Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
Did you write every day in the changelist, what you changed? for me it is hard, to know, which element is changed days after changeing and working on different Projects.
I think the desire to keep track of deleted items in Revit falls under this category. Here is the reason why.
We recently encountered an issue where someone had accidentally deleted a Ceiling object and along with it all the ceiling hosted objects in it. The design team didn't noticed it until very late and when it was discovered the quicker solution (for all kinds of reason) was to just recreate the ceiling and insert all the ceiling hosted elements back again.
Here is the workflow that may work better.
1) Someone deletes the Host objects. Revit converts it into a a transient object and keeps the hosted objects with it.
2) Based on user's choice you can remove the transient object from the model and along with it all the hosted objects.
3) In an event it was an accident then the user shall have an option to convert the transient object back to valid object.
4) Almost like "Reveal Hidden" Tool but for Deleted Items until it is purged as a choice.
Autodesk please see if this qualifies for a separate idea or falls under this same category of tracking changes.
Hey all, can you guys elaborate a little on the workflow you'd like to carry out here? I totally get the value of Revit keeping track of how models are changing, and our Compare Versions feature is al illustration of initial investment in this space, so I'd like to make sure we're keeping in mind the workflows with most value for subscribers like yourselves.
Hey all, can you guys elaborate a little on the workflow you'd like to carry out here?
For example, linked models. When we receive a MEP and Structural model, we have to check if it fits our architectural model. Things that need to be changed are marked up in our model which we then send to the other parties. They have to link our model and make the necessary changes. They send back the changed model and then we have to check if they actually made the changes. Now if it's about a couple of changes, then it's easy to eyeball. But in case of many changes, it's a tedious job. That's one scenario.
Another scenario is evolving models. Whats thing change over time in third party models? For example, the structural engineer decided to change beam sizes and as a result, they pop out under the ceiling. The structural engineer doesn't make a list of all changes to a structural model, so if we link that model in our model, we don't have a clue about those changes.
The work-around we use now is to load the new and previous model in Navisworks and clash them to spot the differences. Those clashes then have to be conveyed back into Revit to make model changes. But Navisworks only checks geometry - not annotations. Changes to annotation have to be done' manually'. All in all it's a pretty time-consuming procedure which could be eased if Revit keeps track of changes. In which case we simply open the change-schedule to get an overview of changed elements and annotation. Double click on them to navigate to the changed item.
It would be very beneficial as an MEP modeler to receive an Architectural link that when you reloaded it showed up the changes or movements of selected categories such as walls, ceilings say in a red colour it would be similar to schedules where it lists out the changes and you can click each item and have a button for show in model, to be even more bold if it could automatically tell you when your equipment is now clashing or has been modified due to host changes would be amazing.
I suggested something related here. My suggestion is more to do with a revision control system. Not only would you know who did what when but you could also create separate branches that could be revised and merged at a later time. Take a look at Git if you're not familiar with this concept.
Pick model snapshot from CD issue. In the current state of the model (say Bid Addendum 1) Revit automatically generates a list of potential clouds and deltas. Allow user to check or uncheck items to be clouded. (In other words, why am I manually digging through a database and hand-generating a report to tell someone what's changed in the database?)
Pick from a list of model files. Given a set of model snapshots created over time, when was item 'X' created/modified/removed?
Project Manager needs to see what work was done by a specific modeler over the past week. Generate a report.
Project Manager wants to see model progress over the last x amount of time. Pick any desired view, and interact with it via a tool that iterates through model changes much like the Rewind tool iterates through view changes.
Something I was going to submit as a separate idea, but seems to fit here as change tracking would be the larger umbrella necessary for my idea to work. Similar to Paul's first bullet point, Revision Management needs an overhaul. Like he says, why are we going through and manually tagging changes in a program like Revit?
Revit should track changes, always, and as you set Issues/Revisions, Revit should be able to associate the tracked changes with the issues/revisions. Making a more robust/flexible revision manager could allow for categorizing changes based on major drawing releases, ASIs, RFIs, and so on, as well as looking at the changes in other ways as suggested in comments here.
Then, for example, when it is time to put out a drawing or set of drawings, one could toggle changes to be highlighted, clouded, or something based on a previous issue/revision. Then the user should be able to review those, approve/reject/adjust revision clouds, and now changes aren't missed in a drawing set. Would need to be able to see the changes both in list view (exportable to excel, for easy copying to a transmittal page or other system), as well as visually in any view affected.
I also like the other possibilities suggested here of being able to see changes in the model and linked models (have appearance overrides, for example). This would greatly increase the ability of team members to collaborate.
At the end of the day, I think all these pieces are related and could be made possible with the same set of updates in the core of Revit.
Can we get an explanation on the status change, please? Revision tracking is kind-of an important thing in the design and construction industry. Automating it intelligently could be a huge boost. Thanks!
Ideally, Revit would follow a standard version control/revision control system. Autodesk Vault is supposed to fill that need but it needs to get granular with specific Revit elements. It would also be great to expose that information out to a file or a database so it's human and machine-readable. I would love to use services like Git with Revit binaries!
In the meantime, think of how it would integrate with Autodesk Forge. Don't go out there and build something that's no one could add to with APIs.
Just to keep this conversation going, I think that at the very least Revit should formally support the idea of a hand written change log. This could be akin to a schedule where each row is a new change log entry. Change log entries belong to revisions and should be grouped by revisions. Items should be sorted alphabetically by item id or by creation time stamp. Revision cloud and tag system should change to reflect this. So clicking on the tag would take me to the change log row and I could click on a change log row and "show it in model". Revision tags would a more sophisticated numbering system with both revision and item numbers. For example 3-5 could indicate revision 3 item 5. I should be able to place a change log table a sheet just like a schedule.
I'm making this up as I write this. One thing is clear to me though the old skool revision notes field is just completely inadequate in the age of data.
To take this idea further I would like to see the tracking by who made the edits be fairly significant in order to safely enable Level 3 BIM and allow multiple groups like designers, consultants, and fabricators to all work from the same model from the cloud (BIM 360 Design Collaboration). This type of tracking would hold people accountable for the work they do in a truly collaborative environment.
@SteveDFThorne is spot on. The software design industry is more than a decade ahead of us here. I would really like to see a git-like versioning system that allows any number of people to work on a project (model) independently and request the owner merge those changes after review into the authoritative version. Quick description (Wikipedia link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git😞 "Git is a version control system for tracking changes in computer files and coordinating work on those files among multiple people. It is primarily used for source code management in software development, but it can be used to keep track of changes in any set of files. As a distributed revision control system, it is aimed at speed, data integrity, and support for distributed, non-linear workflows. ... As with most other distributed version control systems, and unlike most client-server systems, every Git directory on every computer is a full-fledged repository with complete history and full version tracking abilities, independent of network access or a central server."
We are issuing Rev 0 of a big Revit project and our PM wants to convert the drawings to AutoCAD and continue the project in AutoCAD. This is mainly due to his fear of tracking revisions. He's afraid (in Revit) a change in one drawing will propagate through the package (that's the idea of Revit, right?) and not be bubbled on the other sheets.
If Revit automatically flagged these changes or at least could compare current sheets with previously issued sheets, it would be great.
AutoCAD does dwg compare. Bluebeam can compare two pdfs and bubble them (my current solution) so it seems Revit should be able to do this too.
To reorganize and consolidate our Revit Ideas for ease of use to both our customers and our product teams, we are no longer using the "Future Consideration" status for Revit Ideas. All Revit Ideas are always under review, and consolidating posts (and Kudos!) will give weight to topics previously spread across many posts. We are continuing to evaluate where this request falls into our roadmap and will provide an update when we have made a decision.
I appreciate that this topic is still getting some attention. However, after years of seeing small changes and tweaks here or there in Revit (for which we are thankful), I think it's time to take a leap and make a big change like this, even if it's the only thing the Revit team works on for the next year. This sort of change by itself would be a huge advancement in Revit, and a big differentiator among the many BIM platforms. Personally, I'd be fine if this change was the only "new" thing in the next Revit (at this point, v2023 I guess, since v2022 is only 3 months away). Having the Git-like version control, branching, merging, reporting and automation @Anonymous @Anonymous @Anonymous (and the rest of us on here) have all described is where Revit needs to go. It also needs to work with or without BIM360, that way it's available to ALL Revit users (I understand if it needs something like Revit Server or BIM360, as Git isn't server-less, but both should be an option). Having the branching/merging would also be really valuable for controlling when changes appear in the master model. We frequently run into the issue of getting a model that aligns with a certain release, but also includes unfinished changes related to other planned future changes/releases. There are typically many different changes in various stages of progress in models we receive. However, technically (and legally) those changes don't exist yet per contract, and thus shouldn't be visible, not by default anyway. Design options sort of address this, but are difficult to use for major changes, or for changes the further into design/CDs a projects gets. However, a true branching/merging system could simultaneously update and advance the revision tracking/reporting/markup system, and the design option functionality, and make things much easier to work with, as well as better suited for wider collaboration with design consultants, contractors and trade partners. Sorry for the long post, but this is something I've been thinking about and wanting for a long time. Hoping some people smarter than me on software version control can chime in again (like those mentioned above or @luke.johnson@j0hnp@sobon.konrad ?)
