Adaptive Component Tree Column.

[craighowie]

Hi.

So I am wanting to attempt to model a tree column! (see ‘steel tree column’ jpg attached) It has been suggested to me that as my tree column supports change as the roof slopes (see ‘side view’ pdf attached) that I should use an Adaptive Component Family.

I have watched David Lights ‘Revit 2011 Treesupport’ tutorial as well as various other tutorials off the net which show how to make the skeleton of such a tree column (see ‘David Light’ png screen shot attached) These tutorials are however thin on information about making custom solid geometry within the adaptive component environment, like the attached ‘support’ jpg image.

I have been able to create a simple cylindrical solid along a line between two points but I am unsure of how to create the custom ends of the support within the adaptive component environment.

Would the custom bolts, brackets be modeled in the adaptive component environment or would these be imported in as massing components? Bearing in mind I would ideally like the brackets etc to adapt with the changing parameters of the support.

Any advice for me?

Thanks,
Craig

[craighowie]

Anyone got any ideas!

[cliff collins]

This is one of those "borderline" problems which could be done in Conceptual Massing environment, or with traditional family modeling tools.

The Conceptual Mass approach gives you power and flexibility as the geometry responds
to changes via adaptive components. However, the detailed ends of the trees branches
do not really lend themselves to the Conceptual Massing environment.

If done with Massing, the masses must eventually be "converted" to Revit objects such as walls, floors, roofs, curtain systems, etc.

You could build this with nested families, and try using formulae to drive the angles, etc--
but not as good as adaptive components.

So--I think the Massing tools are really intended to generate overall building form, not detailed items such as the brackets on the end of the tree "limbs".

I wish you could import or nest a "normal" family into the Conceptual Massing editor,
and attach it--which would give you the "best of both worlds".

That said, I think you could use the massing tools with adaptive components to generate
the tree column--and you could probably even model the end brackets as well.

What you do with it when you are done becomes more of the problem for developing documents.

The new "frame generator" add-in comes close to being able to do this sort of thing--
it's really a structural column, braces and connectors--whose form is dictated by the Architect, but could be detailed in both A and S drawings--and exist in both models.

Just my 2 c worth.

cheers

[twiceroadsfool]

It would take very little to do that out of traditional families. Make one family thats Work Plane Based, and use Reference Lines to host the arms. Coinstrain the Reference lines, and its all set.

[craighowie]

Thanks Cliff for the response.

Cliff as you mention the Conceptual Mass approach gives you power and flexibility as the geometry responds to changes via adaptive components. This is the exact reason that I see this option as the most appealing. However, as you mention the detailed ends of the trees branches do not lend themselves to the Conceptual Massing environment. (I am still unsure of how I would achieve the braces and connectors as one single adaptive component within the conceptual massing environment... Any ideas???)

The problem currently with massing as you mention Cliff is that the masses must eventually be "converted" to Revit objects such as walls, floors, roofs, curtain systems, etc. In my opinion this is limiting, and would like to see the masses created in the conceptual massing environment being able to be nested into other families so that they can form part of other family categories, like for example, ‘structural framing.’

As for the creation of nested families, and trying to use formulae to drive the angles, etc. sounds a bit in-depth for me at this stage especially when there is the adaptive family tool available which would require no use of calculations and /or formulae.

I agree with the view that the massing tools are really intended to generate overall building form, not detailed items such as the brackets on the end of the tree "limbs". But at the same time I would like to see this change in the future. (I personally have never really bought into the idea of generating a whole building form out of a mass, I believe that it is really only appropriate when a certain building type is required, and is more of a fun marketing gimmick.)

I have not seen the "frame generator" add-in, and will have to have a look at that.

Thanks again for the reponse,
Craig

[craighowie]

It would take very little to do that out of traditional families. Make one family thats Work Plane Based, and use Reference Lines to host the arms. Coinstrain the Reference lines, and its all set.

Thanks Aaron for the response.

Possibly you could post the tree column rfa. of the thumbnail! I still don’t see how the branches of the tree would adjust to suit change in roof angle and height!

I have attached an example of a building with a similar roof support to that which I a trying to achieve.

Thanks,
Craig

[craighowie]

Heres the attachment...

[cliff collins]

I think in Aaron's family example, you could use reference lines to generate the extusions for the braces and have them tied to a parameter so each brace member could be a different length based on its distance from a sloped reference plane which defines or is equal to the angle of the roof above?

A challenge indeed......

cheers

[twiceroadsfool]

I think in Aaron's family example, you could use reference lines to generate the extusions for the braces and have them tied to a parameter so each brace member could be a different length based on its distance from a sloped reference plane which defines or is equal to the angle of the roof above?

A challenge indeed......

cheers

Im not at the office right now, and im training all week, but if i remember ill post it next time.

Theres really nothing challenging in it: Its a nested family, set to be work plane based. Then in the parent family, there are reference lines, and those are the work planes for the nested family instances. Constrain the reference lines, and yadda yadda.

For what you have pictured in the first post, the origin of the "arm" could be at one end. So host them on 4 reference lines, with an instance parameter for each length.

[hugotavares6]

Im not at the office right now, and im training all week, but if i remember ill post it next time.

Theres really nothing challenging in it: Its a nested family, set to be work plane based. Then in the parent family, there are reference lines, and those are the work planes for the nested family instances. Constrain the reference lines, and yadda yadda.

For what you have pictured in the first post, the origin of the "arm" could be at one end. So host them on 4 reference lines, with an instance parameter for each length.

Sometimes we lost a lot of time trying to do things because we dont ask ourselves if theres another way, simler than the first way we tend to try. With nested families, make a tree support seems to me very easy. Nice shot