multiple wall assemblies and respective notes to easily arrange or hide each independently. Once again, I don't plan to use these elements anywhere else!

Revit doesn't seem to have an option for this workflow. Am I just Mad?! Do others see value in a tool like this? Any suggestions for workflow would be appreciated!

[ The subject line of this post has been edited for clarity by @handjonathan Original: Is there an alternative to Groups and Families?]

[ToanDN]

So you got beef with groups and families simply because of file sizes?  

[scot3813]

Yee pretty much. I completely see the value in using families, though! My beef comes from workflows that create hundreds of groups for the sake of manipulating unique elements independent from the rest of the model or detail. I've spent hours cleaning up bloated Revit files...

I just discovered Selection Sets under the Manage>Selection that essentially does what I'm after! 

[barthbradley]

---

@scot3813 wrote:

Yee pretty much. I completely see the value in using families, though! My beef comes from workflows that create hundreds of groups for the sake of manipulating unique elements independent from the rest of the model or detail. I've spent hours cleaning up bloated Revit files...

I just discovered Selection Sets under the Manage>Selection that essentially does what I'm after! 

---

Why exactly are you creating HUNDREDS of Groups? Let's start there.   

[scot3813]

That's a fair question. I'm cleaning up my company's detail library. It's a small company with 6 or so designers. The library is essentially a historical document of every past employee and their Revit "styles." Over the years, the file has slowly grown with one-time used groups, families, line types, and filled regions.

[barthbradley]

Cleaning up the Company's Detail Library?

Got a rug? If so, sweep the library under that rug and move on.  Out of sight; out of mind.  

Only half kidding here.   

[ToanDN]

There is no problem with hundreds of groups of they are all unique and being used.  If they are not being used then simply purge them away.

[SteveKStafford]

A principal advantage of a Group over a Family is that a group can contain multiple categories of elements where as a Family is a single category element (if we forget about nesting/shared families).

A group is intended to deal with repetition of more complicated design elements, 3D and/or 2D. For example, a hotel room layout, a kitchen configuration, office furniture configurations, a curtain wall configuration and more. Groups can be saved to external files or loaded as a file into a project so they can act as prototypes for common design elements that your company uses. Attached Detail Groups can allow you to add the same relevant 2D detail elements to a Model group efficiently.

Detail Items are meant to provide reusable elements to do 2D documentation so you can avoid drafting lines for "real" things that you use to generate building details. When you sketch a lot of lines to represent something you only expect to use once then a group (with a good name) is reasonable. It makes it easy to move around the "collection" of lines. However, if you can drawing this collection of lines in the project you could do so just as easily in a Detail Item family template and save/load it into the project. Now it is easy to move and reuse...someday. However if you have to revise it you need to edit the family to do so, versus Edit Group.

As for file size, the initial loading of a family or definition of a Group will increase the file size more than multiple instances of the family/group being used will. For example, a 400KB family will increase the file size but placing 10 instance of the family won't result in a 4,000KB file size increase. It will be a fraction of that...each family and project will vary slightly due in part to the relationships that Revit creates between elements. A wall hosted element will like add a slight additional cost per family instance because it is related to specific walls and that relationship is "watched" too.

Another feature called Assemblies is available to deal with documenting a collection of design elements too, think manufacturing or shop drawing motivation.

[scot3813]

Haha sadly no rugs. How would you suggest a company document past details to make future projects a little easier?

[SteveKStafford]

Save Drafting Views into a "Detail" container project and use Insert from File > Views to add them to other projects as required.

[handjonathan]

Hi @scot3813 

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

[scot3813]

---

@SteveKStafford wrote:

A group is intended to deal with repetition of more complicate design elements, 3D and/or 2D...

---

It's interesting you mention groups as a complex combination of geometry. We internally debate whether we should draw repeating apartment layouts using groups or linked Revit models. I understand that linking models instead of grouping elements can help keep individual Revit files smaller and more wieldy. I can see what you're saying, however, components and linked models surely add friction to the editing process. This friction sounds good and bad depending on the situation. For one, people often duplicate groups for editing, which bumps up the amount of space simple elements take and also clutters the project browser. 

It sounds like groups are essentially families but with less metadata and more readily accessible for editing. So groups are for a complicated "collection" of lines that are expected to be edited often. Families are for repeated elements with a low revision rate. Correct? 

[SteveKStafford]

Linked models remain one aspect of Revit that performance has not improved significantly, meaning the more linked models you use the worse the opening time, at the very least, will get. Revit has to load every linked model. I have worked with teams that have gone down the road of "links for units" many times. Every time has been miserable...in my opinion.

Groups are not equal to a family because groups interact with the model and can be comprised of multiple categories of elements/families (system or loadable). A family belongs to one category, no more. Groups are a container for any number of families not the reverse. Both tools are a means to manage repetition of design features. A family is an inert representation of something in a building while a group is a collection building elements that have some sort of logical relationship to each.