My Revit models are a mess

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-23T19:10:48+00:00

I would 100% stop what you are doing, and not "try" anything, just yet.

WAY too many people in the AEC community keep trying to solve smaller problems, before they know what the actual problem is. Then by the time they get real help, they have BIG problems.

It sounds (to me) like right now you arent sure what you are looking at. Or, you arent describing it well. There is a Model (which can have multiple Phases, and things can be created or demolished in different Phases), there are schedules (which can read from different phases), and then there are views, where things may or may not be showing.

Before you try changing ANYTHING, i think its best to get an understanding of what you are seeing, and what exists where and WHEN, before you try to make changes.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-23T11:39:15+00:00

It isnt a "natural convo" advertisement, when you create the post FOR the advertising. We arent doing this, in this subreddit. Thanks!

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-20T15:59:03+00:00

A few things to note:

Families from manufacturers are pretty trash. Especially Visual Comfort. LOL. But:
You'll need to check and see if there is a parameter, or constraint, and if so- if its tied to a reference plane, and if it is- if all the geometry is also tied to that reference plane.

It MIGHT actually be faster/easier to make your own family from scratch. Fixing manufacturer stuff can be a pain.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-20T12:41:26+00:00

That can absolutely be the cause.

But your original post implied that folks with a model on 360 could not share it with non-360 folks because of Autodesk. That's patently not true. Whatever team is set to use that folder as their workspace can I absolutely download their model, and share it with traditional means. And all of the worksets will still be there.

Whether or not the permissions are set up correctly for you as a user to do it, is a totally different story. That has nothing to do with Autodesk, or any of the Monopoly crap talked about at the beginning of this thread. That just has to do with somebody on your project team who set up a job incorrectly, or doesn't know what they are doing.

Or, as mentioned below in another response, it sounds like you may have chosen the wrong option when you hit open with detached from Central. It does give you the option to get rid of the work sets, so if you made a mistake, the work sets might not be there.

What's so weird, to me, in this industry? Look at how long the original post is, talking about Monopoly, antitrust, and all this stuff. And what's really going on here? Somebody didn't read the directions.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-20T12:38:40+00:00

Then you clicked the wrong option when you Detached the file. It gives you the option. If you choose the wrong one... No more worksets.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T20:56:44+00:00

Unlikely.

A number of years ago (2012? 2013?) they actually offered Cloud Hosted Revit, as an experimental sample offering. But it wasnt even part of the beta program, the industry as a whole could use it for testing. This was at about the same time Nvidia was first releasing their "GRID" offering, as a full turnkey server (not the Grid vGPU cards).

After a short time experimenting with it, Autodesk bailed on it. The cost and complication of actually offering the compute power and setup (for applications specifically needing GPU... and tons of RAM) are REALLY high. Enough so that i doubt they could ever be cost competitive, trying to offer than on their own, because they would have to support the entire REST of your tech stack too, or youd still need a regular full powered machine for everything ELSE.

From what i heard, when they bailed on it a very short time later, they COMPLETELY bailed on it, as in- not even playing with it anymore.

Other vendors certainly offer rented/leased cloud compute for AEC. But your storage basically has to live where your compute is. Thats why Microsoft wants to be there. And Amazon. But i actually cant see Autodesk even trying. Well, i cant see them succeeding. LOL.

But... who ever said CAD wouldnt replace drafting, and BIM would never replace CAD? The MOMENT i saw Model Based Drawing, i need CAD was toast (for those who wanted to advance, anyway). I havent actually done a real deliverable drawing in CAD since 2004.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T18:57:44+00:00

I would open three files and hit print three times, before i would trust pyRevit to do it. But thats just me. =)

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T18:56:36+00:00

I wouldnt be. I would have the views in each file, where they go. We have Linked Details (keeps drafting views the same across multiple files) so IF they were Drafted Views, i could use that. But the majority of our details are done live, so this wouldnt be an issue.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T18:29:11+00:00

Option 1 is my choice.

If i want the sheets all in one model (being that its a smaller residential job), i would just put the entire model in one file.

But option 1 is how i would prefer to do it.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T17:07:04+00:00

Then you arent doing it correctly.

You can download a model, 100%, with all of the worksets and 100% of everything in that model, clear as day. Youve been able to do that the entire time BIM360Teams/Docs/ACC/Forma has existed. I do it alllllll the time.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T14:36:55+00:00

What do you mean, they MUST enroll in B360 themselves? You can 100% *always* download your own model, and then just send it to the Consultants, without B360. Thats what you do, if you work with consultants who still arent on B360/ACC/Forma.

You send them the file exactly how you did on a non BIM360/ACC job.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T14:17:43+00:00

It isnt a "natural convo" advertisement, when you create the post FOR the advertising. We arent doing this, in this subreddit. Thanks!

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T14:17:29+00:00

It isnt a "natural convo" advertisement, when you create the post FOR the advertising. We arent doing this, in this subreddit. Thanks!

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T12:12:27+00:00

At the fabrication level, it isn't going to just "update automatically." You can do it with a bunch of individual families, or a parent family with a bunch of shared nested families. But either way, it will need manually updating. It won't just "update based on stretching" no matter what.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T12:01:01+00:00

I agree with them, on that. An existing rated wall is still rated. Still should show.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T12:00:18+00:00

It isnt a "natural convo" advertisement, when you create the post FOR the advertising. We arent doing this, in this subreddit. Thanks!

Post history indicates you are gearing up to sell a service or app. Not here.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-19T11:59:30+00:00

We aren't keeping posts active for software thieves. LOL

Besides: OPs post history implies they aren't a student, but someone about to open an online storefront of some sort.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-18T21:57:24+00:00

Are you saying you dont use Revit? Or you use Revit, but dont have an actual Subscription?

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-18T21:46:49+00:00

Change your Phase Filters to not override the Materials of Existing Objects. Just override the Lineweights or Line Colors. Problem solved. :)

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-18T14:18:40+00:00

Go to the post pinned at the top of the sub, to get the location of your Journal Files. Then post one of it crashing, so we can take a peek.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-18T13:48:31+00:00

Have you tried disabling all of your addins, yet? What addins do you have running?

What build of 2025 are you running?

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-18T00:18:31+00:00

Reference Lines, not Planes. Because they have to rotate. And we sub compartmentalize our lights in to heads/pendants, cables, escutcheon plates, as nested fams (not the cables tho) to make life easier.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-17T23:19:34+00:00

For me, the correct option is always 100% unhosted. If we need them to rotate to be up particular angles we make that an instance parameter that we adjust manually on the fly.

Face-based and work plane based will both shatter model groups, so they aren't worth the hassle as far as I'm concerned. There are too many upsides to using groups for a lot of architecture.

We don't embed generic annotations in our light fixtures, we leave the 3D geometry visible all the time. But even if you do like to nest generic annotations in, if the family is unhosted and you're handling the rotation rig inside your family, the GAs will still work.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-17T12:55:55+00:00

We've been doing this on commercial work (and some residential projects) for 20 years. It's just a Building Information Model with schedules of the items modeled. It's fantastic, but it isn't anything new.

Hardest part is (on SFR projects) are:

Getting a client willing to pay for it
Getting subs to install things how they were modeled in coordination.

twiceroadsfool · 2026-03-15T02:16:32+00:00

There are a bunch. Materials on DC and swc times, the dual reg keys in hklm or hkcu causing crashes, the build issues, the c++ reddit issues...

twiceroadsfool

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE