Working link to your Revit cloud model in Forma Data Management.
https://acc.autodesk.com/docs/files/projects/1ce65301-5ad5-4fde-ac34-5fd901a347d0?folderUrn=urn%3Aadsk.wipprod%3Afs.folder%3Aco.60V-WrK8S1GBjn5gp5DnAQ&entityId=urn%3Aadsk.wipprod%3Adm.lineage%3AmbppQfh_TneCxRnBP77lVQ&viewModel=detail&moduleId=folders
Working link to your Individual Forma Board
DF sheet set at D size, 30 by 42 inches, six sheets. Delete any blank sheets.
Screenshot of your Insight result alongside your Week 3 Forma result.
Design memo of 300 to 400 words: what survived the handoff, what you rebuilt, what assembly choices you made and why, and where Revit and Forma disagreed.
What survived the handoff. The massing, floor plates, and facade geometry arrived in Revit as native geometry, and the windows came through as Forma Windows. What did not survive was any real construction. The walls, roof, and floors were generic surfaces, and the windows had placeholder thermal properties.
What I rebuilt. I created new wall, roof, and glazing types rather than overriding instances. The floors are a wood-frame wall at R-39 (19" thick), and the other is brick-faced wall at R-19.8 (17.6" thick). The roof is a green roof at R-35.8. I reset the windows to low-E double glazing with SHGC but the U-factor is 0.37, which misses the 0.35 target, so the glazing needs another upgrade.
Assembly choices and why. I assumed a concrete podium with wood frame above. The wood wall suits that assumption because it roughly doubles the R-19 minimum and reduces the load transferred to the podium. The brick assembly only just clears R-19, so I limited it to street level, where durability and masonry character matter most. I chose a green roof over a terrace for stormwater retention and reduced heat gain, and it exceeds the R-30 minimum. I ran Total Carbon on both upper-floor wall options and got 1.036M kgCOâ‚‚e for wood and 1.043M for brick, a 0.67% difference. Carbon did not decide the choice, so thermal margin and constructability did.
Where Revit and Forma disagreed. Embodied carbon fell from 2.86M kgCO₂e in Week 3 to about 0.47M. Both analyses use the same scope (envelope and interiors, A1-A3 and B6, EC3 dataset), so the comparison is fair. The main driver is the wall. Forma assumed 8" heavyweight concrete with 6" insulation, while Revit now uses wood frame. EUI also rose from 33 to about 69 kBtu/ft². Week 3 was set to Multifamily, but my Revit insight read as Office, whose default loads are much higher. That likely explains why doubling the wall R-value barely moved EUI. I will correct the building type and rerun. Neither analysis includes structure or foundations, so neither is a whole-building figure.