Type and instance worksets for groups

[dn_setshogoe]

Hi all,

I am working on a multi-story apartment/ hotel project.

I am using groups to make multiple instances of the room variations across the various levels.

the group types have type worksets and instance worksets. whenever I close the instance worsket of a group type,

Revit closes it as expected. However when I try to close the type workset (in the edit type properties) all the multiple intances of the group type still remain in the project. 

This doesn't make sense. What is the purpose of the type workset in a group if you cannot manage the groups assigned to them?

Kind regards,

Dirang

[dn_setshogoe]

Hi all,

I am working on a multi-story apartment/ hotel project.

I am using groups to make multiple instances of the room variations across the various levels.

the group types have type worksets and instance worksets. whenever I close the instance worsket of a group type,

Revit closes it as expected. However when I try to close the type workset (in the edit type properties) all the multiple intances of the group type still remain in the project. 

This doesn't make sense. What is the purpose of the type workset in a group if you cannot manage the groups assigned to them?

Kind regards,

Dirang

[dn_setshogoe]

So I see this kind of exercise works fine with Revit links.

In regards to groups, I wonder if Revit will ever allow families inside groups to be given independent worksets from 

the group they are in. but still doesnt answer why groups have type workset properties.

[dn_setshogoe]

So I see this kind of exercise works fine with Revit links.

In regards to groups, I wonder if Revit will ever allow families inside groups to be given independent worksets from 

the group they are in. but still doesnt answer why groups have type workset properties.

[Corsten.Au]

worksets are good for multiple users.. 

for design variation, you can use " Design Options "

also if possible, you can use combination of groups to create new group..

( nested group )

[Corsten.Au]

worksets are good for multiple users.. 

for design variation, you can use " Design Options "

also if possible, you can use combination of groups to create new group..

( nested group )

[dn_setshogoe]

Hi Ganesh,

Thanks for the advice.

Is there any way other consultants can use Design options, as you suggest, to manage the load of the model of the link I would send them? 

Also, is there way to universally "hide" the revit elements using design options - as you could with opening/closing worksets?

I agree, worksets are good for worksharing. I think its also good for managing the graphic data generated in Revit.

Kind regards,

Dirang

[dn_setshogoe]

Hi Ganesh,

Thanks for the advice.

Is there any way other consultants can use Design options, as you suggest, to manage the load of the model of the link I would send them? 

Also, is there way to universally "hide" the revit elements using design options - as you could with opening/closing worksets?

I agree, worksets are good for worksharing. I think its also good for managing the graphic data generated in Revit.

Kind regards,

Dirang

[Anonymous]

If you don't understand what this is about, it's better to not reply.

[Anonymous]

If you don't understand what this is about, it's better to not reply.

[kadmonkee]

I am working on a similar type project, and groups can make an easier workflow

are you working in a single model for Building Core and Interior Fit out?

Nested groups are never a good idea as a permanent solution (temporary only) in my experience.

Group 1 w/ nested group 5 on floors 3-7

Group 1 w/ nested group 6 on floors 8-12

group naming becomes an issue- plan ahead

if you cant avoid that then maybe filters can help sort this out

group 1 =room type 1= workset 1 this approach can get crazy real quick too many worksets / group

another option would be to link into your Building Shell / Core an Interior Fit out model

[kadmonkee]

I am working on a similar type project, and groups can make an easier workflow

are you working in a single model for Building Core and Interior Fit out?

Nested groups are never a good idea as a permanent solution (temporary only) in my experience.

Group 1 w/ nested group 5 on floors 3-7

Group 1 w/ nested group 6 on floors 8-12

group naming becomes an issue- plan ahead

if you cant avoid that then maybe filters can help sort this out

group 1 =room type 1= workset 1 this approach can get crazy real quick too many worksets / group

another option would be to link into your Building Shell / Core an Interior Fit out model

[SteveKStafford]

A Group's Workset Type parameter = The definition  (not a placed instance) of the group is assigned to this, imagine a group that has not been placed yet. It has to be stored in the database, available to use and that can be borrowed too. Much like a Dimension Style can be borrowed. I can place many dimensions in a view without altering the dimension style (borrowing the style from Project Standards). If I edit the dimension style to use a different font now I must borrow it from Project Standards > Dimension Styles workset.

A Group's Workset Instance parameter = This is the workset assigned to a specific group placed in the model. Each group you place can be assigned to the same workset as its type or to any other available workset.

When a Group has the same Type/Instance Workset assignment - Using Specify Workset - Turning off that workset will turn off those groups when the file is opened.

When a Group has a different Type/Instance Workset assignment - Using Specify Worksets - Turning off the Instance workset controls the loading of only the groups assigned to it. The Type parameter value assigned to the groups definition is ignored.

Elements can start out assigned to different worksets but when they are associated with a Group they must share the same Workset relationship. That's a fundamental weakness of relying on the strategy Worksets as Visibility Tool...an element can only belong to one workset. That's because it was never intended for visibility. Worksets were invented to allow Revit to manage the borrowing of elements.

[SteveKStafford]

A Group's Workset Type parameter = The definition  (not a placed instance) of the group is assigned to this, imagine a group that has not been placed yet. It has to be stored in the database, available to use and that can be borrowed too. Much like a Dimension Style can be borrowed. I can place many dimensions in a view without altering the dimension style (borrowing the style from Project Standards). If I edit the dimension style to use a different font now I must borrow it from Project Standards > Dimension Styles workset.

A Group's Workset Instance parameter = This is the workset assigned to a specific group placed in the model. Each group you place can be assigned to the same workset as its type or to any other available workset.

When a Group has the same Type/Instance Workset assignment - Using Specify Workset - Turning off that workset will turn off those groups when the file is opened.

When a Group has a different Type/Instance Workset assignment - Using Specify Worksets - Turning off the Instance workset controls the loading of only the groups assigned to it. The Type parameter value assigned to the groups definition is ignored.

Elements can start out assigned to different worksets but when they are associated with a Group they must share the same Workset relationship. That's a fundamental weakness of relying on the strategy Worksets as Visibility Tool...an element can only belong to one workset. That's because it was never intended for visibility. Worksets were invented to allow Revit to manage the borrowing of elements.

[dn_setshogoe]

This seems to be a common method amongst interior design firms

To answer you question. We have a Revit file for building core and another Revit file for interior fit out.

And yes... The strategy of a model group =work set name = scope box name can really go down a path that's messy. 

Fortunately the BIM Execution Plan for the current project preferes links over model groups. 

So what I've done is save out the model groups and populate those in a  container model for coordinating. 

I've left the current Revit file with only one instance of each model group type so I can always save and override the Revit links that go in the container model. 

Much easier workflow. Less heavier model. Less group disadvantages. Everyone's happy 😊 

[dn_setshogoe]

This seems to be a common method amongst interior design firms

To answer you question. We have a Revit file for building core and another Revit file for interior fit out.

And yes... The strategy of a model group =work set name = scope box name can really go down a path that's messy. 

Fortunately the BIM Execution Plan for the current project preferes links over model groups. 

So what I've done is save out the model groups and populate those in a  container model for coordinating. 

I've left the current Revit file with only one instance of each model group type so I can always save and override the Revit links that go in the container model. 

Much easier workflow. Less heavier model. Less group disadvantages. Everyone's happy 😊