We have several users who provide DGN files of completed Land F/X plans.
I wrote a script many years ago to strip the shadows from the plant blocks, as an earlier version of Microstation didn't like the solid fill objects in the blocks.

I think you would need to maintain a Microstation license to assist with the conversions in either direction.
And then you could find the best workflow, for instance if it is best have AutoCAD convert a DWG to a DGN, or to have Microstation import the DWG and save as a DGN.

Since everything Land F/X does is pretty tightly controlled, should you need to redefine blocks or reassign layers, it should be pretty smooth.
We've heard and seen much bigger issues with getting DGN files into AutoCAD. Which in this case would still apply -- you need to get the base Xref in there. That is going to be a much bigger issue than converting a clean Land F/X DWG to a DGN.
Note, for instance, that any Land F/X file can actually be down-saved to a DXF file, which can be imported by Microstation or literally any CAD program without any issue.

--J

Jeremiah,
Thanks for the reply. I suppose my main concern is working with the .dgn files in CAD and workflow when trying to produce documents in this manner, like you mentioned. This will be a very long project (time-wise and distance-wise), with many milestones and deliverable dates, and possibly many revisions. Every other consultant working on the team will be using MicroStation, and there are many xrefs from multiple disciplines that would need to be continually updated, so we're concerned about the ability to quickly share files, update new base linework, etc, without too many errors or hiccups. If we have to convert every time we share or receive files, it seems that it could become rather cumbersome for this project.

Any other thoughts or ideas from you or other users out there? Any other methods or processes that can be done to make it more efficient?

Trevor,

The longer the project, the more time savings to be had by using Land F/X. And besides, your actual time gain/loss calculation (I'm assuming) would revolve around having to do everything in Microstation, versus finding the best conversion methodology to do your work in AutoCAD. The way I run those numbers, it's always a net gain to spend maybe five minutes each time a revised base is received, and getting it converted.

I would try to go with the lowest common denominator, which should be DXF. If you can drop the Microstation base files down to DXF, and then bring that into CAD to be saved as a DWG, that should leave you with a very clean AutoCAD environment. But I can't speak for what object types might be lost in that process.
I know of other users who bring a DGN file into AutoCAD, and then use our Nuke tool to clean it up.
I would still think it would imperative to have a copy of MS to go through the many transfer experiments.

--J

Thanks Jeremiah. I'll take these things into consideration as we move forward. I'll let you know if I have any other questions.