Schedules slowing down MEP - Combined Parameters?

[donnia.tabor-hanson]

We have been having problems with our MEP projects and we think we have narrowed it down.

Combining parameters allow things like Door Size to show 84x36 in one column. MEP uses a lot of these such as Voltage/Phase or Voltage/Phase/HP.

Apparently, when you combine parameters in schedules it can slow things way down. The work has slowed steadily with each version as we have upgraded.

Our schedules worked perfectly in 2019 and 2020. Starting in 2021 we noticed things slowing down. Using 2022 and 2023 seems to be even slower. It takes a long time to complete these processes if we need to draw something that will be in one of the schedules with combined parameters. It does not matter if the schedule has been opened or not, just the presence of the combined parameters drags our system down. It does seem to be worse with Shared Parameters, but that is what we use all the time.

The word I am getting from a reseller I have consulted with is that we need to not use all these combined parameters, that used to work and don’t now. This, my team, feels is unacceptable, to say the least.

I need to know if others are experiencing this. Does anyone have a workaround? Do we really have to change the way we have worked because of something that had changed in the software? Can we expect to get this fixed?

[HVAC-Novice]

I don't use a lot of combined parameters. So I haven't noticed a degradation in R2024. did you use R2024, or only up to R2023? 

Did you try the same project with your normal schedules and combined parameters, and then the very same project and separated those combined parameters? Or how did you narrow it down to combined parameters? 

Definitely an interesting topic and I'm curious how this ends. 

[donnia.tabor-hanson]

An outside party created the template. They have been doing this for years. Our engineers complain to me, I go to the source. The outside party has been in discussion with Autodesk and it is a recognized issue. They were told just to quit using the combined parameters. This would change the look of our standards that we have had for years.

[RobDraw]

Many of us have had to change long established standards in order to work more efficiently within the limitations of our chosen platform. Just because it’s always been done that way doesn’t mean it can’t be changed.

[HVAC-Novice]

I generally agree. For features that don't exist we have to use workarounds. 

But features that do exist should be usable. And as OP stated, there seems to be a degradation over the newer Revit versions. things definitely shouldn't get worse with newer software.

OP: what exactly is slow due to this? Is it when you place a new family (and it creates a new schedule entry), or how does the problem exactly look like? It sounds you have this information second-hand. Did you try other templates? I don't know your templates or projects, but I'm always worried about things I didn't create myself. Just spit-balling here and I want to know what to look for so I can decide how to proceed with future schedules and combined. I think we need more detail to understand how the problem manifests itself. 

For the most part I just combine manufacturer and model. Sometimes voltage and phases. Maybe I just haven't paid attention to see the issue. 

[donnia.tabor-hanson]

It is exactly voltage and phasing types of combinations that are generally accepted in the profession that we have. When something with the combined shared parameters gets put into a project, the project slows down tremendously. It is like the calculations of putting a combined parameter together is too much for 2023 but it worked great in 2019. But to be told now that we have to quit using them because it is known that it slows things down if they are in schedules is ridiculous I feel. (dismounting my high horse now)

[RobDraw]

Revit has changed some things in parameters in recent years. That may persuade you to look closer at the issue to verify that these changes are/are not throwing errors that Revit might be struggling with. Your 3rd party consultant should be aware of this.

[HVAC-Novice]

What exactly does "project slows down" mean? What exactly is slower? Does it happen when the schedule is closed? 

Did you try that in R2024? Are the computers adequate at all? 

Did you literally use the project with those parameters combined and it was slow, and once you separated them it was back to fast? I mean literally you yourself tried it, or are you just relying on what the 3rd party said? I think this is the only way to know for sure this is the problem. A lot of other things could have changed to slow a project down. 

It's hard to trouble-shoot with second or third-hand knowledge of the exact situation. 

Showing phases and voltage in 2 columns isn't the end of the World. It still legally shows the same thing. Sure, it isn't nice if a feature has unintended consequences. But let's first establish what the issue is based on first-hand experience and experimentation. 

[donnia.tabor-hanson]

@RobDraw Our third-party consultant was the one that found out why the files are running so slow. They have been in discussion with Autodesk who told them to use no more than 10 combined parameters. 

I am wanting to know how we get their attention to let them know this is unacceptable. Don't give us things to use and then take our toys and break them and tell us we can't have them anymore unless we want to play with broken toys.

[donnia.tabor-hanson]

@HVAC-Novice I know the computers are adequate. I know they have changed the software over the years, but do they have to change it so that things quit working? So that we have to change our standards because they broke something?

There has been much study on this for the last year or more and Autodesk knows this is an issue. 
How do we raise it up to get it fixed?

[HVAC-Novice]

I'm just trying to suggest what to do to narrow down the cause of issues. If you don't want to do any of the things I suggested, or reveal more information, fine. But you are not getting better help from us users or Autodesk if you don't go through the steps suggested or provide the information. I hope you give Autodesk support more to work with. 

If you already talked to Autodesk, or opened a support ticket, that is all you can do to get their attention. This forum is mainly users helping users. Autodesk staff sometimes jumps in to help, though. My recommendation is to re-create the problem yourself (as I suggested in previously thread) and talk to Autodesk directly and not rely on a 3rd party. 

At this point I haven't seen anything substantiating this is a combined parameter problem. But this is just because no first hand information was provided or tests shown. So, who knows. I'm certainly interested in learning more if this is an actual problem and if it still is a problem in R2024. So keep us updated on how this develops. 

[RobDraw]

Yeah, it seems to be speculation or maybe passing the buck. Third party says it's Autodesk. Autodesk says it's third party. 

[donnia.tabor-hanson]

I have faith in our third-party team. They have gone through extensive settings such as looking into the families individually, then they tried taking out Conditional formatting in the schedules to see if that was it and then they tried taking out the combined parameters separately and that seemed to speed things up. It was confirmed with Autodesk that this is a known issue. 

The machines do not seem to make a difference because new and old machines have the same problem. 

I wanted to find out if anyone else had experienced this. Did they try other things? Have others found other issues causing MEP files to be slowing the projects down?

[HVAC-Novice]

Other users may be able to confirm this problem if you detail exactly how the problem manifests itself. What exactly is slow? Honestly, I have no idea what to pay attention to now to confirm or deny this problem exists. Does this only slow things down when the schedule is open? Or all the time? and how much slower? And did you try R2024? You talk about R2023. OK, but how is Autodesk to resolve issues if users don't apply updates? 

Old PCs can be faster than newer PCs. It all depends. For all we know you could use laptops. If that hardware is barely able to keep up, any slight performance hog will be noticeable whereas powerful hardware won't notice a small % drop at all. So providing hardware details for any performance issue is crucial. 

It takes some meticulous testing to find the cause of slowing down. I once had a duct pressure calculation problem that slowed down calcs extremely. It turned out using an array in a louver family to create the louver blades caused this. Took me a while to figure out and I still don't understand why. I ended up removing the louver blades and just use model lines or something like that since it will look exactly the same. What I'm trying to say is, it takes quite some testing to find the problem and resolve it. It isn't something I could have someone else solve it since I'm the one experiencing it and I had ALL the available information and didn't have someone else filtering and withholding some crucial details. 

[RLY_15]

As a baseline reference point to the rest of us unfamiliar with the company standards, roughly how many combined parameters have been generated into the typical project file? Are we talking a handful? Several dozen? On top of that, roughly how many elements utilize combined parameters? Dozens? Hundreds? Thousands? Are there notable differences if the schedules are grouped? Ungrouped? 

I'll put my two cents in the ring and say I haven't personally experienced client performance issues related to combined parameters. I use maybe less than 10 per project, and they affect probably 100ish elements at most. So in that range of project, no particular issues (yet).

Based on the comments posted so far, it doesn't seem like this has come up for others, and I'm aware that the users posting so far have participated in projects substantially larger than what I tend to be involved with. So at this point I'm on the whole thought process of starting by validating/discretizing the consultant's statement, regardless of faith.

Not much else to do at this point until another user chimes in echoing a similar experience. Until that happens, most responses are going to be in the realm of 'well are you positive that's the only thing that's going on here?'. No particular shade to your consultant, your team, etc... that's just the natural question for those outside the circumstance.

[hmunsell]

---

@donnia.tabor-hanson wrote:

...When something with the combined shared parameters gets put into a project, the project slows down tremendously. 

---

i didn't see anyone else address this...so... Is it only happening with "Shared Parameters" or does it happen if you use Combined "Project Parameters", that were not created from Shared Parameters?

[donnia.tabor-hanson]

@hmunsell since we only use Shared Parameters for these combined parameters I cannot address this. Some of these parameters have to also be tagged so they have to remain Shared Parameters. 

[drewj]

This seems very interesting, so I setup a couple of files:

File 1 has 3744 Lighting Fixtures, then no shared parameters or schedules

File 2 has the same 3744 Lighting Fixtures, with 9 shared parameters then 48 schedules, all with 26 combined parameters

I notice no difference in performance in Revit 2022, the attached gif shows me moving the elements, each move takes approx 8 seconds in either file.

The performance of the schedules (opening and viewing) is very slow, but not the move command.

Can you recommend where the files need modification to replicate the error?

Drew

[donnia.tabor-hanson]

Can you do a test with pipes and duct work? Those are the ones with major issues.

[drewj]

Seems to be no difference, all I am doing is a test of moving in 3D view, but with 

and the same combination of parameters, combined parameters and 48 more schedules for Ducts I am not seeing any difference in performance in 2022.

I tested in 2024 as well, same results, actually about 15% quicker than 2022,  but no difference between combined parameters and no combined parameters.

I wonder what the difference can be?