Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Using linked Architect's walls in Structural model

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Using linked Architect's walls in Structural model

    Revit 2014

    We have a project starting up that is a load bearing masonry wall building with hollow core plank floors. The Architect (separate office) is modeling the walls AND the planks. We really will only need to add footings, a few columns (in certain areas), and possibly some steel framing in certain areas.

    I would love to be able to link their model in and just add in what we need to show. I hate to model everything again if they've already done it! This is the problem with load bearing masonry jobs....

    Is there any work around for adding footings to a linked wall? Or would I have to model some form of wall anyway?

    If anyone has done this type of collaboration before, I would love to hear more about the processes you used.

    Thanks!

    #2
    They can be hosted to model lines as well see the comments in this post

    I also had another post talking about using part from the Architect, this post is old and had the architect creating parts now it can happen through links
    Show only Core of walls | BD Mackey Consulting | The Revit Geek Blog
    Brian Mackey |BD Mackey Consulting
    www.bdmackeyconsulting.com/blog
    @Twitter

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by sblake View Post
      Revit 2014

      We have a project starting up that is a load bearing masonry wall building with hollow core plank floors. The Architect (separate office) is modeling the walls AND the planks. We really will only need to add footings, a few columns (in certain areas), and possibly some steel framing in certain areas.

      I would love to be able to link their model in and just add in what we need to show. I hate to model everything again if they've already done it! This is the problem with load bearing masonry jobs....

      Is there any work around for adding footings to a linked wall? Or would I have to model some form of wall anyway?

      If anyone has done this type of collaboration before, I would love to hear more about the processes you used.

      Thanks!
      The reason why the arch has to model the structural wall is that it may have finishes associated with it, as well as doors and windows that have to be scheduled. Structural also models these same walls to provide the correct location, thickness and openings for doors and windows.

      Arch requires the ability to revise door and window locations at will, and it is not a good workflow to eliminate the arch modeled structural walls. The time spent designing and locking in a design may not parallel the workflow of the structural consultant. Is is best practice to use VG and good communication to model and present elements as required that ultimately end up on the printed documents.
      Bettisworth North

      Comment


        #4
        Brian,
        Thanks for giving me a few options. I am going to look into hosting the footings to model lines.

        Charles, Normally we do model the walls, even when the Architect has done this already. However, in this project we are going to be relying on the walls AND hollow core slabs from the Architect, it seemed easier to try and use their modeled elements, instead of our office replicating it.

        Originally posted by Charles Karl View Post
        The reason why the arch has to model the structural wall is that it may have finishes associated with it, as well as doors and windows that have to be scheduled. Structural also models these same walls to provide the correct location, thickness and openings for doors and windows.

        Arch requires the ability to revise door and window locations at will, and it is not a good workflow to eliminate the arch modeled structural walls. The time spent designing and locking in a design may not parallel the workflow of the structural consultant. Is is best practice to use VG and good communication to model and present elements as required that ultimately end up on the printed documents.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by sblake View Post
          ...it seemed easier to try and use their modeled elements, instead of our office replicating it.
          Just out of curiosity, how do you plan on handling the details/sections at, let's say, a hollowcore slab-to-wall connection? Do you plan on showing the architectural model (including finishes, insulation, and other non-structural elements) in these views?
          Tony Perez @Twitter
          BIM Manager
          Page Southerland Page, Inc.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by sblake View Post
            Brian,
            Thanks for giving me a few options. I am going to look into hosting the footings to model lines.

            Charles, Normally we do model the walls, even when the Architect has done this already. However, in this project we are going to be relying on the walls AND hollow core slabs from the Architect, it seemed easier to try and use their modeled elements, instead of our office replicating it.
            Bottom line is, the structural model is the bones of any design, therefore structural should have a complete model to be fully coordinated with all disciplines. Also, structural is ultimately the owner of the grids that all project direction and location is described. One more note,...some but not all mechanical sub contractors rely on a complete structural model to coordinate their mechanical duct locations and material takeoffs and even cutting lists. In the future, this will be common place throughout.
            Bettisworth North

            Comment


              #7
              Haven't thought it all through yet. For details/sections: if worse came to worse, we could hide their wall and put in a detail item family... I know that's not the greatest solution.

              It just seems silly that the Architect models the walls and we have to go and model the same walls again.

              Originally posted by Knitro87 View Post
              Just out of curiosity, how do you plan on handling the details/sections at, let's say, a hollowcore slab-to-wall connection? Do you plan on showing the architectural model (including finishes, insulation, and other non-structural elements) in these views?

              Comment


                #8
                Its not silly. You should both model them. Then coordinate, and then filter theirs out.
                Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
                @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
                  ...You should both model them. Then coordinate, and then filter theirs out.
                  I agree. A good rule of thumb is anything that can be copy/monitored (levels, grids, columns, walls, floors, and openings) is acceptable to model twice. Having these elements in the host model gives you more control and better predictability when it comes to creating the actual construction documents.
                  Tony Perez @Twitter
                  BIM Manager
                  Page Southerland Page, Inc.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Has Revit fixed the issue with the copy/monitor function of walls?

                    Comment

                    Related Topics

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X