Search the Community

In BIM workflows, the Revit Project Base Point (PBP) and Internal Origin (IO) are often described as if they are the same. In practice, they only coincide in a new file. Treating them as identical can lead to mis-coordination between Revit, Vectorworks, and IFC/DWG exchanges. I have just noticed that the Vectorworks Help makes the same assumption, presenting the PBP and IO as the same, whereas in reality, they are not. Once project coordinates are defined, the PBP can be moved away from the IO, much like shifting the User Origin in Vectorworks relative to the Internal Origin. This isn’t just a technicality. In live BIM projects, the distinction directly affects model positioning, shared coordinates, and reliable file exchange. Misunderstandings here often explain why models don’t line up across disciplines and across software platforms. In almost every BIM Execution Plan (BEP), other than ours ;-), the 'Project Origin' is defined at the PBP, not the IO. The ambiguity is that BEPs rarely clarify whether the PBP and IO are coincident, and in practice they’re often far apart. If models are then set up relative to the PBP rather than the IO, the defined coordinate is often nowhere near the internal origin, which is why Vectorworks users who ‘set the origin at the origin’ often hit problems when exchanging IFCs with Revit. It also highlights an important distinction between best practice and good practice: Best practice describes idealised workflows and is geared toward software-specific functionality, for example, Revit’s shared coordinates allow models with different internal origins to align if they share a common Project Base Point. Good practice reflects methods that reduce coordination risks in real-world projects. If origins (and orientation) align in all models, coordination just happens. Other elements, such as the Survey Point, or workflows like “next click” and “center on import”, carry similar risks if treated too casually. These need careful management to maintain consistent shared coordinates and predictable model positioning and are best avoided. It’s also worth noting that the location of origins can also affect DWG exchange. Have you noticed that DWG data exported from sheets in Revit often ends up in a different location than the same data exported from modelspace? This is another example of how origins directly impact design coordination and can create unexpected misalignments downstream. In our experience, good practice often diverges from best practice, and those differences can make or break BIM coordination. Sound familiar?