I have always maintained that the Structural Analysis 'bi-directional' link between Revit Structure and the numerous analytical packages out there is a myth.
Engineers analytical requirements are not as precise as the detailer at the front end of the project.
An engineers analytical model could be 10mm, 50mm, even 100mm out, whereas a construction / documentation model has to be 100% accurate. After all, this is what is used to work out tricky buildability area, take accurate steel weights and concrete volumes, not to mentions detailing difficult connections.
It is due to this very reason that I have always taken a stance that an analytical model exported to Revit, only has its uses at the early stages of a project. Tender stage for example, the analytical model will be fairly accurate (it has to be if the engineer wants to give a good estimate of the actual costs involved.) It is so easy and time saving if the tender documents are produced from an exported analytical model.
You could produce a set of annotated GA's for a large building in well under a week. The cost savings for the consultant alone will be huge, compared with traditional 2D or starting from scratch.
I have then always taken the stance that the Tender model is 'binned' (archived) and a fresh model is constructed after tender, whilst the Engineer continues to 'tweak' his / her analytical model as and when required through to Construction issue.
Mark Fox over at Revit FOX has thrown an interesting spanner in the works with his post Revit / Analysis Software - The Missing Link.
He explains his way of working, which the concepts / philosophy is more or less the same as mine, but he does things the opposite way round. He uses the 'one' export from Revit to the analysis software, at quite an advanced stage.
....Firstly, the model should always be created in Revit. My reason is simple. Whilst Engineers are very fussy about some things, there are also some they couldn't care less about; the accuracy of the analytical model generally falls into the ‘I’m not that bothered’ category. Mr Engineer is often ‘not that bothered’ if members they model are 100mm one way or the other. Analytically and from a design POV it generally makes very little difference to them. So why let them start the model and then give it to Mr Technician who then spends hours correcting it? Just start in Revit in the first place right?....
This has led me to think about a second step in the process I follow, combining both of the above points into one approach.
Once the tender documents are produced and the tender model is 'binned,' the construction model can start to take shape, and can be exported to the analysis package.
Whilst this is not a true bi-directional link, it would mean both technician and engineer are working on models that are more or less exactly the same.
Like all of these things, time is always a problem, so the workflow would have to be set up early on, but I do think this approach could work quite well.