Part of knowing What Revit Wants, is also knowing what it Does Not want.  Sometimes, you can push the hack (or workaround) that step or two too far… and the result is unpredictable, buggy and kinda useless.

In the past, I have used various methods to create inplace or component families that are not ‘officially’ or natively available.  In this particular instance, I used the IFC round trip method to force the creation of an Inplace family with Category set to Rooms.  I also pushed this into a Component (loadable) family.

Great!  I have Room families.  But guess what?   The result is unpredictable, buggy and kinda useless.

In fact, if you open these projects, make some Room Separation lines and then try to place a Room, I would estimate that in 95% of cases, your Revit has already crashed.  The families will not accept a tag, and they won’t schedule.  They seem to just sit there, destabilizing your Revit environment.  So why post about it?  Well, basically so that you can add this workaround to the aforementioned list of something that Revit (currently) does not want.

I have provided both 2013 and 2014 versions for your download and testing here:
RVTs that will crash Revit

via email
You are getting this message because you downloaded a version of IFC Exporter for Revit 2013 or Revit IFC Export Alternate UI prior to March 29, 2013.  We have posted an update to the IFC Exporter for Revit, which you can get to using the links below:

IFC Exporter for Revit 2013 (v2.9):

Updates from version 2.8.1 are listed below.  Please upgrade to the newest version!  Please note that there is no update to the corresponding Alternate UI in this update release.

If you do not wish to receive upgrade notices, please reply and I will make sure you don’t get these notices in the future.

Angel Velez
Senior Principal Engineer
Autodesk, Inc.

What’s new for IFC Exporter for Revit 2013 v2.9:

New Functionality:

– Add/fix property sets: Pset_SpaceThermalDesign, PsetSanitaryTerminalTypeToiletPan
– Add support for IfcBuilding Description and LongName.
– Add support for IfcBuildingStorey Name override, ObjectType, Description, and LongName.
– Allow exporting a Revit Assembly as an IfcSystem.
– Allow exporting a Revit Floor as an IfcFooting.
– Parameters in Revit no longer have to have the same base type as their corresponding IFC property. For example, an IFCTEXT property in IFC could now have a corresponding “Number” parameter in Revit.

Bug Fixes:
– Add material associations for FabricSheets.
– Change the precision given in IFCGEOMETRICREPRESENTATIONCONTEXT to VertexTolerance/10 (about 1/1600″).
– Create local placement closer to geometry for many Family-based instances.
– Don’t create orphaned IFCAXIS2PLACEMENTs with invalid IFCCARTESIANPOINT references.
– Ensure that the IFCFACEOUTERBOUND for an IFCFACE with more than one boundary corresponding to the boundary with the largest area.
– Export rooms, areas, and MEP spaces when exporting 2nd level space boundaries, even if they aren’t part of the energy analysis model (like gross design areas).
– Fix duplicate GUIDs for some columns split by level that had instance geometry.
– Fix issue where elements in assemblies would not be related to building storeys if the parent assembly were marked as not exported.
– For properties where they are defined with a different Revit parameter name and IFC property name, if the Revit parameter name is not found, look for the IFC property name.
– In the case where linear grid lines were grouped into 3 distinct direction sets, and 2 of the directions were orthogonal, the 3rd set of grid lines would not be exported. This has been fixed.
– Only export beam/column/member quantities if “QTO” export is chosen.

– Use IfcRelAssignsToGroup, not IfcRelAggregates, for IfcZones; stabilize IfcRelAssignsToGroup GUID.

Or is it a professional, individual endeavor?  Or both?  Five quick quotes from different parts of the latest JBIM:
When practiced correctly, BIM is meant to support collaboration across the facilities life cycle. BIM is the flow of information through a project, from inception to completion and throughout the entire life cycle of a structure.

Unfortunately, the industry is still developing separate models that are not communicating.

… as projects become bigger and more distributed, some teams struggle with the collaborative aspects inherent to BIM.

The utilization of BIM technology can result in improved occupational safety by connecting the safety issues more closely to construction planning.

IFC4 introduces the concept of material profiles, where axis-based components, such as beams, pipes and ducts, can be described by paths and cross-sections of materials, along with offsets relative to the axis and end points.

The journal seems to contain quite a bit of info on NBIMS,  NBIMS-US and even IFC4.

Heads-up via:
Download BIM Can Be a Team Sport | Journal of Building Information Modeling – Fall 2012 | Bradley BIM