Detail Level and Interference Check

I've written a couple posts in the past (January 2012 and August 2009) about creating clearance elements for use with Revit's own interference checking. Toward the end of one post I mentioned incompatibility between using Detail Level settings with forms that are intended for interference detection.

I wrote, "Keep in mind that the obvious way to manage visibility by using Detail Level won't help us for now. Why? Detail Level doesn't work with Interference Checking, the solid has to be "visible". If we assign the clearance solid to use a specific Detail Level the Interference Check tool fails to see the solid at all even if we change the view to the correct detail level."

I continued, "The Bottom line, we can't use Detail Level to manage the visibility of clearance solids. We must use sub-categories or Yes/No parameters. Using sub-categories is a broader brush solution while Yes/No is more involved because you have to manage them at the family level. When we use these methods we can turn off the visibility of a clearance solid and the Interference Check tool will still find them."

All these years later the incompatibility remains.

We can re-use common forms for clearance families if we nest them into other families, they don't need to be "Shared" to work. We can use a different category element (for example Generic Model > Clearance) and it will detected as interference based on the host's category. Just don't use Detail Level settings to control the visibility of the nested clearance family either.

I also suggested that Autodesk standardize "Clearance" as it's own category. Alternatively they could establish a sub-category of Generic Model or even for all categories like they did with Hidden Lines (for Show Hidden). This way they could, at a system level, help us define what clearance elements are, how they are defined, what they should look like and how they should behave.

Somewhat related here's a May 2009 post I wrote about Design Options and Interference checking not working well together. It's still the same in 2014.

I wrote, "The Interference Check tool does not filter out results for elements assigned to various Design Options that "interfere" with one another. Keep this in mind the next time you are reviewing the results. You'll have a lot a "meaningless" collisions if you have any number of of options."

Stay interference free my friends!

Our Model is Clash Free

Offering a "clash free model" is a bit like the car ads on television that offer a 100k car for $299/month. When we read the tiny print we realize that the monthly cost is more like $1600/month and mere mortals won't qualify for the financing terms. Like the car ads, we have to carefully declare/define what a clash is. What sort of clashes are acceptable (and therefore not considered a clash) and those that are not (and therefore are a clash).

One simple example, pipes pass through walls. If they don't cut a hole in every wall at every location where a pipe intersects with a wall then technically we've got a clash. If it is a poured concrete wall that requires a sleeve it is a bigger deal (even bigger deal if precast) than a wood/metal framed wall with gypsum wall board. By the time we are done defining clashes our client and/or team will feel like they are getting "nickel and dimed" to death. ...and that's just for our work...

We can't offer a clash free model if everyone else working on the project isn't working toward that goal themselves. Our model might be "perfect" (according to our fine print) but if they aren't coordinating their work with ours...and vice versa...we'll still have clashes. It's not a one way street.

It is also a moving target as a project moves through design phases. Are we promising "clash free" when people start swinging hammers or is it clash free within two weeks after receiving an architect's model, at the end of each design phase?

"Clash Free" - It's a worthy goal and one every client and project team would love to achieve. It's not possible without considerable commitment by everyone and can't be achieved in a vacuum by one part of the team. In my view someone casually offering "clash free" suggests to me that they may not have enough experience yet. Anyone who has been part of weekly clash review sessions can attest to it not being a trivial matter.

It seems to me that's just the sort of promise that keeps lawyers busy...

Designing Revit Content - What is Interference?

Since today is a superstitious day and I'll be pretty busy watching out for black cats, walking around ladders and such...I thought I'd bump something I wrote in August 2009 up to the front. I thought of this one because of a couple posts by Doug Bowers.

For the most part Revit will help you find when various elements interfere with each other. A window that gets bumped into by a perpendicular wall will generate a warning. A wall that overlaps another will too. A desk copied on top of another will but only if it is in the exact same location.



There are instances that do not generate warnings at all. The same window that complained about a wall won't complain if another window overlaps it. Then there is a door that doesn't mind something encroaching on the swing area or the accessibility requirements. Put a desk so that it crosses into the swing area and use Interference Check between doors and furniture and you'll find no interference reported. Is Revit blind? In a way yes!



A typical door family doesn't have a real element representing the swing or panel in a plan view, it is just symbolic lines. Therefore no interference. The only solid geometry in most door families is the panel and glass which is usually confined to the extents of the wall interior and exterior faces. That desk will need to cross into that space to be a conflict.

Is all of the content for Revit missing this intelligence. Yes, nearly all of it. Why? Because except for a few instances this intelligence isn't so simple. The clearance requirements for content becomes highly specific very quickly. Even more specific when you start examining MEP equipment. Even doors that have seemingly simple push/pull clearance requirements have subtle exceptions depending upon where in the world the door is installed and the relevant code(s). Thus far the content we use ignores this issue for the most part.

The next step is for content to begin to address these design considerations and that's how content becomes more powerful and relevant. More powerful when it not only helps us model and document a design but it begins to make sure that our decisions will meet codes and design best practices. Does your content help your firm in this way? If it does then bravo, if it doesn't it could. How?

One way is to include solid geometry that represents the clearance requirements for the element. This means defining a boundary, usually parametric too, that will represent whatever clearance/interference issues a family might have. This could be a bounding box surrounding the entire element or a box defining an access door's swing clearance for maintenance.

Incidentally, with Naviswork's Clash Detective it is possible to test for Hard and Soft clashes and even define a clearance value that can be applied during a test. Revit lacks this subtlety so a family needs to provide something for it to use. That something is solid geometry.


Practically speaking this means more in each family. This extra solid will also have to be managed otherwise you'll be seeing a lot of boxes in your views.

Autodesk could help us by defining a new sub-category for all elements called Clearance or similar. This would mean that Revit could then learn how to detect a user defined clearance sub-category element and even have a default visibility behavior or setting allowing us to flip a switch to show or hide clearances. Until such time we have to do it by adding it ourselves and ensuring these solids are properly assigned and done consistently for our content.

Keep in mind that the obvious way to manage visibility by using Detail Level won't help us for now. Why? Detail Level doesn't work with Interference Checking, the solid has to be "visible". If you assign the clearance solid to use a specific Detail Level the Interference Check tool fails to see the solid at all even if you change the view to the correct detail level.

Bottom line, can't use Detail Level to manage the visibility of clearance solids. You must use sub-categories or Yes/No parameters. Using sub-categories is a broader brush solution while Yes/No is more involved because you have to manage them at the family level. When you use these methods you can turn off the visibility of a clearance solid and the Interference Check tool will still find them.

Just when you thought your content was great you find out there is something else you could do to make them even better! A toast to making content better still!

Revit Content - What is Interference?

For the most part Revit will help you find when various elements interfere with each other. A window that gets bumped into by a perpendicular wall will generate a warning. A wall that overlaps another will too. A desk copied on top of another will but only if it is in the exact same location.



There are instances that do not generate warnings at all. The same window that complained about a wall won't complain if another window overlaps it. Then there is a door that doesn't mind something encroaching on the swing area or the accessibility requirements. Put a desk so that it crosses into the swing area and use Interference Check between doors and furniture and you'll find no interference reported. Is Revit blind? In a way yes!



A typical door family doesn't have a real element representing the swing or panel in a plan view, it is just symbolic lines. Therefore no interference. The only solid geometry in most door families is the panel and glass which is usually confined to the extents of the wall interior and exterior faces. That desk will need to cross into that space to be a conflict.

Is all of the content for Revit missing this intelligence. Yes, nearly all of it. Why? Because except for a few instances this intelligence isn't so simple. The clearance requirements for content becomes highly specific very quickly. Even more specific when you start examining MEP equipment. Even doors that have seemingly simple push/pull clearance requirements have subtle exceptions depending upon where in the world the door is installed and the relevant code(s). Thus far the content we use ignores this issue for the most part.

The next step is for content to begin to address these design considerations and that's how content becomes more powerful and relevant. More powerful when it not only helps us model and document a design but it begins to make sure that our decisions will meet codes and design best practices. Does your content help your firm in this way? If it does then bravo, if it doesn't it could. How?

One way is to include solid geometry that represents the clearance requirements for the element. This means defining a boundary, usually parametric too, that will represent whatever clearance/interference issues a family might have. This could be a bounding box surrounding the entire element or a box defining an access door's swing clearance for maintenance.

Incidentally, with Naviswork's Clash Detective it is possible to test for Hard and Soft clashes and even define a clearance value that can be applied during a test. Revit lacks this subtlety so a family needs to provide something for it to use. That something is solid geometry.


Practically speaking this means more in each family. This extra solid will also have to be managed otherwise you'll be seeing a lot of boxes in your views.

Autodesk could help us by defining a new sub-category for all elements called Clearance or similar. This would mean that Revit could then learn how to detect a user defined clearance sub-category element and even have a default visibility behavior or setting allowing us to flip a switch to show or hide clearances. Until such time we have to do it by adding it ourselves and ensuring these solids are properly assigned and done consistently for our content.

Keep in mind that the obvious way to manage visibility by using Detail Level won't help us for now. Why? Detail Level doesn't work with Interference Checking, the solid has to be "visible". If you assign the clearance solid to use a specific Detail Level the Interference Check tool fails to see the solid at all even if you change the view to the correct detail level.

Bottom line, can't use Detail Level to manage the visibility of clearance solids. You must use sub-categories or Yes/No parameters. Using sub-categories is a broader brush solution while Yes/No is more involved because you have to manage them at the family level. When you use these methods you can turn off the visibility of a clearance solid and the Interference Check tool will still find them.

Just when you thought your content was great you find out there is something else you could do to make them even better! A toast to making content better still!

Interference Checking and Design Options

The Interference Check tool does not filter out results for elements assigned to various Design Options that "interfere" with one another. Keep this in mind the next time you are reviewing the results. You'll have a lot a "meaningless" collisions if you have any number of of options.

You can open the report in Word and use Find/Replace to highlight results that include Options as part of the interference information to make it a little easier to "evaluate/ignore" them.

The reporting process could use some more options like: Ignore Design Options, include interference between element in the same option, primary options and main model. It would also be great to be able to check two linked models against each other from within the host.

Dept. of Unfair - Revit MEP - Interference/Insulation

Justin wrote to me via a comment earlier today in another post so the inspiration for this post goes to him, thanks!

He wrote:

I've run into a little quirk and would like to pose the question. I'm trying to do multiple discipline coordination and ran into this problem. When we have a duct (Revit MEP) and use the insulation parameter to add onto it, "interference check" doesn't recognize a clash with only the insulation. Is this normal? Is there a workaround? As soon as the wall/beam collides with the duct itself, the "interference check" recognizes the clash. Any insight into this is appreciated. Thanks!

I replied. "Yes, that has been my observation as well, sorry!"

This one is insulation "being interfered with":


This one is the insulation and now the duct too:


I recommended that they contact Revit support to file a support request so that they either get another or get one if by chance they haven't already encountered the issue.

Yes, methinks it is "unfair"! Insulation deserves the same credibility that ducts get in Interference Check. Even better Interference Check ought to be "smart" enough to distinguish between a "hard" conflict and a "soft" conflict. My two tarnished pennies!