I use groups all the time, in just about every project. I think it's just a matter of knowing what you can and can't do with them.

1. Line based families- can't go in groups. If a copy of that group gets moved or placed out of plane, that family will stay in plane, and Revit will totally let you do it. Its a mess.

2. I never put objects in a group without objects it's dependent on. If I'm using wall hosted, the walls are included. If I'm using rooms, boundaries are included. Face based- I include a re plane for the objects.

3. I generally try to be careful about how much walls in groups have to join with items outside the group, but mine do. All the time. It's just common sense: if the joint has to be different, I use a different group.

4. I keep the scale smaller. I'll do every curtain wall or storefront configuration as a group (I made it office policy). An entire unit? Eh. I'm on the fence. But I have tremendous success and comfort with file links, too. But I can see the appeal. I've done it both ways. Links have the benefit of design options for variations in units, too. :-)

5. Mirroring groups. People say not to do it, but I find it's because of the 3 reasons above. I mirror mine ALL THE TIME. never A problem, unless someone constrained something they didn't understand.

A little more info here

I'll echo what Aaron said. Groups are a tricky little monster for those who are just starting to use them, but once you get to know them, they are very useful.

I would say this as well. Don't over use groups. Just like any tool, trying to get too cute with groups can overload your project and create more work that you save.

For instance, a large condo project that I did. There were units that were essentially just mirrors of the unit next to it, but instead of creating 1 group and mirroring it, I created both units and then grouped them together. Yes, if 1 wall moved, I had to move the wall next-door, but that's far less work and coordination than having to deal with all the hosted items on the wall that splits the units and dealing with mirror issues. Does that make sense?

I'll never forget working at a firm that way over used AutoCAD viewports. . . .they spent so much time with visibility, that the coordination they saved was worthless.

I cant reiterate enough: Its not a quantity thing, its a knowing what they can do thing. I use groups for every Storefront assembly, even when i do retail. Ive done 5 or 6 huge outdoor shopping facilities. One in particular, had a storefront assembly (group) every 16'-8", over THOUSANDS of linear feet of exterior walls (outdoor racetrack type shopping center). Performance absolutely FLEW. AND, they were all set to automatically embed in the exterior walls they were placed in. Did it take a minute or two to finish the group? Of course! It was updating several HUNDRED instances. But it was perfection.

Shear NUMBERS of Groups will NOT hurt model performance of behavior. Using groups INCORRECTLY will bring a project to its knees with 5 groups.

Thanks so much! Great points, I'll pass this along to the team, and probably have more questions!

Ciao,

Another question..

Stairs in groups. They randomly are not part of a group anymore. Or the opposite it adds it to all instances of the group and then have to be deleted.

Is that normal?


Thanks again all!

I'll make stairs part of a Vertical Circulation group that repeats floor to floor, all the time, without an issue... So the stairs themselves arent the problem. Are you moving the levels, editing the stairs, doing something that would change the constraints?

Yes, editing them. So that's not a good idea once it's in a group?

It depends on how and what youre editing. Obviously, you need to be in Edit Group... But it shouldnt be having an issue Finishing the group, unless WHAT youre editing is a constraint issue.