Donate Now Goal amount for this year: 2500 USD, Received: 2164 USD (87%)

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 54
Like Tree10Likes

Thread: C4R, Updating Links

  1. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    September 19, 2013
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    40
    Current Local Time
    05:21 PM
    Been using A360/C4R since this past September so I felt compelled to jump into this thread. Sorry for reviving something that is a month old.

    Originally Posted by TRWhiteheadSomething that seems missing is 1) assuming that everyone in a team WANTS to be on C4R. We commonly have projects where I'd like to get up to 10 users in a project file, from multiple locations. Every other consultant is either slow to update or doesn't work in Revit. So even putting them on the C4R team isn't really viable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyle View Post
    Sounds like this sort of a project probably isn't a great fit for the cloud worksharing workflow enabled by the C4R product today, to be honest. As I said earlier, our goal is to make cloud worksharing the most efficient & cost-effective way for teams to deliver a project using a BIM process. For that statement to be true for the majority of Projects, we need to evolve the service as you know it today. That's what I was alluding to earlier.
    I have to ask, what specifically is the ideal fit for Autodesk's vision of what a C4R project should be? Not asking for future looking statements, just in its current iteration what is the sweet spot?

    We collaborate with Associate Architects very regularly where the need to be in the same model is a must. At the same time our consultants could vary wildly in terms of technology, budget, experience, etc. It just depends on the project. To this point, we have chosen to only have the Arch models active on C4R. We use the Consultant models links, but they are not active on the project hub. This is due to some of the points made in the previous discussion.

    So if the majority of our projects are potentially not suitable for C4R in Autodesk's eyes and we need a vehicle to collaborate, what is the solution?
    Last edited by nbower; March 7th, 2016 at 12:47 PM.

  2. #22
    Forum Addict tzframpton's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 17, 2011
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,052
    Current Local Time
    04:21 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by nbower View Post
    So if the majority of our projects are potentially not suitable for C4R in Autodesk's eyes and we need a vehicle to collaborate, what is the solution?
    There's actually a few solutions. Revit Server is one. A 3rd party WAN networking service. Or, in-house I.T. staffing can collaborate and build some type of system that works together.

    Not saying they're the more effective way, but the free market does have viable options. I think C4R can handle ten users in a project just fine, unless I'm missing something. We've had four users in at one time with no hiccup at all. Can't imagine why ten would be too much to handle... but I also can't imagine ten people in a project, unless it's a very large project with many sub-areas of modeling going on, in the same exact model. Usually, you'll have a few in the arch, few in strc and few in MEP and Links set up appropriately between each model. So 2-4 users each model.

  3. #23
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    September 19, 2013
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    40
    Current Local Time
    05:21 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tzframpton View Post
    There's actually a few solutions. Revit Server is one. A 3rd party WAN networking service. Or, in-house I.T. staffing can collaborate and build some type of system that works together.

    Not saying they're the more effective way, but the free market does have viable options. I think C4R can handle ten users in a project just fine, unless I'm missing something. We've had four users in at one time with no hiccup at all. Can't imagine why ten would be too much to handle... but I also can't imagine ten people in a project, unless it's a very large project with many sub-areas of modeling going on, in the same exact model. Usually, you'll have a few in the arch, few in strc and few in MEP and Links set up appropriately between each model. So 2-4 users each model.
    Thanks for the response. We have been RS users since 2011. We have done over 100 projects on RS and have collaborated internally and externally on it. It has seemed to get worse with every release, so we are quickly find it to not be a viable solution for external collaboration. And in all fairness, that was probably not its intended usage anyway. It will always have its place here at our firm for internal multi-office collaboration though.

    I was referring specifically to Kyle's response on what an ideal project should be. It seems with the our perceived limitations that are currently in place when dealing Consultants that the majority of our projects will not fit the C4R mold.

  4. #24
    Forum Addict tzframpton's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 17, 2011
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,052
    Current Local Time
    04:21 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by nbower View Post
    It has seemed to get worse with every release
    The Autodesk way!! Haha KIDDING. Kind of.

    Quote Originally Posted by nbower View Post
    I was referring specifically to Kyle's response on what an ideal project should be. It seems with the our perceived limitations that are currently in place when dealing Consultants that the majority of our projects will not fit the C4R mold.
    Yeah I hear you. I think C4R will grow and will eventually become what it needs to be, complete with administrative access levels and everything.

  5. #25
    Forum Co-Founder Twiceroadsfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    10,346
    Current Local Time
    04:21 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tzframpton View Post
    There's actually a few solutions. Revit Server is one. A 3rd party WAN networking service. Or, in-house I.T. staffing can collaborate and build some type of system that works together.

    Not saying they're the more effective way, but the free market does have viable options. I think C4R can handle ten users in a project just fine, unless I'm missing something. We've had four users in at one time with no hiccup at all. Can't imagine why ten would be too much to handle... but I also can't imagine ten people in a project, unless it's a very large project with many sub-areas of modeling going on, in the same exact model. Usually, you'll have a few in the arch, few in strc and few in MEP and Links set up appropriately between each model. So 2-4 users each model.
    Just one thing to clarify- 2-4 people isn't a *large project staff* in architecture. Big projects regularly have 6-10 folks just from architecture, in them. Especially specialty market sectors like healthcare and life sciences, or with interior design in the model as well (they work in the arch model).
    tzframpton likes this.

  6. #26
    Forum Addict tzframpton's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 17, 2011
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,052
    Current Local Time
    04:21 PM
    Gotcha, thanks for clarifying Aaron.

  7. #27
    Autodesk
    (Product Line Manager, BDS)
    Kyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 3, 2012
    Posts
    242
    Current Local Time
    05:21 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by nbower View Post
    Thanks for the response. We have been RS users since 2011. We have done over 100 projects on RS and have collaborated internally and externally on it. It has seemed to get worse with every release, so we are quickly find it to not be a viable solution for external collaboration. And in all fairness, that was probably not its intended usage anyway. It will always have its place here at our firm for internal multi-office collaboration though.
    Yes, you are correct that Revit Server was never really designed to cross the Domain boundary, even though adept IT jujitsu can make it it work. This is one of the main reasons we built the Cloud Worksharing cloud service that underpins the C4R product.
    Quote Originally Posted by nbower View Post
    I was referring specifically to Kyle's response on what an ideal project should be. It seems with the our perceived limitations that are currently in place when dealing Consultants that the majority of our projects will not fit the C4R mold.
    The ideal project has all primary design partners subscribed to the C4R product, and Cloud Worksharing employed on all primary models. To have this today, there needs to be a highly collaborative workflow between partners coupled with effective communications. In most cases that needs to be captured in the BIM Execution Plan from day 1.

    As I've said previously, we realize that the high trust + live-linking workflow is not for everybody, and consider it a very high priority to evolve the Cloud Worksharing service and Common Data Environment (CDE) to support other workflows.

    -Kyle

  8. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    September 19, 2013
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    40
    Current Local Time
    05:21 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyle View Post
    Yes, you are correct that Revit Server was never really designed to cross the Domain boundary, even though adept IT jujitsu can make it it work. This is one of the main reasons we built the Cloud Worksharing cloud service that underpins the C4R product.
    Agreed. We were desperate for something, so our martial artist made it happen. We had some successes and some disasters. A360 has been a blessing so far compared to where we were 2 years ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyle View Post
    The ideal project has all primary design partners subscribed to the C4R product, and Cloud Worksharing employed on all primary models. To have this today, there needs to be a highly collaborative workflow between partners coupled with effective communications. In most cases that needs to be captured in the BIM Execution Plan from day 1.

    As I've said previously, we realize that the high trust + live-linking workflow is not for everybody, and consider it a very high priority to evolve the Cloud Worksharing service and Common Data Environment (CDE) to support other workflows.

    -Kyle
    Thank you Kyle, I just wanted to make sure I understood exactly the Factory's position on this. We have had some interest from a few of our consultants on going all in on C4R on the projects we have active. However, to this point we haven't done a project that way. Although it has come up in internal conversations, I am less concerned with their ability to access our models and change things. Even though some security access would be beneficial. I am more concerned about the shift in workflow in regards to when we see what we see from our MEP and Structural engineers. Traditionally they are a week behind us b/c of the posting cycles. I think our users would need to shift expectations in that what they are seeing may not actually be the final designed system. That and we have heard that cost has been a little prohibitive for them.

    Still would be nice to overwrite a link file and link non-revit A360 files though....

  9. #29
    Autodesk
    (Product Line Manager, BDS)
    Kyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 3, 2012
    Posts
    242
    Current Local Time
    05:21 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by nbower View Post
    Although it has come up in internal conversations, I am less concerned with their ability to access our models and change things. Even though some security access would be beneficial. I am more concerned about the shift in workflow in regards to when we see what we see from our MEP and Structural engineers. Traditionally they are a week behind us b/c of the posting cycles. I think our users would need to shift expectations in that what they are seeing may not actually be the final designed system. That and we have heard that cost has been a little prohibitive for them.

    Still would be nice to overwrite a link file and link non-revit A360 files though....
    We hear you, and many others in the market, on this one. The cross-team data flows are a big focus for us at the moment. In the very short-term, we'll likely enable linking to non-C4R Revit models as a stop-gap.

    -Kyle

  10. #30
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    September 19, 2013
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    40
    Current Local Time
    05:21 PM
    Thank you Kyle. I greatly appreciate the info.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. C4R Updating and overwriting models used as links?
    By tzframpton in forum Worksharing, Revit Server & C4R
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: January 13th, 2016, 01:58 PM
  2. CAD links not updating
    By Lkenshalo in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2015, 04:38 PM
  3. Link not updating
    By varun_adaarchitecture in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 23rd, 2013, 07:50 PM
  4. Updating families
    By jbenoit44 in forum Tutorials, Tips & Tricks
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 23rd, 2011, 09:47 AM
  5. Elevation Tags Not Updating
    By WVReviter in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 9th, 2011, 09:47 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •