Is it just me, or are the valves useless?

[matt__w]

They may not be COMPLETELY useless, but.... depending on which way the valve is rotated, you may or may not see a symbol. Plus, any valves on, say a 3" and smaller pipe, well.. they just don't show up on the plans very well (if at all). So what is everyone else doing? How are your working around this?

[RevitNinja]

They may not be COMPLETELY useless, but.... depending on which way the valve is rotated, you may or may not see a symbol. Plus, any valves on, say a 3" and smaller pipe, well.. they just don't show up on the plans very well (if at all). So what is everyone else doing? How are your working around this?

We're generally not required to model things under 3", so some of what you are mentioning doesn't apply. There might be certain situations which require that level of detail is required for coordination, but they are few and far between.

Many times, you can cover valve placement with a note or in your specs.

[RobertB]

We're generally not required to model things under 3", so some of what you are mentioning doesn't apply. There might be certain situations which require that level of detail is required for coordination, but they are few and far between.

Oh my. That sort of violates the idea of BIM, no? How is the FM guy going to determine the valve needed for replacement on that 1" hot water line?

[darin.marsden]

3" and above? I wish I could do that. Our specs require 1" or 1-1/4" and larger.

[RevitNinja]

Oh my. That sort of violates the idea of BIM, no? How is the FM guy going to determine the valve needed for replacement on that 1" hot water line?

My thoughts exactly, but the last few big jobs I worked on, the smallest size required was 3", sometimes 2". These were big name contractors that probably all of you would recognize too.

[james.klatt]

I haven't yet delivered a project with plumbing, but we are early in the design phase for one that will require plumbing in Revit. Generally speaking plumbing is mostly diagramatic in CAD. Since Revit is real world modelling showing stacked pipe, small valves, etc are going to require a non-traditional and creative way to show your design intent. My thoughts are to utilize more sections and 3d views to relay that sort of information.

[Mcgregage]

Most def for coordination you dont need it, i pretty sure the big one that starts with an m doesnt require anything under 3, though other contractor do require everything all the way down to the 3/4" conduit to every light fixture. for plumbing design in revit you guys a certainly correct you have to get creative and that may be putting it lightly...

[moopey19]

I haven't yet delivered a project with plumbing, but we are early in the design phase for one that will require plumbing in Revit. Generally speaking plumbing is mostly diagramatic in CAD. Since Revit is real world modelling showing stacked pipe, small valves, etc are going to require a non-traditional and creative way to show your design intent. My thoughts are to utilize more sections and 3d views to relay that sort of information.

I noticed this also, and was thinking the same thing. Our plan is to do exactly that, show more risers and sections to show the detail that is not available in plan view. In my opinion, plumbing drawings in revit plan view look atrocious, but i digress.

[rrubert]

I don't think valves are completely useless. It's nice to have something modeled that can move with the pipe that it's on. What we do is use the Autodesk standard shut-off valve as our only valve. We have a symbol for each type of valve (balancing, shut-off automatic balancing, etc) in the family and make a different type for each valve. Each type has a yes/no visibility setting that shows one of the symbols.

[matt__w]

Could you post a small file showing that? Since I'm still a little rough around the edges with Revit, I'm curious to see how it's set up.

Thanks in advance!
Matt