BIM 360 Linked Revit Models use Local Cache Path

We've been running into this situation lately. Linked Revit models start using an individuals collaboration cache location for the path instead of the project's BIM 360 location.

At first it seemed that we could resolve it easily by applying the update for Revit 2020. Most of the active projects I deal with are still based on Revit 2020.

It appears that a fair number of firms are deploying "even" years and skipping the "odd" years. The larger the scope of deployment seems to have some influence over that choice. I've been working with 2021 in smaller situations though, wishing it were true everywhere...I digress.

Autodesk acknowledges the issue and has this ARTICLE to contend with it.

Wishing it were that simple, we are still running into it. Naturally there is another ARTICLE that mentions they are still researching the issue but that using Force Relinquish (BIM 360 Manage Cloud Models option) can cause this situation too. This requires us to clear the collaboration cache for a user who has forced us (haha) to use Force Relinquish. We are still in the diagnosis phase ourselves so we're not convinced of anything yet.

The article also tells us that using Force Relinquish should be a last resort and not recommended for routine use. Autodesk article says, 

"This is happening because somebody has used Manage Cloud Models to force relinquish that user from that link, which breaks the link in the host model for the affected user."

"Note: Force Relinquish is a destructive operation and should be used sparingly! It is intended to be used as a last resort when the user to be relinquished is unavailable for some reason."

"If someone has been forced out through Force Relinquish, then all the changes that they have not synced, become orphaned and lost. While the central model will be unaffected by the use, people can lose work (and have to close and reopen the model which will be slow)."

"It is better for the user to open the model and use Relinquish All Mine to relinquish their permissions rather than using the Manage Cloud Models dialog."

Okay, that's fair. However the new named user subscription based model "forces" this option on us (not haha) at large because we can't pretend to be another user anymore. As soon as we log off to become that user we lose our Revit session too. Catch 22

It would be nice if employees didn't quit and go elsewhere or earn a dismissal. It would be nice if 3rd party applications didn't need to borrow a workset on our behalf and then refuse to return a workset without our knowledge. It would be nice is 3rd party applications that do automation didn't require their own username to run quietly in the background and then fail to return a workset from time to time.

That world is where we can find pink unicorns with diamond encrusted saddles, at least I think that's where they are, I could be wrong?

Right now clearing a workset conflict in Revit Server projects is not nice. BIM 360 at least has Force Relinquish...but now we're told you really shouldn't use it because it might wreck your linked model paths. It starts the kind of internal conversations that make EyeTee license management "heads spin". Nobody wants users to start sharing log in credentials do they?

Additional Collaboration Cache Article

Unloading a Link Deletes Radial Dimensions

I read THIS post at RFO with interest naturally. The thread is about losing dimensions when linked files are updated. A subtle development in the thread is that radial dimension and linear dimensions are affected differently when a link is unloaded. Aaron Maller noticed that, mentioned it (in the thread) and asked someone at Autodesk about it. They looked into it and replied with:

Originally Posted by Autodesk Team

Here are the details. This is caused by the inconsistency between linear and radial dimension internal design.

For linear dimension, it handles “Unload a linked file" as a special case of dimension references not visible in the current view, while for radial dimension, it handles the unloading as invalid dimension reference, and thus it requires deletion of the radial dimension when unloading.

We will see how we might improve the radial dimension to follow a similar behavior pattern.

The emphasis was added by Aaron. Okay, good to know. For now, radial dimensions are at great peril if they are referencing a linked project. Best bet is to avoid dimensioning to linked elements anyway but especially so with radial dimensions. 

Topography Links and Using Tag by Category Makes Revit Angry

This one is subtle, like so many Reviteristics.

A team is testing the Revit to Civil 3D relationship via BIM 360 and Autodesk Desktop Connector. I don't think there are enough moving parts for this equation but I digress. A user reported that Tag by Category (TbC) causes Revit to crash.

We narrowed it down to linked Topography. If any exists then TbC gets dicey. Here's what we know so far:

• Topography link Not Loaded status > Topography category visible in active view > TbC crash
• Topography link Loaded status > Topography category NOT visible in active view > TbC NO crash
• Topography link Loaded status > Topography category visible in active view > TbC NO crash

The team's project has two different linked topography sources so there are two of them in the Manage Links dialog. I haven't tried with just one present yet.

I'd be curious to see if anyone else can corroborate our situation. I've submitted crash reports (several/many) as I worked on this so perhaps Autodesk will find some lurking evil to contend with in the meantime.

Happy troubleshooting...

Exploding DWG Files

 "Just don't explode DWG files" is good advice, that is immediately ignored because...reasons...

Setting that aside, now that we've exploded that DWG, now what. First, there is full explode versus partial explode. A full explode will recreate all the DWG elements into native Revit elements (assuming it is possible) but a partial explode will produce some native elements and some new DWG elements (blocks).

Reducing all DWG elements to equivalent elements in Revit is fraught with peril. Not all blocks in a DWG are created well. Explode one block that happens to have very large extents and your project will now have display/graphics issues. A Revit project might have one imported DWG but many times that number after partial exploding.

I recently encountered three project files that had +95k imported DWG files. These were the result of partial exploding less than 20 DWG files. As most people are aware, Revit won't create an element if it is too short (less than 1/32" long). A scary number of these DWG files were invisible, undetectable by eye in any view, because I believe their contents were too short to display. Many thousands were in just a few views. I used IDEATE Explorer to select, open the view they were in, if they were invisible then delete them.

It was time consuming; for some of them it was fastest to just delete the drafting view entirely because the view/detail wasn't going to be used on the project anyway. It was part of the everything and the kitchen sink approach in their template. Many of these details were derived from existing DWG based details created over many years to varying standards.

Back to Revit and exploded DWG elements...

Each line, arc, circle, etc. element is recreated and assigned to a new line style named for the layer it lived on in DWG. Similarly each text element is created using DWG info to define it as unique. Line and fill patterns are created this way as well. Ditto for dimension styles...and filled regions...

Once these exist in a project they are prone to being used by others because they are there. It is hard to ensure the standards a company has developed are used when this additional noise is present.

If we must explode a DWG let's not do so in our active project. Use an isolated file, based on our project standards (template). Once exploded, take the time to convert everything to our standard types. The completed drafting view can be added to our active project using Revit's Insert from File tool.

Also consider the time is takes to do this well...might be as long or longer than sketching over a detail DWG instead. If our detail item library is pretty good we'll be able to create a detail faster because we have components to represent the same kinds of things the DWG has in block form etc.

Don't sweep the DWG remnants under the rug...

Drafting Views have an Origin Too

Drafting views look like a blank sheet of paper we can drop your pen and start sketching in. We can but it might help to know that they do have an origin and you can end up quite from from the origin if we use an external file to sketch over (which happens a lot). I routinely encounter projects that have very large drafting views, when you know where the origin is.

The old trick to find the origin in Revit was to import/link a DWG with a crosshair at the world coordinate system origin. Linked via Origin to Origin places that DWG at the origin of the view. The PyRevit application has a handy function to place a pair of intersecting lines at the origin of a view. I find I just use that now instead. It's about the same number of "clicks" either way.

Now, the natural question to ask is, "Does it matter?" I don't know but if large extents are bad in model views I can reasonably infer that it might also be bad in drafting views. I don't have any evidence that this model was bad because drafting views were huge. I do know that some bad models I've encountered also had drafting views with very large extents. When I deal with a such a model it is one of the things I consider (of the many things, so many things).

Good housekeeping isn't just for the model.

Large Extents -Can't Navigate in a View and-or View Will Only Show Wireframe

I've written about Revit's fussiness regarding large extents numerous times over the years. In some of those posts I mentioned a related view issue. A view that refuses to show the model in anything other than wireframe is a symptom of the large extent issue.

I recently encountered a project that didn't have any DWG files to blame for it. Not only did the view not show according to graphic style settings it didn't allow navigation of any sort. The view was frozen. We could open or close it but nothing else. I noticed I could use a crossing selection window but then using Filter to focus my troubleshooting effort was still too coarse.

I've been meaning to mention how much I like IDEATE Explorer (IE). It has been very useful to examine projects and track down issues. It permits examining a model in ways that Revit can't. for example, I can select a category of elements or instances of each family/type within the category.

I use it routinely to check for excess DWG imports (resulting from exploded DWG content), workset assignment, reviewing warnings (more effectively than Revit's own), phase assignment/usage, content naming/usage and resolve line style usage (and more).

After using the crossing selection window in various parts of the view I realized some structural elements seemed quite far apart. Keep in mind the view was a white screen of nothing...imagining gazing toward Earth from Mars and trying to pick out where California is or my house. The Project Base Point and Survey Point didn't even show up in the view.

I started with trying to isolate where in this vast white space the structural element was but no matter what I tried I seemed to always select some structural framing.

Once I knew which category to hunt in I used IE to look at individual framing elements. I found a single framing (W Beam) was 2+ million feet long. I expected to find a family very far away, not one that was just very long. I realized that a Structural Framing schedule could have revealed this element too, if I knew which category and to look at Length. I did make a schedule just to see if I missed any other really long framing.

One Beam, one verrrrry looonnng beam killed any view it was visible in. 3D views are where we were confronted with the problem but other views whose extent permitted the beam's true extent to affect the view were also victimized. In the end we rolled the project back to just prior to the beam being added. 

The views didn't "recover" from the harm when the offending beam was deleted. I surmise other aspects of the model were altered by the extent of the beam, perhaps scope boxes, crop boundaries, a connected or joined element...not sure. That will remain a mystery.

May your troubleshooting be quick, effective and "trouble" free.

DWG XREF Follow Up

 A year ago I wrote about XREF DWG files showing up in Revit even when they are assigned to Overlay vs Attached. It hasn't been resolved, meaning Revit is still doing it, no change...

Shortly after writing the post we arrived at our "solution", to assign all Xrefs (in AutoCAD/Civil 3D) to a unique layer(s) and turn that layer(s) off in Revit (via View Templates usually). This way the extra layers of the xrefs do not show up even though Revit is technically ready and willing to show them.

Manage Cloud Models - UI Real Estate

 I wish the list of projects I get when I use Manage Cloud Models (BIM 360 projects) didn't waste sooo much real estate. These big icons are a waste of space, they just mean lots of scrolling. Well if you only have a couple projects on BIM 360 maybe it's no big deal to you. But hundreds? I keep looking for a View option of "List" or "Details" ... something to shrink this bugger down.

That's my experience with Revit 2020 at the moment when a good many projects that I get to look at reside. I'll have to check out 2021 to see if it is any different.

Insert From File and BIM 360

When we're working on a BIM 360 hosted project there are times we'd like to use the Insert From File > Insert Views tool. Unfortunately BIM 360 isn't an available path in the Insert From File dialog.

Yes, we can download a copy of the project or open both projects and use Copy/Paste but it would be nicer to be able to use the tool itself as it is an easier/faster (more obvious) process.

Ramp Slope is Still a Second Class Citizen

Wrote about this before in 2013. Ramps and the Slope Annotation don't like each other. In the past we could work around their unfriendliness by dragging a working slope annotation from an adjacent floor to the ramp. That no longer works since as far back as 2019.

I'm reasonably sure Ramps have a slope... odd that the annotation doesn't think so? I wrote another post in 2013 too that describes using an adaptive point family to add some graphics to a floor posing as a ramp which might also permit using the slope annotation on it instead. Yet another thing to experiment with.

Then again it might just be better to ignore the ramp feature entirely in favor of Floors?

Revit 2021.1 Reset Shared Coordinates and Acknowledge Acquire Coordinates

I saw that Daniel Stine and Autodesk both wrote about the new point release for 2021. Daniel mentioned my past post about resetting shared coordinates because the latest update includes a new feature dedicated to that task.

I also wrote about Acquire Coordinates not rewarding us for successfully completing the task and they granted that wish too.

One of my post's was written in 2012, only eight years to get my wish. Glad I'm pretty patient.

Revit 2021 - W Shapes-Column Family is Missing

The stock imperial architecture template has the W Shapes-Column family loaded with two types: W10X33 and W10X49. I was experimenting with new features and noticed the family isn't part of the 2021 content deployment, weird. I had to reload from the 2020 version to add a size.

If it's not one thing it's another.

Revit 2021 Line Style Naming Tweak

I saw Jason (@RVT) tweet about this yesterday and I thought this is right up the Dept. of Subtle alley.

I've been telling people for years that the brackets meant "these belong to the Revit system" but then there were several other rogue line styles that came along without brackets. I had to explain that any line style you couldn't delete is also a system line styles...

Consider the Dept. of Subtle tickled.

Create or Opening a Section View Crashes Revit

Have you encountered this issue (and/or elevations)? By crash I mean Revit stops responding, the blue spinning wheel of death. One cause I've identified is HVAC Zones. I've been able to resolve each on so far by deleting the related zone(s) and creating the zone(s) again. I haven't figured out what is going wrong with the zones. I'm just calling it corruption for now but I have no idea if it is something I can prevent or see first yet.

Happy to hear if any readers have encountered this situation too.

Parameter is Missing for Some Types

From a thread at RFO, Aaron explains what's gone wrong...

Aaron wrote:

"If someone deletes a family that is also the default option for a Family Type, with that Shared Parameter: Yes, the entire parameter gets deleted. It's terrible behavior, and its been that way for years.

In case I wasnt clear: This is a known issue, and it's easily reproducible.

1. Take any Family that uses a Shared Family Type Parameter, that has a default value.
2. Find the family in the project browser, that is the Family and Type that's in the default value.
3. Delete that family from the Project Browser.
4. After you've clicked *DELETE* in the warning, go back to the original Family (the parent family with the parameter).
5. For JUST the types that had that default value set, that parameter is now gone.

And yes, the instances in your project are hella broken, now."

Keynote Schedules Not Updating

I wrote a post in April last year when we were observing some projects that would not update their keynote schedules during printing.

When they issued 2018.3 that issue was reportedly resolved. Moving forward into 2019 and 2020 versions it seems true. However we've seen a few projects that seem to continue to exhibit the problem. Specifically a keynote schedule does not show all of the keynotes that are actually visible in views on the sheet.

With these troubled project files we can force a regeneration IF each sheet view is open during printing. Like before turning the annotation crop boundary off/on or on/off will cause a regeneration too. However printing is when it matters the most. More testing is required before I can be certain there is an ongoing issue in the more recent releases but these projects do exhibit the problem in more recent versions too.

The current solution is to open all the sheets that must print first and then print to PDF. Alternately open a sheet view and print and repeat for all required sheets. If all the views are open then the revision schedule regenerates (you can watch it happen). The sheet view does not have to have Revit's focus, just has to be open in the background at least. Any sheet views that are not open won't refresh.

Revit 2020.2.1 Hot Fix Posted

Regarding my last post - a Revit 2020.1 Hot Fix is now posted.

Of specific interest...Autodesk writes:

Issues Resolved:
Fixed an issue that resulted in the loss of family data in some workshared models when family definitions had not been recently modified. This fix does not repair models which have encountered loss of family data, for more information refer to Family Corruption in Revit 2020.2

Revit 2020.2 Corrupt or Unusable Families Issue

Autodesk posted an article describing a particularly unpleasant bug/issue that started to appear shortly after 2020.2 was made available. This is the text from the article. If you're using 2020.2 pay close attention, you don't want to catch this bug. They've removed the 2020.2 download until they've resolved the situation.

Issue:
The Revit team has identified a defect with Revit 2020.2 that affects a small percentage of customer projects. In order to reduce the likelihood that customers come across this issue, we have temporarily removed the Revit 2020.2 updates while we work to provide a build that remedies this defect. For customers that have already installed Revit 2020.2, please see the FAQ below. We apologize for any inconvenience this issue may have caused.

Solution:

Q. What is the issue?
A. A change in the way that Revit 2020.2 processes families can cause family content to go missing from workshared central models created in previous versions if the families have existed in an active project for a long time without being modified. The defect results in the deletion of the family content from the central model.

Q. Which versions/models are affected?
A. This issue affects only Revit 2020.2. Previous versions are not affected.

Q. What models are affected?
A. The issue can affect workshared models that were created or upgraded in Revit 2020.0 or 2020.1 which are then repeatedly modified in Revit 2020.2. This issue can impact central models stored locally, on Revit Server, or in Revit Cloud Worksharing. The following models are NOT affected:
Non-workshared models
Workshared models created and exclusively modified in Revit 2020.2

Q. What if I have already installed Revit 2020.2?
A. If everyone on the project team is working in 2020.2, there are a few one-time operations you can take in a Revit 2020.2 build to prevent the issue:
Rename all families in the project (e.g. FamilyX to FamilyX-2 and then back to FamilyX)

OR

Save the model as a new central (must be a new file, not Save As to the same location)

OR

Reload all families (including company, Autodesk, and 3rd party families) in the project

OR

Move the entire project team back to Revit 2020.1
If the team is working on mixed versions, we suggest first getting everyone onto the same version. Working in a mix of Revit 2020.2 and earlier versions can reintroduce the issue to model(s).

Q. What is Autodesk doing to resolve the issue?
A. The Revit team has reproduced the issue and is actively working on a build that does not contain this defect. In the meantime, we advise against installing Revit 2020.2 until the Revit team provides an updated build. To reduce the likelihood that customers come across this issue, we have temporarily removed Revit 2020.2 updates from Accounts and the Autodesk Desktop Application. Due to backend constraints a full install of Revit 2020.2 continues to be available from Accounts.

Q. When will a fix be available?
A. Thanks to the support of our valued customers, the Revit team has been able to reproduce the issue and has identified a fix. In the next few days we will be thoroughly testing the fix. Assuming all goes well, it will then take the team a few more days to make the build available in Accounts and the Autodesk Desktop Application.

Q. Revit 2020.2 has been available for months – why didn’t Autodesk communicate anything previously?
A. The Revit team was first made aware of a possible issue by our customers a few weeks ago. Since these kinds of issues can be difficult to reproduce from scratch, from the time a concern was raised we have been working closely with those customers to reproduce the issue. We were finally successfully able to reproduce, and therefore confirm, the issue at the end of last week when we took action to limit the availability of Revit 2020.2. We have been working diligently to clarify the full scope of the impact and the possible workarounds in order to write this communication.

Q. Why didn’t the Revit team discover the issue during pre-release testing?
A. Unfortunately because this issue requires a combination of model creation and modification of families in a previous version and then extensive modification to the same model in 2020.2 it does not lend itself well to typical testing practices or automated regression tests. This means that unfortunately, despite rigorous Revit 2020.2 testing, we were not able to identify the issue before it affected customer models. We sincerely thank the customers that escalated the issue to us so that we are now able to take appropriate action.

Q. What actions will the Revit team take to prevent this kind of issue from happening again?
A. After the Revit team resolves the immediate issue, we will be holding a retrospective to clarify how the defect occurred and what specific actions we can take to prevent similar issues in the future. As much as possible we will look to create automated tests to cover this kind of situation as that means that every future Revit code submission will be scanned for similar problems.

Linked DWG Xref Overlay vs Attached Bug - Part Two

Two options exists to work around this situation (last post). One is easy and Revit focused but depends on the AutoCAD user a little and the second is impractical and depends on the AutoCAD user entirely.

• Xrefs on their own layer
• Xrefs always unloaded

If we can count on the AutoCAD user being consistent to assign all of the file's xrefs to a unique layer not shared by any other elements then we can still turn off the overlay xref when it shows up. This shouldn't be too difficult to achieve and many firms already have that standard for xrefs.

If the xref's are always unloaded before closing a file then they won't show up in a Revit project. That's pretty unlikely. It's inconvenient for AutoCAD users and forgetting just once and the system fails.

Linked DWG Xref Overlay vs Attached Bug

Revit has long understood the difference between a DWG having an attached or overlay external reference (Xref). It uses the same logic for its own linking behavior for RVT files. Recently a client began reporting seeing DWG files including Xref layers in Object Styles and Visibility/Graphics even though the DWG has only an overlay Xref. Revit seems to be converting the overlay Xref to a block element and including it and all the layers in the process.

We noticed it happening first with projects hosted on BIM360. That led me to consider it was because this firm isn't using Autodesk Desktop Connector. Not too surprising considering Autodesk recommends using it for linked DWG support on BIM360.

That's irrelevant now that I've reproduced it on a project file based on a stock template, doesn't use worksets and the all files are on a single PC. It's related to how Revit is reloading the linked DWG when a new session of Revit is opened.

It seems to matter that it is a new session of Revit, opening the project again, and to a lesser degree if there are changes in the DWG file. Any of those conditions seems to be enough to find an overlay Xref(s) showing up but reporting as a block element with Query. It is pretty easy to reproduce now that I've done it a few times.

• Start a new project
• Link a DWG with an Xref (overlay)
• Save the project > close it and the Revit session
• Open Revit again
• Open project (xref is now visible)

Variables:

• When the project is opened and the linked DWG has changes it will load the xref too.
• If after opening the Revit project the file looks correct using Reload From will display the xref afterward.

The images that follow are captured using Revit 2020.2. In this version using Reload From fixed it, a couple times but not every time. I've also run through this with 2018.3 and 2016 with similar results. I didn't try 2019 or 2017 because they are not installed on this particular PC.

This is the mockup DWG files.

This is the result of linking the file into a Revit project.

This is what happens after opening Revit and the project again.

This is what Revit's Query feature reports when selecting a line that belongs to the overlay Xref in the linked DWG.

It also occurred to me that it could happen if the host file's Xref was originally attached, when it was linked to Revit and changed afterward. Testing didn't support that theory. The example above is based on a xref that was placed as an overlay from the start, not changed to overlay. It also occurred to me that it might be related to large coordinate values. Civil files are linked here primarily. To rule that out, the mock up I show above is at the WCS origin and linked origin to origin.

This particular firm uses Civil 3D/AutoCAD for their civil and landscape disciplines so eliminating DWG files isn't in their future. This bug is annoying AND increasing the time required to prepare projects for plotting and publishing.

Assuming this isn't being caused by some aspect of this firm's EyeTee implementation (PC configuration and/or security measures) I'd love to hear some corroboration.