No announcement yet.

System Family Naming: Project vs Library

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    System Family Naming: Project vs Library

    It seems to me that there is an innate conflict between the naming needs in an office Library of system families vs the naming needs for the subset of those families in use in an actual project. In the library I might need something like E- 06 10 Wood Stud (2x8) - BV over air space & RI - GWB (5/8") where the air space size is generic, the Brick Veneer is generic, the Rigid Insulation is generic, etc. But the long name is required because there may be 100 walls in that library, and each needs a unique name. In the project, I may end up with 10 varieties of this wall, with different air space to provide intentional reveals at the intersection with different structural elements, along with different colors and brick patterns/sizes, and different interior paint colors if that can be consistently applied at the wall type level. And in a perfect world, the naming in the project would be shorter and perhaps more descriptive of the actual use or condition.

    Some approaches to family renaming I have tried include...

    Expand the Library name
    E- 06 10 Wood Stud (2x8) - BV over air space & RI - GWB (5/8") becomes E- 06 10 Wood Stud (2x8) - BV (Taupe Common 1/3 running bond) over air space (3") & RI (4") - GWB (5/8") & Paint
    This means the people placing walls have to understand the wall, which is a good thing. But mother of gawd that is a painfully long name. And yet I have seen situations on even a small school where we have 3 or 4 brick patterns/colors combined with very consistent paint colors on the inside that would really make this necessary.

    Rename to Type Mark
    E- 06 10 Wood Stud (2x8) - BV over air space & RI - GWB (5/8") becomes E-9
    Obvious naming choice, but you might not know your type mark numbering until late in DD. And if you do have to renumber, you also have to rename. Unless you have a really systematic numbering system, this can become a lot of extra work, even tho the names really are pretty good.

    Rename to use
    E- 06 10 Wood Stud (2x8) - BV over air space & RI - GWB (5/8") becomes E- Classroom Wing or E- Classroom Wing Dark Pattern or the like.
    Good for simple projects, but on complex projects there would be a lot of time spent figuring out an appropriate naming convention. Or there wouldn't and the naming would be haphazard. And on complex projects the name by use would be just as long and complicated as the library name, and so of little value.

    I am leaning towards Name by Use when the families come in from the office Library, in early DD and sometimes even SD. Then late in DD or early in CDs, Rename for Mark and proceed to tag. Of course some PMs want to see the tags at 25% DD which throws a monkey wrench in things, but they also usually want to see donuts on interior elevations and line weights in elevation at the same time, so their projects are a bit of a write off.

    Anyway, wondering what others are doing here, and the philosophy behind the process.

    Pragmatic Praxis

    Interesting thought to name them by use, but I think I´ll stick to naming by how it´s build. e.g. <Function>_<OverallThickness>_<MainLayers>_<MainLa yerThickness>

    Some more thoughts in this thread for the style guide.
    Klaus Munkholm
    "Do. Or do not. There is no try."


      Yep, me too... Mainly because I think it's important to use the same naming convention on all elements and this would be an exception (since this method doesn't make a lot of sense for roofs and floors)
      Martijn de Riet
      Professional Revit Consultant | Revit API Developer
      MdR Advies
      Planta1 Revit Online Consulting


      Related Topics