Revit loses dimensions/annotations when linked files reload

[Anonymous]

Does any one know if this is a universal occurance or is it just me. I lose dimensions and annotations when I reload linked files. I understand that you will lose the ones that reffer to elements that no longer existes but why am I losing the ones that simply shifted or didnt even move. Please someone help me with this. Thnak you.

[maciejwypych]

When you just reload or reload from, annotation will stay, but if you unload a link from the project it's gone forever.
That's why you should place each link on a separate workset, and then you can just close the workset instead of unloading a link.
Annotation will disappear, but it will come back once you open the workset again. Also, this way each user can close worksets individually without affecting anyone else.

[Anonymous]

maciejwypych, Thank you for your responce. I didnt describe the situation correctly. I am using a linked CAD site plan that has occasional updates so lines are moving around. I understand that if a line that the dimensions or anotations from revit are referencing is deleted in the CAD file, the dimension or anotations from revit will be deleted. The issue is that when a line is simply moved the dimension/anotation does not always adjust but is deleted sometimes. this occurs even if its reloaded or reloaded from as oppose to unload and reload. There is a level of unpredictability that I cannot understand. The workset option you suggest gives me the same result as described above. Thnak you again.

[loboarch]

Is is possible when the line moves in the linked site plan it is getting slightly rotated? This would cause an aligned dimension to "disappear". Or is it possible the lines are not being moved in the CAD file but are getting deleted and redrawn in the new location? This might also cause what you are describing (not totally sure I would have to test that one.)

[Anonymous]

loboarch, Thank you for your reply. I tested booth your theories with no luck. I would hate to have to resort to printing certain files from CAD as I am really trying to get the office to switch over to a Revit based firm as opposed to CAD based. Thank you again.

[rosskirby]

Having CAD files linked into a Revit model, while possible, is just not a good idea.  As you've found, dimensions between a Revit element and a CAD element will often disappear when the CAD link is reloaded or "reloaded from" either an updated version of the same file, or the same file that has been moved to a different location.  There's no fix for it, and no way to prevent it from happening.  Pick CAD, or pick Revit.  Hybrid approaches are a waste of time and will continue to be a huge source of frustration as long as you try and force the two to play nice.

[Anonymous]

rosskirby, I agree that having CAD linked to Revit is not a good idea, unfortunately most projects get started in CAD due to the fact that civil engineers are deeply involved at the start of a project which drives the CAD process unless its a part of the BIM execution plan at the beginning of the project. Most of our clients will not pay for that initial cost to invest in Revit. As a result there is a need for some sort of hybrid between the two platforms, I do not like it but thats what it is. I have resorted to keeping the site plan in CAD and then importing it at the time of printing understanding that there will be visual eyesores but atleast all the information will be there. Thank you for your input, while disappointing to hear it confirmed my frustration.

[rosskirby]

Our civil engineers work in CAD, too, but we never dimension to their drawings.  If there's something important enough to have a dimension to, such as a property line, setback, or adjacent building, we re-create it in Revit and then turn that CAD layer off.  Problem solved.  Our clients don't pay anything more for us to work in Revit; we wouldn't think of trying to charge them more, and that entire line of thinking is a non-starter for me.  Our clients pay us for the service we perform, not the software we use to perform it.

I've tried to do hybrid projects in the past.  I've done projects:

• where the civil was in CAD
• where all the interior design was done in CAD
• where existing drawings were done in CAD
• where "standard" details were in CAD

You name it, I've done it.  And I'll tell you right now: there's not a single one of those projects that would not have been better off had they been done completely in Revit from the start.  I tried to make it work; I really did.  I could have spent my time dealing with actual architecture instead of constantly struggling to keep my CAD from fighting my Revit.  Trust me.  Go Revit, or go CAD.  NEVER go hybrid.  You won't benefit from it.  Your client won't benefit from it.  And your project will absolutely suffer for it.

[maciejwypych]

Completely agree with Ross. Hybrid approach just never works.... And if you really(and I mean if it's a life or death situation) need to dimension between Revit & CAD - DON'T! - Instead pick the line to create a detail line and dimension to this line. (Or even better remove AutoCAD from your workflow altogether) Dimensions in Revit cannot be used just as a graphic like in AutoCAD, they always need to be associated to element location lines/element faces/points. Most of the time if you create a dimension in revit between a face of element and linked AutoCAD line, any changes to a line in AutoCAD will remove your dimensions in Revit because the line won't longer be parallel to the associated face (that also include any modifications) If you dimension to start/end of the line and not the line itself - Revit dimensions will stay even if the line in AutoBAD is stretched/ moved/extended/trimmed. But if someone will delete and re-draw the same line, it will have a different GUID and Revit will remove the associated dimension.

[Anonymous]

maciejwypych,Ross, Thank you booth for your input. I am doing a fairly large project right now, with over 300 sheets it is the first revit project for the firm. There are CAD files that we will recieve from consultants that will be in CAD that we are rsponsible for with regards to permiting/coordinating. I cannot redraw those files in Revit, further more there are details that I simply do not not have the time or resources to redraw in revit right now; my approach is to keep CAD sheets totally in CAD and Revit sheets totally in Revit but use Revit as the managing software for the two. That being said how do you suggests dealing with those sheets,  I am relucntant to have one set of drawings in CAD and the other in Revit for printing/cordinating purposes particularly when I start thinking about permit comments, RFIs ASIs and the likes. While I understand the attitude to seperate the two software entirely thats not an option I have at this time. Thank you.

[chrisplyler]

The Civil guys are going to keep using Autocad Civil3D or whatever else they might be using for a while. Revit is a long, long way off from anybody ever calling it a competent Civil engineering package.

[rosskirby · Accepted solution]

Clayon, I've been in your shoes.  It would help to know the discipline of the consultants you're using that are providing you with CAD that you need to dimension to.  If it's MEP, I would question the need to dimension to anything at all that they provide.  If it's civil, as you mentioned before, there are only a few things that you would need to be dimensioning to, and I would recommend recreating those items with either detail or model lines, as appropriate.  If it's the structural model, which would be my guess, that you're concerned about, I would highly recommend recreating the structural design in your model.  It may not be part of your original scope, but if you're already to the point in the project where you've got 300 sheets, then the ship has sailed on talking about it up front, as should have been done.

For the details, it's a bit of mixed bag.  I would recommend live details wherever possible, because "standard" details tend to become not-so-standard-after-all when applied to an actual project condition.  You can place a dummy sheet in the drawing index, and keep all those details in separate CAD files. 

If you want to create a detail callout, referencing those CAD details, then you've got four options:

1. Link each detail into a drafting view, then reference that view <-- Most Revit-y option, somewhat time-intensive depending on the number of details
2. Create "dummy" drafting views and place them on a "dummy" sheet with the same numbering as shown on the CAD sheet <-- Semi-Revit-y option, fast option, most likely to have mistakes due to poor manual coordination
3. Make a "fake" detail callout that looks like you're regular detail callout, but can be filled in manually with the detail reference data <-- Semi-Revit-y option, slightly faster than option 2 due to not needing to make lots of dummy placeholder details
4. Recreate the details in Revit <-- Most Revit-y option, most accurate, and most time consuming

What you choose to do is dependent in large part on your particular project, particularly the number of and complexity of the details you have from CAD.  What you'll likely end up doing is some combination of Options 3 and 4.  It has a relatively high potential for errors, especially if there are to be any modifications to the CAD details at any point.  You could also choose a few of the details (as many as possible) to convert to Revit.  Prime candidates for this conversion are any CAD details that are not correct or otherwise need to be updated.

Hope that helps.

[Anonymous]

Ross, Without going into too much details the permiting process is split into 2 sections Core&shell and TI so there is a need for overlaping details at times. MEP  and Structural are on board with Revit.  for the most part the CAD files would be interior design elements from our consultants, Site plan which is integrated with Civil and our own CAD detail files. I am going to use option 1 for the most part ( Link each detail into a drafting view, then reference that view <-- Most Revit-y option, somewhat time-intensive depending on the number of details) due to the fact that it gives me the opertunity to place the less experience users working with CAD and right now I would prefer the accuracy that options provides. Option 4 will be implemented based on time constraints. Thank you again for your time its been very valuable in confirming my decisions.

[smurphy08]

I know this thread is a couple months old now however interested in your advice as we've had similar problems with dimensioning between Revit and linked CAD files.  We are a building design firm, and are regularly supplied with feature surveys from land surveyors and other consultants in CAD format.  Some of these surveys are quite large and to redraw entirely would be time consuming.  Detail lines over the cad file in the area of required dimensions appears to be the best answer, however interested in your processes, as you say 'Pick CAD, or pick Revit' and not to mix the two?  Cheers.

[Anonymous]

Smurphy

If this is going to be a one time thing and I suspect it will not be, then the process you describe would work (keep in mind that you need to make sure you are adding the dimensions to the Revit detail lines and not the CAD). If there will be revisions of any form I would advise to do everthing in CAD and I do mean everything, so that means even printing the drawing from CAD and not making some kind of a hybrid. Your sheet list will be in Revit so you will need to add the the neccessary sheets to it manually. Hope this helps.

[schlueter]

Everyone who likes this behavior to be changed... please vote 🙂

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/dimensions-on-linked-dwg-file-gets-lost-after-updating-th...

[Anonymous]

This is related (I believe) to the order that Revit loads things when you open your file.  Linked files are last, and if you've dimensioned to an object in the linked file, Revit will respond that (at the time of opening), there is nothing there to dimension to.  You need to be especially careful not to dimension to anything in a linked file -- Revit, on the other hand, should not allow dimensioning to anything in a linked file if the "Select Links" option (usually on bottom/left) is checked to "X".

[Seychellian]

Why is Revit so cruel?

[chrisplyler]

---

@Seychellian wrote:

Why is Revit so cruel?

---

What happened? Did Revit murder your parents or something?

[David_Knight]

we've been suffering through this.  All of our Struct, Mech, Elec, Plub people used revit.   But the people that did the interior upfits used Archicad.  I explained the hardships we were going to experience with this but it was deemed acceptable since we could not handle the workflow at the time.

The exports for 13 stories of units was... massive.  We ended up using cad floor plans per level to ease the amount of conversion required (over 1.5 hours everytime we got a new IFC file)

Let's just say, we're never going that route again.  

But, every single enlarged marketing unit plan that received dimensions had to have manual lines added and aligned.  then dimensioned to those.  It's been a real pain.