Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

As-built Model using In-place family

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

    As-built Model using In-place family

    Hello All,

    My office recently hired a company to build a as-is model for one of our projects. The building is an existing building that had been remodeled a number of times in the past so there are new "wings" added from time to time. (One thing I do want to stress though is the model information is based on the Point cloud file loaded to Revit to create the as-is version). My concern is the modeler who put the model together using a lot of in-place family for the model. By "a lot" means there are things that are not necessary to be modeled as in-place. Things such as light-fixture, ceiling fan, structural columns beam and rafter (simple shapes) or simple canopy and roof; and he would model all the structural pieces within a single in-place family.

    Since we will need to use the model for the future phase of the development, there will be demolition, new work added on top of this as-is model. By having all these in-place families placed in the model, I could see it can be an serious issue. Like I mentioned eariler, he modeled the whole structural piece (rafter, beam and column) as one single in-place family, then I will not have the option to select indivdual member for demolition but to choose the entire family (as a group) for that purpose.

    I would like to hear from you to see what y'all have experienced since this is the first time for us to work with a survey company that generate both Point Cloud and as-is model.

    What are the things you have learned? Is there any critical things you could advise to others to watch out?
    Any comments are greatly appreicated!
    Philip Chan
    Practice Technology Manager | HKS
    http://phil-osophyinbim.blogspot.com/

    #2
    I guess I'll be the first to chime in and tell you (rather, your survey company) to not use in place families. It sounds to me like you have a cluster on your hands. I use in place rarely. Mostly just for renderings. I'll do my curbs, concrete, asphalt, and grass areas as in place families in a separate file. Then link my architectural file into it for rendering.

    My advise, have them fix it now. He could have easily made a truss family, a beam family, and a column family. Then, populated the project with them. I'd actually go so far as to say that would have been an easier method. I bet he created an in place, then copied it everywhere. Now, you have multiple instances of the same family. You're in for a world of hurt.
    Dan

    Comment


      #3
      Phillip-

      Sounds like they did a crap job, and they should redo it. That is- of course- assuming you gave them a detailed strategy document telling them how and what to model. I learned my lesson from third party modeling companies a long time ago: The price is often low because the quality is too. Read the fine print, or write the fine print.

      It has nothing to do with point clouds, i just finished modeling an entire building off Point Clouds. I think there is one in place family in the entire building. (Massing)
      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


        #4
        Dan,

        I am the same way that I am so against in-place family in the project, I even advise my team not to have any or build a generic family even if the case is one-off.
        Also, like you said (and my thoughts are the same), the modeler could have made those structural element as structural families and place it in the project. He did model other mechanical, plumbing equipments as in-place and I found it as a headache.

        I think he is taking a easy way out since he is contracted to the survey company. And you are correct, he modeled In-place, then copy them everywhere so that created multi-instances now in the model.

        I am now thinking that might be the only way he knows how to build families, as he probably doesn't know how to start from scratch!? I have seen the ceiling fan built as in-place and there were 2 in the room, I was going crazy there....

        Anyway, thanks Dan and I am hoping to hear from more people
        Philip Chan
        Practice Technology Manager | HKS
        http://phil-osophyinbim.blogspot.com/

        Comment


          #5
          @ Aaron,

          that's what I am talking about. However, there is no standard involved in this effort. It is a long story. To cut to the chase, the model was supposed to be done by another experienced Revit modeler person whom I had a face-to-face meeting with. However, based on some un-foreseen incident, he wasn't able to do it and now this "new" person comes in and do the job.

          And I do agree with you, it has nothing /very little to do with Point Cloud. I assume having the point cloud file loaded to the model makes it a very good excuse to model in-place. (I guess)

          One more piece of information though, the contractural responsibility said the model is built to BASIC LOD, meaning basic level of walls, floors, ceiling and roof. It didn't say anything about in-place families.

          Aaron, how much do you think the price ought to be when it comes to a good quality of as-is model?
          Philip Chan
          Practice Technology Manager | HKS
          http://phil-osophyinbim.blogspot.com/

          Comment


            #6
            Depends on a bunch of factors. Size of the project, Level of Detail (sorry, you need to be INSANELY specific. I use that ridiculous 70 pager of a BIM-E that we have, stripped down, for such a thing). I dont believ ein using generic walls, or much generic stuff. Structure: Ive seen some model houses try to say "we will model a flat plane (ceiling, reference plane, etc) as the Bottom of structure, since thats all you need. Bzzzzzzzzzt. Wrong.

            So there are a ton of variables. But send me an email with the project specs, and ill let you know.
            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


              #7
              Yeah, then Aaron can sub it out to me. :thumbsup:
              Dan

              Comment


                #8
                Aaron works fast enough that he wouldnt have to sub it 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
                  Well, maybe we need to talk about me subbing some stuff to you then. :laugh:
                  Dan

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Just to throw this out on top of what we have talked about. How do you all feel about modeling historic elements? Things like cornice, arches, keystone in that nature?
                    Also, openings? the one I have now the modeler model the opening as 3 seperated walls. 2 on the sides and 1 (short wall as base constrain is head of the opening)above the opening to "make" the "opening"
                    I would have done much much differently. Using case opening family is my preferred way, or use 'opening" tool to do the job.

                    Any thoughts on that?
                    Philip Chan
                    Practice Technology Manager | HKS
                    http://phil-osophyinbim.blogspot.com/

                    Comment

                    Related Topics

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X