Parts and Assemblies

[clog boy]

I'm sure everyone is playing around with the new version, and tinkered with Parts and Assemblies. At this time there is no thread about it or I am looking in the wrong subforum. So, what do you all think?

My take on parts:
Parts is in my opinion a way to get somewhat reliable quantities from Architect models, where multi layered system families are joined in an 'intelligent' fashion.
My dislike is that it does not physically break the wall apart, ie you cant adjust the join for individual layers or adjust base and top offsets. (it is something we do for precise construction drawings)
I'm not going to use Parts for these reasons. However I can see how it narrows down to more reliable cost estimation with QTO and other object based cost estimation software.

Assemblies. I would love to love them. It is a kind of 'groups Light' with a twist.
Yes they can be copied. But unintended changes to one version of the Assembly automatically creates a new type. And you cant change one type for another.
The way I see it is that from an Architect model, builders can isolate elements and place them on a sheet for construction drawings. It is a good way to create a drawing for a set of components and get them on a sheet quickly. Prefabricated walls and floors for instance. Or how about doors and windows. We now FINALLY have a way to make 'legends', and dimension and tag them and more freedom as to what view we are using.
As a cherry on the pie, nested families appear in a Parts list. however they have to be added to the assembly individually.


In my opinion, Parts and Assemblies stand out in the list of software improvements. They have a lot of potential and I hope they sand off the rough edges soon and keep improving them. My next wish for Assemblies would be to scan for individual families of a category (a bit like RST graphical schedules and for Parts I would like to see an option to not only divide layers but also conquer (and manage) them as individual elements. Then we're really up to steam. Thank you Factory for a job well done, keep polishing until it shines :)

[Dimitri Harvalias]

My dislike is that it does not physically break the wall apart, ie you cant adjust the join for individual layers or adjust base and top offsets. (it is something we do for precise construction drawings)


When you create parts you can select the individual layers and in the properties dialogue you should see a check box to 'display grips' (something like that, not at Revit right at the moment). This allows you to drag edit the edges of the parts. The only caveat is that it only works on horizontal and vertical edges. Other edges need to be modified with a profile sketch.

[RossMc]

Assemblies seem very useful for some limited applications.

One aspect that leaves this feature crippled is the inability to put the views of an assembly on any sheet. I doubt many (if any) firms use separate sheets to define individual assemblies. I see this being more useful to manufacturers who may define a single assembly on each sheet.

[narlee]

I'm sorry. I overlooked your thread and started one called "Parts". If a moderator see this, s/he might decide to take my thread and put it in here.

[tamas]

When you create parts you can select the individual layers and in the properties dialogue you should see a check box to 'display grips' (something like that, not at Revit right at the moment). This allows you to drag edit the edges of the parts. The only caveat is that it only works on horizontal and vertical edges. Other edges need to be modified with a profile sketch.

Here is the relevant link to the new wiki help:

http://wikihelp.autodesk.com/Revit/enu/2012/Help/Revit_User%27s_Guide/0325-Build_th325/1144-Construc1144/1146-Parts1146/1153-Editing_1153


Tamas

[clog boy]

When you create parts you can select the individual layers and in the properties dialogue you should see a check box to 'display grips' (something like that, not at Revit right at the moment). This allows you to drag edit the edges of the parts. The only caveat is that it only works on horizontal and vertical edges. Other edges need to be modified with a profile sketch.

Ah it is called Show Shape Handles, thank you very much!


Assemblies seem very useful for some limited applications.

One aspect that leaves this feature crippled is the inability to put the views of an assembly on any sheet. I doubt many (if any) firms use separate sheets to define individual assemblies. I see this being more useful to manufacturers who may define a single assembly on each sheet.

By the beard of Odin! You are right :( yes we do make 'parts' sheets (precast wall views) with all walls for a house on one single sheet. Doesn't seem like there is a way around it either.
It would be no problem to export each individual wall to CAD for our manufacturer (yes Y2D) but it would be a lot easier if Assemblies permitted the same browser organisation (grouping by project parameters for views) as views and sheets. But sadly, no such luck.

[mrauscher]

Here's a crazy question... I can happily make my wall into parts and adjust heights of the wall-assembly to correctly show in parapet details; however, I cannot create parts from a ROOF.

is this just the way it is? I don't get it.
Perhaps because Parts are more aimed towards materials and not just simplified detailing...

any ideas?

[tamas]

Maria,

In general creating layer parts from complex roofs was too difficult for us so to worry about so far. If we follow the wall layer analogy, the roof layer would be a continuous solid object with thickness being the defined layer thickness. Generating this shape is a tricky geometrical problem. Plus I doubt anybody would need this complex 3D shaped single material layer of a roof to represent anything in 3D. In real life the roofs are built of more fragmented components. We have not had time to implement these as parts yet.

I am curious, do you actually use these wall layer parts in production now? If yes, only to show more accurate 3D details?

Tamas

[clog boy]

Maria,

In general creating layer parts from complex roofs was too difficult for us so to worry about so far. If we follow the wall layer analogy, the roof layer would be a continuous solid object with thickness being the defined layer thickness. Generating this shape is a tricky geometrical problem. Plus I doubt anybody would need this complex 3D shaped single material layer of a roof to represent anything in 3D. In real life the roofs are built of more fragmented components. We have not had time to implement these as parts yet.

I am curious, do you actually use these wall layer parts in production now? If yes, only to show more accurate 3D details?

Tamas

In layman's terms, only none-sloped roofs can be divided in parts.
Actually the roof assembly is entirely different from it's covering but too much of a hassle to model as a separate component. So what's easy to recreate by hand is also easy to handle for an automated process such as a piece of software. But in my opinion, the focus should lie on things that are NOT easy to do manually. That's why software developers exist in the first place if you ask me.
Much respect for the Revit development team, but in my opinion if it is as easy to draw an assembly in separate layers as it is for Parts to deal with it, Parts missed the mark. Scale that up, and Revit should focus more on making tedious tasks easier instead of things that are easy to program, such as stairs and windows. (the basic concepts are nailed perfectly in resp. massing and Inventor) Otherwise it will eventually become redundant and underused.

[tamas]

Much respect for the Revit development team, but in my opinion if it is as easy to draw an assembly in separate layers as it is for Parts to deal with it, Parts missed the mark.

I am not really following your point here. Could you add a concrete example?

Tamas

[mrauscher]

Maria,

In general creating layer parts from complex roofs was too difficult for us so to worry about so far. If we follow the wall layer analogy, the roof layer would be a continuous solid object with thickness being the defined layer thickness. Generating this shape is a tricky geometrical problem. Plus I doubt anybody would need this complex 3D shaped single material layer of a roof to represent anything in 3D. In real life the roofs are built of more fragmented components. We have not had time to implement these as parts yet.

I am curious, do you actually use these wall layer parts in production now? If yes, only to show more accurate 3D details?

Tamas

Fair enough.
We have not deployed 2012 fully through our projects yet, but we are working on our new template and what new features we want to take advantage of. I was testing the parts in a typical parapet detail instead of using the "Edit Cut Profile" tool. I figured since I was able to edit the heights of the wall parts, I would be able to adjust the layers in the roof assembly.

That being said, it could easily be controled by using the Cut Profile command and we wouldn't have to split the roof into parts. It IS a sloped roof, which is common for our types of projects.

it was one of those moments of excitement where I thought I could apply the new tool to all aspects. Obviously it's not perfect, and I agree with clog boy about focusing on making tedious tasks more streamline as a priority for autodesk. (I avoid stairs like the plague. Can someone else do them instead?! :) )

[clog boy]

I am not really following your point here. Could you add a concrete example?

Tamas

Tamas,
Thanks for getting back on this subject.
Please allow me to explain. It is easier to draw separate wall layers than it is to create and draw a wall assembly, then divide it into parts, then adjust the detailling. So I for one will not use Parts for that purpose.

Neither do I use Stairs (I make generic models instead). To make a fair note about doors and windows, I think many companies invest a lot of time and effort during (and sometimes well after) the implementation process to find a good workflow which ends up being something similar to the Curtain Wall function. One could be forgiven for using curtain walls rather than windows, but doing so would be fundamentally wrong when the BIM lifecycle is considered.

Revit could easily become twice as valuable to us if Autodesk found a good way to make Parts more functional (ie for each system family that can give a 2D layered representation) and Stairs, Doors and Windows easier to model. To find whether and how a good solution could be implemented Autodesk would do well to discuss the basic parameters with their manufacturing partners and leave the old ways in place, in case the new tool isnt suitable for everyone. There again, if it was easy, then it would have already been done.