How To Measure Egress Travel Distance [Archive]

Steve_Stafford

2010-02-11, 06:31 AM

The original post stated that they didn't like the place an egress object and schedule process. That process assumes that you will need to be able to revisit the values again. Taking them off and putting the values in text or somewhere else means when someone casually asks you to double check things...you have to do it all over again. If there is a minor change then these objects can usually survive with subtle changes. If it is a complete do over then obviously it isn't much different than taking them off again. It is the unanticipated revisiting that gets over looked and where the family/tag/schedule approach starts to sing.

cliff collins

2010-02-11, 04:58 PM

I vote for the Line-based Family and Schedule.

Very "BIM".

cheers........

bhanna173409

2010-02-12, 03:45 PM

Thanks for the replies, all very helpful and positive. We are familiar with the line/family based approach. "Scheduling" the egress distance has advantages, but also adds complexity to the process that previously wasn't there. In most cases, the added procedural complexity at the beginning of the process pays big dividends down the road.

But in this case we're not dealing with systems (e.g. beams, electrical panels, ductwork, doors even) than require careful scheduling and parametric control. It's just dumb lines, so I wish there was something more straight forward.

Steve_Stafford

2010-02-12, 05:07 PM

...But in this case we're not dealing with systems (e.g. beams, electrical panels, ductwork, doors even) than require careful scheduling and parametric control. It's just dumb lines, so I wish there was something more straight forward...I created a line-based egress family for a class at AU, just as an example of how the new family type could be used. It's been a pretty popular item. Not necessarily the choice or need for everyone.

That written...if I had a nickle for every time someone told me that they don't need "this approach", they just need 2D or plain lines or some such, I'd be rich. The interior designer says I don't care if the furniture is 3D...but when you later are looking at the building in a camera view the first question from them is, "Where's the furniture??". Reply with, "You said you didn't want 3D! They reply with, "Yeah, but this is Revit!?!"

Same thing happens all the time with egress studies...do one, take it off with polylines and then do it again and then do it again. Every time you end up transferring the information to excel or something. If you set up a single schedule and sketch those "lines" with the family instead, you get results at the same time. The only part that isn't efficient enough really is identifying each path uniquely. If you tag all and use a tag that has the parameter that defines them uniquely in it, you can sketch them quick and use the tag to label them 1, 2, 3 etc.

Tagging etc. assumes that documenting the results is part of the equation. If just dealing with quick takeoff the lines should still be just as quick. If you have to make the schedule each time then that ought to be in the template.

Done well it shouldn't be any more work than taking it off once, more likely less work. If you are writing the results of polyline takeoffs down somewhere/elsewhere then the "family" technique should "lap the other approach several times in a race".

sthedens

2010-02-12, 05:38 PM

That written...if I had a nickle for every time someone told me that they don't need "this approach", they just need 2D or plain lines or some such, I'd be rich. The interior designer says I don't care if the furniture is 3D...but when you later are looking at the building in a camera view the first question from them is, "Where's the furniture??". Reply with, "You said you didn't want 3D! They reply with, "Yeah, but this is Revit!?!"

This is why they don't allow firearms in the workplace. I need a Terry Tate Office Linebacker!

twiceroadsfool

2010-02-12, 06:32 PM

Drawing a line = 2 clicks. Drawing a Line Based Family = 2 clicks.

Querying the lengths of the lines and writing the distance with text = 6 clicks plus typing (everytime it changes).

Tagging / making different Path types of Line Based families = 3 clicks per travel distance... Once.

Thats really the entire crux of the matter. Using steves example of the "interior designer who doesnt need furniture in 3D," they need to be educated in how the program works. If the piece of furniture is built, its the same work placing it in 3d as it is in 2d.

Its not a matter of if you NEED intelligent/parametric egress distances. Its that: If you take 4 minutes to build one, why WOULDNT you?

bhanna173409

2010-02-15, 04:37 PM

Its not a matter of if you NEED intelligent/parametric egress distances. Its that: If you take 4 minutes to build one, why WOULDNT you?

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. The real trick is to manage systemic complexity and decrease overall project "entropy." I'm not convinced yet that this is a case where the extra complexity is beneficial; more schedules to manage, more families in the list, more "weight".

I certainly appreciate the power of families and scheduling, and I'm certain that people who post here can manage these things way faster than a typical user. As a novice responsible for novices, I have to be particularly attentive to time and efficiency.

For my part, why would I want to spend 4 minutes screwing around with something mundane when I could "draw" it in 1 minute and spend the other three figuring out something cool: http://buildz.blogspot.com/2009/12/api-yi-yi-bitmap-to-panel-plugin.html

Of course a good counter argument would be that simplicity is to be found in the consistency of the process algorithm; Build Family -> Schedule Family -> Extract Data. Foreverything.

twiceroadsfool

2010-02-15, 05:16 PM

LOL. Im not someone who lives in the camp of "do it just because you can."

Im in the camp of "Do it because its way faster, much more efficient, keeps the budget lower overall, and makes the project team able to go focus on the ARCHITECTURE and not on having to draw and redraw lines and query them and chase text notes around 4 floors of Egress diagrams and..." Well, i guess you get the point.

Ive implemented these Egress Families in 3 offices now. Ive never had a single user (all novices when they first used it) have trouble with it. Have you USED a line based family? Its the SAME as drawing a series of lines. Literally. Only, then you dont have to query it.

Its not like their building it every time, its built for them. Believe me, im ware of the stakes in overcomplicating a Revit project, and all that it entails when dealing with Novice project teams.

I also know, that when youre responsible for novices, if you entirely defeat the tool for the sake of "letting them do what theyve always done" theyll never get good, or fast.

ron.sanpedro

2010-02-15, 05:41 PM

For what it is worth, I find that the folks doing Life Safety Plans, while novice Revit users, are never junior staff. They are Project Architects and Project Managers and sometimes even Principals/Owners. Show THEM that Revit done right is a better way and EVERYONE stops wanting to "do it like I've always done it" a lot faster. The "Working Door Schedule" may be the single most powerful "old hand converter" available in Revit, un-sexy as it is. ;)

That said, I am wondering what people have done vis-a-vis scheduling to deal with "shared" path of travel. Like when three paths come together for a segment before exiting. I want to see all three paths as a total length of each path, but the one leg has to be counted three times in effect, and the schedule wants to only show it once. Never found a graceful way to make that work, other than stacking three segments at the shared portion.

Gordon

twiceroadsfool

2010-02-15, 06:33 PM

We put them next to each other, so theres no ambiguity about the paths. Ive seen them done (at my olb job) where they get stacked on top of one another. Graphically i dont like it, nor do i care for it Revit wise, but it still works just fine...

bhanna173409

2010-02-15, 11:54 PM

Have you USED a line based family?
Of course I have. I found it to be a clumsy workaround, lacking the typical elegance of how operations are typically performed in Revit. This is why I posted this question - I was hoping that there was something more powerful.

I fully support families and scheduling, but perhaps the original question should be phrased as conjecture, to wit, is the current "line-based-family" method of constructing egress routes the best possible solution or is there potentially a better way to do this? And if so then what?

Its the SAME as drawing a series of lines. Literally. Yes. That's exactly the problem. I'd like to end up with a single intelligent object at the end of the process. Perhaps we're implementing this incorrectly?

twiceroadsfool

2010-02-16, 01:51 AM

Of course I have. I found it to be a clumsy workaround, lacking the typical elegance of how operations are typically performed in Revit. This is why I posted this question - I was hoping that there was something more powerful.

I fully support families and scheduling, but perhaps the original question should be phrased as conjecture, to wit, is the current "line-based-family" method of constructing egress routes the best possible solution or is there potentially a better way to do this? And if so then what?

Yes. That's exactly the problem. I'd like to end up with a single intelligent object at the end of the process. Perhaps we're implementing this incorrectly?

I just cant see how its clumsy, unless im missing something vital. I click "Component- SE-Travel Distance Line- Path1," i check the Chain box in the option bar, and i start in the corner of the room. I click. Move around the desk, click, move towards the door, click, down the hall, click, down the next hall, click, out the door, click. I go to do it again, but first duplicate the type in the browser and call it Path2. Through that,the schedule is filling itself out.

If thats clumsy, then i guess its clumsy? Im not sure what you want it to do, aside from do the project for you. :)

bhanna173409

2010-02-16, 02:42 AM

Again. Is the current "line-based-family" method of constructing egress routes the best possible solution or is there potentially a better way to do this? And if so then what?

How can one ever hope to grow and innovate if one can't imagine something better than the status quo?

twiceroadsfool

2010-02-16, 02:44 AM

Again. Is the current "line-based-family" method of constructing egress routes the best possible solution or is there potentially a better way to do this? And if so then what?

Its the best there is. :)

nancy.mcclure

2010-02-16, 09:41 PM

...I am wondering what people have done vis-a-vis scheduling to deal with "shared" path of travel. Like when three paths come together for a segment before exiting. I want to see all three paths as a total length of each path, but the one leg has to be counted three times in effect, and the schedule wants to only show it once.

Gordon

Why not name the routes (comments or custom parameter) with Route 1ABC (shared length) and the spurs as Route 1A, 1B, 1C, etc? Then the schedules could be filtered using wildcards including the shared length plus it's appropriate spur.

ron.sanpedro

2010-02-16, 10:03 PM

Why not name the routes (comments or custom parameter) with Route 1ABC (shared length) and the spurs as Route 1A, 1B, 1C, etc? Then the schedules could be filtered using wildcards including the shared length plus it's appropriate spur.

I have tried that, but then you need a different schedule for A, B & C, because 1ABC can't show up three times to give appropriate totals. By actually repeating each path you can have a single schedule that tells you that 1B is the longest of the three, for example. And I have seen jurisdictions who want that called out in bold text on the number showing length of each leg. Neither is ideal, and both work.

But the truth is, as lame and non BIMmie as this approach is, it is a ton better than punting plines to autobad and doing manual or Excel calculations. And while I would love to see a fully realized Exiting tool, the truth is that every jurisdiction requires their own approach to documentation, making a single highly refined tool hard to do. And I want Site Tools that actually fail to suck long before I want a better approach to exiting! ;)

Gordon

twiceroadsfool

2010-02-16, 11:41 PM

I cant even say that its a Non-BIM approach. I mean, what does that even mean? BIM is a catchphrase that sadly gets thrown around as the sgapegoat for the all-encompassing-problem herein: Were upset that the program doesnt do our jobs for us, LOL.

I mean, dont get me wrong. I love all that "BIM" is, but im really curious how a piece of software is supposed to BETTER handle this situation. There are a dozen SMALL things we could ask for that would help US custom tailor it (Like doors and door parameters being available in room and area schedules... I mean the doors supposedly know what rooms their in, etc, and like letting shared parameters cross pollenate catagories (scheduling egress width of doors per area in an area schedule), but even then its all going to be custom tailored.

Auto check Egress distances to a specific door? Soooooo- The room/area would have to have an "Exit" specified. Then it would need rules. What can the "distance finder" walk through, and what cant it? Then were all upset because we did a nifty trick where we used a railing to make track lighting, but oops... The railing is one of those catagories that Egress finder cant walk through, and were "MAD AT HAVING TO FIND WORKAROUNDS." Meanwhile in a fit of anger we demand here that autodesk do something about my track lights stopping the man running from the fire, and we delete the track lights, which makes the interior designers mad (but theyre mad anyway because railings cant be ceiling hosted. BUT TRACK LIGHTS GO ON CEILINGS!!! who can i sue!?!?!?!?1?1!?). And all of this is superfluous because- lets be honest- I cant get a quantity takeoff for the entire number of bricks in the building when i have my first Pre-design programming layout, so this program is junk.

(If you didnt catch on, thats totally a joke..... :) )

At the end of the day, in 2008 when Line Based families came out, the potential was endless. We can extrapolate models/data/whatever, along a variable length path, and quantify it. It *is* what a polyline used to be. Only better. I use them for a ton of things. Is it unBIM? I cant really say so. Because BIM is a process (if anything) and this is the PROCESS of getting this information faster, and eliminating the error and rework associated with constant redrawing and requerying a series of TRULY unintelligent lines.

Plus (if youre really BIM crazy like we are) you can put something in to that "family" that has space protection qualities, and clash detech against it later to make sure that no only is the floor space clear, but that ALL the space is clear. It doesnt get much more BIM than that.

But i digress.

Steve_Stafford

2010-02-18, 03:12 AM

As the guy that can probably fairly claim starting the Line Based Egress craze...it never started out that way. It was just a demonstration of the new family feature that showed up in 2006. I showed the example in front of 600+ people at AU2006 and I still get an email for it now and then. Can't fight gravity?

Revit MEP calculates the length of electrical circuits once a device is connected to a panel. The length however is a bit crude...essentially an x,y extrapolation of the position of the device and the panel and a little bit of addition.

I'm sure the Revit developers could fashion a clever egress tool that you could sketch and finish, resulting in a single entity. Taken a bit further it could do some reporting etc. As clever as it might get I seriously doubt it would satisfy every last jurisdiction or user's process...not an excuse for doing nothing.

You could distort a railing's purpose I suppose by sketching the railing and examining the length or displaying it in a schedule but now I'm going to really spin Aaron's head. :shock:

twiceroadsfool

2010-02-18, 03:47 AM

LOL, wouldnt bust my head up at all. I suppose one of the things i still struggle with, is saying what im trying to say, instead of... what im saying.

What would the goal of a native "Revit egress" tool be? Something "railing-esque" may work at "solidifying" the object in to a single unit, with a single sketch... But what does that have to do with BIM? I mean, what makes a single froze dumb object more "BIM Like" than 7 chain'ed objects that are attached and schedule together?

Im all FOR a tool that actually provided more intelligence. But intelligence (to me) isnt looking down a CAD tools sketch. Can it know that it uses a DOOR to pass through a WALL, so that when the DOOR moves or gets deleted it freaks out? Now were talkin. Can it warn us/call us/cry to us when it gets too close (or when something gets too close to it) like furniture that interrupts path of travel? Now were talkin. Can we define minimum space clearances so its not just a length calculator, but its actual manueverable spaces? Now were talkin. Can it know what ROOMS and AREAS it crosses? Awesome.

Thats all im trying to say. A "single P-line" isnt BIM. Maybe a Line Based Family isnt MUCH better, but at least its got data i dont have to query and retype. It has a LITTLE intelligence that i can leverage through design changes. And they ALWAYS change. For all the architects that swear they never do a cope plan twice, im yet to do a project that only did one once.

Now a supper neat tool that did all of the above, and knew all about the spaces and places and faces it crossed? Yeah, im there.

Although Steve, now that you bring it up, i saw someone use a railing as an expansion joint. What a headache it was. They couldnt type mark tag the railing, so they were material tagging, and making every "railing" a different material, at which point it might as well just be text, lol.... Im not against using tools creatively. Im against using them.... Oh how can i say it nicely......

stuntmonkee

2010-05-03, 04:57 PM

Is it even possible to get a tag to read a railing length?

I know there is some arguments as to using a family for something it's not intended for, but a railing would cover the issue for continuous measurements, AND work for curved situations plus 3d travel.

Problem that I'm hitting first is that you can't tag the length, you can only schedule it.

Stunts

markusb

2010-05-04, 06:53 PM

So this travel line seems like a great tool for egress plans, but I am having a terrible time trying to schedule it. If I use the multi-category I can get it to come up, but there is not field for length. Any help is appreciated.

thanks!

bhanna173409

2010-05-04, 07:02 PM

...
What would the goal of a native "Revit egress" tool be? Something "railing-esque" may work at "solidifying" the object in to a single unit, with a single sketch... But what does that have to do with BIM?

Then what do dimensions have to do with BIM?

To me this is a case of annotation vs. modeling. Calculating egress distance is an exercise in annotating a plan, just like dimensioning is. One shouldn't have to "model" the egress distance any more than one should model individual dimensions. Dimensions describe geometry, paths of egress are inherent to plan geometry. Furthermore their annotation shouldn't show up in other plans, only in the egress plans. Revit gets it right with annotation that stays put with its native view.

The necessity of manually drawing the egress line is the lynch pin that makes this different than simply tagging a door. I would argue that the egress line is a piece of annotation, just like the leader lines for dimensions. Modeling and scheduling them is gratuitous.

twiceroadsfool

2010-05-04, 09:24 PM

Then what do dimensions have to do with BIM?

To me this is a case of annotation vs. modeling. Calculating egress distance is an exercise in annotating a plan, just like dimensioning is. One shouldn't have to "model" the egress distance any more than one should model individual dimensions. Dimensions describe geometry, paths of egress are inherent to plan geometry. Furthermore their annotation shouldn't show up in other plans, only in the egress plans. Revit gets it right with annotation that stays put with its native view.

The necessity of manually drawing the egress line is the lynch pin that makes this different than simply tagging a door. I would argue that the egress line is a piece of annotation, just like the leader lines for dimensions. Modeling and scheduling them is gratuitous.

I agree with you there. And when i use my Line Based Egress Family, nothing modeled shows up, and it only appears in one view.

But its MUCH more than "dimensions". Dimensions tie to actual objects, actual references. In this case, that ACTUAL reference is a pathway. An occurance. A specific path through specific objects. When the path has to get updated, the distances have to get updated. The method we are using does just that, with NO OTHER DOWNSIDE.

The fact that "Generic Model" is in its name doesnt mean much. Theres nothing to deal with in other views, nothing to worry about. I click where the line goes in the code plan, and it goes there, and it knows how long it is.

i really cant see how that could be any easier. :shrug:

markusb

2010-05-05, 09:17 PM

If the Travel Line that was posted is so great to use can someone please help me schedule the thing. Not sure what I am doing wrong, here's the process:

1. downloaded the Travel Line
2. loaded it in to my project
3. placed it on my floor plan
4. created a multi-category schedule
5. got it to show up by adding the family and type field to the schedule

But the Length parameter does not show up in the fields section!?

Did I miss something?

twiceroadsfool

2010-05-05, 09:23 PM

Im not sure which one everyone is downloading, nor am i sure why you need a multi catagory schedule. I make mine specialty equipment, personally.

The Line based family needs a Length Parameter that is SHARED, in it. Then it should show up in the available fields for that catagories schedule.

Steve_Stafford

2010-05-06, 04:22 AM

Hi,

You can download the one I made ages ago as proof of concept from HERE (http://www.aecadvantage.com/links2), scroll down to the egress examples. This one is using the Generic Model category. The examples at the site include a project file with working schedules etc that you can reverse engineer.

markusb

2010-05-06, 05:35 PM

Thanks Steve! This worked beautifully.

t1.shep

2010-05-14, 05:02 PM

I agree with you there. And when i use my Line Based Egress Family, nothing modeled shows up, and it only appears in one view.

But its MUCH more than "dimensions". Dimensions tie to actual objects, actual references. In this case, that ACTUAL reference is a pathway. An occurance. A specific path through specific objects. When the path has to get updated, the distances have to get updated. The method we are using does just that, with NO OTHER DOWNSIDE.

The fact that "Generic Model" is in its name doesnt mean much. Theres nothing to deal with in other views, nothing to worry about. I click where the line goes in the code plan, and it goes there, and it knows how long it is.

i really cant see how that could be any easier. :shrug:

Hey Aaron, how do you get your egress path to only show up in one view?

twiceroadsfool

2010-05-14, 05:39 PM

There are several ways to make it do that.

1. Level of detail, of the catagory. This is a very simple approach, but its extremely effective. Ours goes like this:

Coarse- Working views only.
Medium- All documentation Views
Fine- Rendering and Visualization for presentations.

Our egress travel line is a Specialty Equipment Family, that only has its symbology shown at Coarse level of detail. Our Egress plan is an Area Plan, set to Medium level of detail- Except Specialty Equipment is set to Coarse in the VG settings (its done in our template, plus its the default view template style for Code Plans).

Another way- Subcatagories. Give the symbology its own subcatagory. This is more irritating, because then you need to make sur eits OFF everywhere else, instead of making sure its ON in one place. I like the LOD version, because i almost NEVER get questions about it showing up. No one will switch a documentation view to Coarse. If they NEED something at coarse (like walls, in one view), theyll go change that categories LOD in VG.

3. Filters. You can make a Filter to remove them from all drawings, but again (like subcat) then youd have to make sure that filter was applied and off (invisible) in all views. So i still like the LOD better.

james.251382

2010-07-30, 07:27 PM

I have been playing with using a railing to indicate this since a railing can directly report its length rather than going through all the scheduling and a bunch of unconnected components. The major drawback is the visibility control, to handle this have set this railing just below slab level and on the life safety plan have floors turned off. Then I use a filter to make that railing type a bold dashed line.

I imagine I will run into issues with the railing showing in sections but I am planning to use that same filter to turn off that railing type. I will just have to add this to the section view templates.

Not the best work around but I really don't like the scheduling components method.

Scott Womack

2010-07-31, 03:34 PM

Look at Steve Staffords blog. There is a link to a set of Revit free plugin utilities, that can get the length of connected lines.

http://http://revitoped.blogspot.com/

patricks

2010-08-02, 01:36 PM

t1.shep

2010-08-02, 02:56 PM

What family type do you use for your line-based egress path family?

We have one that is a line-based detail component family, with nested arrows that show up as the line gets longer. The properties lists the length of each segment, but it appears I can't schedule detail components.
You're right, you can't schedule detail components. We use a generic model (or some other category) and filter it out on our non-code sheets. the same filters can be used to limit what you see in your multi-category schedule.

patricks

2010-08-02, 03:14 PM

Oops, I only read the first page and didn't see this 2nd page when I made my post above.

Sure would be nice to be able to just schedule the detail component directly, then it would be easy to ensure that it's only in one view.

I may try the specialty equipment and level-of-detail method Aaron mentioned. I should be able to just nest my detail component already made into a line-based generic model, and then change its category to specialty equipment.

twiceroadsfool

2010-08-02, 03:24 PM

I do that exact thing, except i use a Generic Annotation, instead of a Detail Component. That way it looks contiguous with the size of Dimension ticks, and it doesnt change scales from project to project.

Since all of our documentation views are set to medium LOD, having this family only visible at Coarse is an easy sell. But there are tons of ways to make it only show up in the one view. :)

blacourciere

2010-09-01, 07:05 PM

What category are you scheduling these line based families under? I am using a similar process and have a tag that displays the Path mark and the individual segment length. I would love for this family to work but for it to be truly successful I need to be able to Tag the path with the overall length of the entire path. I am a little unsure how to create a parameter that calculates the sum of a family.

twiceroadsfool

2010-09-01, 07:10 PM

mthurnauer

2010-09-01, 07:50 PM

Just to add onto what Aaron said, you need to have some parameter in which you assign a Path ID. You can use one of the existing available parameters for this. When you create your schedule, you need to sort by the Path ID and then calculate totals

saeborne

2010-09-08, 02:34 PM

You dont. You schedule it, and put the Schedule on the Egress Plan Sheet, with Totals calculated, and Itemize every instance not checked.

Mine are Specialty Equipment, but it really doesnt matter what you use.

When I try to schedule my Specialty Equipment - Egress Path family, I can't access the "Length" parameter under Fields. I also can not access any parameter that I've created within the family, like "PATH ID."

Do I have to make these shared parameters?

Thanks

patricks

2010-09-08, 02:46 PM

When I try to schedule my Specialty Equipment - Egress Path family, I can't access the "Length" parameter under Fields. I also can not access any parameter that I've created within the family, like "PATH ID."

Do I have to make these shared parameters?

Thanks

Yes you have to use shared parameters if you want to schedule them.

jboersema

2010-11-05, 04:34 PM

You don't or you can't tag the end segment and have that tag report the total length of the egress path? I understand placing the path id schedule on the sheet view near the end of the egress path, but if that end of the egress path moves the schedule will not move with it. I want to just tag the end segment.

twiceroadsfool

2010-11-05, 08:29 PM

Its not a matter of what we want, the software wont do it. I dont put the tag anywhere near it. I tag the segments using Type Mark (thats the value i use to name/number the paths) and then i put the schedule in the top right of the sheet, where schedules belong. :)

dkoch

2011-01-21, 12:19 AM

Some day when I have the time, I will need to revisit this thread and try to get the scheduled line family method to work. Thanks to all for contributing to this thread.

Same thing happens all the time with egress studies...do one, take it off with polylines and then do it again and then do it again. Every time you end up transferring the information to excel or something.
I would point out that while you may need to transfer the polyline information to Excel if you are using vanilla AutoCAD, when using ACA, you can add a property set to the polyline that includes an automatic property for the length, and then add a schedule tag to the polyline that displays the length right in the drawing. Edit the polyline, and the length value in the tag updates dynamically. I find it quite useful when working out which path is the longest and usually have the "trial" polylines and tags on a non-plotting layer for future reference. I understand that Revit is different and that I will have to adjust my expectations accordingly, but this happens to be a task that ACA does rather well.

mthurnauer

2011-01-21, 02:11 PM

Another useful tool that I have made using this same method is to make a line-based family that measures egress width. I draw the line across various corridors, stairs, etc. You can makes types in the family for your width per occupant, such as .15, .20, etc. Then it will calculate that for a certain egress component, the allowable load is say 480 occupants. I then tag this with a custom tag that put allowable in the top field and you can enter a value for actual in the bottom field. Unfortunately, you have to add up the actual as it cannot do it for you.