Fire Rated Plan Graphic

[kmarquis]

This is such an old tired topic and I've read several posts on the issue but I've created something and I wanted to run it past the forum to get some opinions. Over the past 8 years of using Revit I've represented fire-rated walls several ways. In the beginning the teams I worked with would just represent fire-rated walls with drafting lines. I don't like this because it's something that has to be managed with all your different plans, enlarged plans and details.

Then I moved to Model Lines. Of course when you place them inside the center of the wall they disappear because the wall is obscurring the line. I created reference planes at the same level as each Levels Cut Plane and placed the lines on the Reference Plane. Perfect...and the line shows up in all your plans. This is nice but I don't like how the line looks at different scales. Easily fixed with a filter but what I've done that I'm really happy with but I have yet to use it on a project is that I created a Generic Model of a dash and a dot to represent a 1-hour rated wall. I then nested that generic model into a wall hosted family and locked it to the middle of the wall and created an array. When I bring the family into the project, I set it's height to match the cut plane and it's beautiful. You can lock the end of the array to the end of the wall so when you pull the wall the line comes with it and it scales so looks perfect in every view. Sorry for such a long winded explanation but I wanted to know if anyone saw any holes in this plan. Overkill?

What else do people do?

[bbeck]

This is such an old tired topic and I've read several posts on the issue but I've created something and I wanted to run it past the forum to get some opinions. Over the past 8 years of using Revit I've represented fire-rated walls several ways. In the beginning the teams I worked with would just represent fire-rated walls with drafting lines. I don't like this because it's something that has to be managed with all your different plans, enlarged plans and details.

Then I moved to Model Lines. Of course when you place them inside the center of the wall they disappear because the wall is obscurring the line. I created reference planes at the same level as each Levels Cut Plane and placed the lines on the Reference Plane. Perfect...and the line shows up in all your plans. This is nice but I don't like how the line looks at different scales. Easily fixed with a filter but what I've done that I'm really happy with but I have yet to use it on a project is that I created a Generic Model of a dash and a dot to represent a 1-hour rated wall. I then nested that generic model into a wall hosted family and locked it to the middle of the wall and created an array. When I bring the family into the project, I set it's height to match the cut plane and it's beautiful. You can lock the end of the array to the end of the wall so when you pull the wall the line comes with it and it scales so looks perfect in every view. Sorry for such a long winded explanation but I wanted to know if anyone saw any holes in this plan. Overkill?

What else do people do?

Do you need to see your fire ratings in sections? I use course fill patterns, lacks text in the pattern but I feel that a legend with keynote modifier at wall takes care of that. I wish we could afford to print color.

[kmarquis]

No we don't need to see rated walls in section and challenge with the firm I'm at now is we show our plans at fine detail so we can see the assembly of the walls.

[Alfredo Medina]

Maybe a Filter by the Fire Rating parameter would be better to set up especial graphics to fire rated walls? Then you can apply the filter to several views, with view templates.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

I wish we could afford to print color.
I hear this argument all the time and the truth of the matter is we can afford to print in color... if we don't print full size drawings!
We need to ask ourselves who needs the 'code compliance' drawings? Typically it is the authority reviewing the project for compliance. The reason we feel the need to print full size drawings is to allow the person viewing the drawings to read text tags or differentiate dashes, dots and combinations of the traditional graphics we've used to show the rating on walls. If we create separate code compliance views and use colors (filters are my choice) we can set them up at coarse detail level and they read really well at 11x17. A ledger size drawing can be printed from a laser or inkjet easily and submitted along with the other permit drawings or bound into the project spec.
On the construction side the wall tag will generally guide the trades doing the layout and they probably won't refer to the compliance drawings much during construction.

On larger projects when I've used a code consultant they almost always produce reduced drawings as part of their code compliance report. I know this isn't the solution for all projects and some folks will say their local authorities are too set in their ways to change but it's worked for me on a few projects.

[kmarquis]

There's much more to the Rated Wall graphic than code compliance officials. It's something that all the disciplines need to be aware of for penetrations such as ducts, doors, borrowed lights...even semi recessed fire extinguisher cabinets need to have the gyp wrapped around the back of the cabinet instead of interupted. It needs to be ridicuously clear on the drawings where these walls are to everyone. I wish Autodesk just provided some cool feature in the wall families that added this graphic in to walls with a fire rating.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

I understand it's not just about submissions. I was referring to the 'printing' argument. Those who have access to the model or digital output aren't concerned about the cost of printing. If they have a specific view that is color coded to display ratings then they can easily determine rating requirements for everything from penetrations to sprinklering requirements or even door hardware. Even if they're not playing in the BIM sandbox and need to print these views out the don't necessarily need to do it full size.
The advantage of basing it on filters accessing wall parameters is that the model can more effectively be used for QA/QC. Say your wall is rated at 1HR and openings require a 45min rating. Set up filters to have Revit fill the 1HR walls red and the 45 min doors red. If your plan shows you red doors in red walls, all is good. if the plan shows a blue door in a red wall then either the door or the wall is not correctly spec'd. Same goes for extinguisher cabinets, borrowed lights.
Service penetrations can be handled with clash detection or coordination views. Even if you don't model the wall penetrations you can overlay the MEP info in the color coded Arch view. Wherever the duct (drawn or modeled) crosses a red wall the MEP better indicate a damper.
I'm not trying to oversimplify it I'm just saying that we need to reassess how we present information and explore other options to leverage our models. As for ridiculous clarity, nothing is clearer or quicker to discern than color (assuming your consultants and trades aren't color blind ;))

[kmarquis]

Very good Dimitri...I completely agree and that is an awesome idea for internal QC working views with the walls/doors. I'm just all worked up about this silly line graphic. Not a huge deal though...Sometimes I spend more time figuring out an automatic solution that takes more time than actually drafting a detail line in plan.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

This particular topic is the only time I long for my old AutoCAD 14/ Softdesk AutoArchitect setup. Multiple lines for walls and the ability to define any number of lines/linetypes within the wall for just this purpose. That said, the only reason I'd want to go back is to get some of my hair back :lol:

[bbeck]

Unfortunately here in California we have to deal with the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, OSPHD. They require that the wall ratings appear on what feels like every single sheet at every scale. I believe the only sheets OSPHD doesn't care about are funiture and floor finish. I'm sure this is just unique to anyone that has to deal with Healthcare projects here in California. Our current Hospital is almost 1600 sheets.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

Well that bites!:lol:
Do they have particular graphic standards you need to conform to or is the method of representation up to you?

[Alex Page]

Just thinking aloud but I can think of a couple of ideas in regards to your method.
(I assume you are using lines instead of the hatchpattern/ filter trick so you can show them through doors):
1. Put your component in a workset that is off in most views by default so you don’t need to use view filters when you don’t want to see them.
2. Regarding your wall-based array method I think I would create a linebased component instead with the array inside it; even thou it doesn’t delete itself when you delete the wall, you can lock it to your walls, and can draw it wherever you want (ie: you might want it so show fire rating for something that isn’t a wall) : but I can understand the advantage of your way.
or
3. Use line based detail component instead, Group them and copy the group to the relevant views so you only have to update in one place: and combined with design options means you wouldn't select it by mistake. Also – isn’t it a pain having that component through all your walls/ doors etc: Im thinking of the selection/ tagging process where Im sure Revit will try and tag the component instead of the wall/door etc!

Just some ideas. I actually think I would go with item 3. for the purity of it (ie: they are "symbolic" lines)

[LP Design]

Before I go on a mini-rant, your wall based family sounds like a great solution. Yes it is overkill but hey, whatchagonnado? :)

I have a couple of thoughts on color life-safety plans. For QA purposes as described here they are fantastic. Both on screen and printed 1/2 size or to 11x17 xerox it makes problems immediately apparent. If you use a decent reprographics company you should be able to get them to insert the life safety plans as color into your overall b/w set of plans. This would be a very cost effective solution when submitting your sets for permit. However, when it comes to large-scale reproduction for distribution things are quite different. At that point color printing is NOT cost effective.

Here's a hypothetical: A project goes out to bid. It was set up for a color life safety plan that works fine when printed in color. Once that set goes into distribution, all copies will go out as b/w or gray scale. At that point contractors would have an extremely difficult time figuring out which gray color goes with which wall type. Was this light gray a smoke wall? Or was that supposed to be 1-hour? This could lead to confusion, mistakes, delays, and possibly even litigation. Obviously some additional method must be used to ensure clarity such as a wall types plan with numbered callouts.

Dimitri has a point about how we distribute information to our team. Engineers should be checking the model for rated walls, not the last set of prints or PDFs. But let's be honest. There are a lot of folks out there who don't really have the handle on Revit that they say/think they do. Additionally, coordination among a project team is difficult enough without requiring additional QA steps along the way. If the mechanical engineer is set in his ways and wants to see a marked up PDF with all of the rated walls on it then he probably won't acclimate well to searching through a Revit model for what was once so "easily" available. I'm not saying I support this way of thinking, but different strokes...

When it comes down to it, a linework-type graphical description is the best way to identify a rated wall assembly on plan. The best solution would be if a graphic could somehow be tied to a wall type :roll: *ahem* wishlist..... Lacking that functionality i believe that the next best solution is to have a colored plan for QA/QC purposes (since that DOES link to the wall types) and to use some other kind of graphic tool such as detail lines or a custom family to describe the ratings on the printed sheets.

Just my own meandering thoughts. Take them as you will. :beer:
-LP

[patricks]

We've just been using drafting fill patterns for the core layer's cut graphic for several years now, patterns that I found here on AUGI. It's a series of extremely close-spaced lines in various configurations so that it looks like different numbers of dashes and spaces on the plan. Been working fine for us, haven't had any issues really. The fill patterns are set to Align With Element so they always look correct no matter what angle the wall is. Shows up in sections, too, if you wish.

[kmarquis]

The other nice thing about this modeled family is that it comes through to linked files so consultants can see it. The only place it doesn't show up is if you do a plan detail instead of a callout that is a floor plan but that doesn't seem like a big deal.

Here's where it's a little cumbersome-One end of it has the arrow at the very end of the element and the other end the arrow is inset one segment from the end. Maybe someone has a better solution for my formula/array. Also, not any length of it can include a partial segment so certain lengths of walls may contain gaps at the end or the line will have to extend past the length of the wall. I guess I could add some sort of patch but that could be messy.

I've attached the family. Insert it into a project file and host it onto a wall, set it's height to the same height as your cut plane and drag it to a length and play around with it. I think the other thing you might need to do is set it's material to poche or cut and surface pattern to solid fill gray.

[kmarquis]

We've just been using drafting fill patterns for the core layer's cut graphic for several years now, patterns that I found here on AUGI. It's a series of extremely close-spaced lines in various configurations so that it looks like different numbers of dashes and spaces on the plan. Been working fine for us, haven't had any issues really. The fill patterns are set to Align With Element so they always look correct no matter what angle the wall is. Shows up in sections, too, if you wish.


Okay well this is actually pretty cool. I like this plan better. I printed my arrayed family next to this simple drafted pattern and it looks just as nice if not better. Problem solved! Autodesk should just build this in as an option rather than having to scour around on the interwebs for it.

Edited Post: On second thought...This is really not going to work for us...We use a lot of CMU walls shown with the masonry cut pattern. Boo Hoo. Oh well.

[patricks]

So do we, but the fire rating pattern takes precedence. In our large-scale details the CMU shows with the crosshatch pattern, but otherwise it shows the fire rating pattern.

[kmarquis]

So do we, but the fire rating pattern takes precedence. In our large-scale details the CMU shows with the crosshatch pattern, but otherwise it shows the fire rating pattern.

Yeah...Our firm likes to see the masonry hatch in the floor plans so unfortunatly this method won't work for us.

[Alex Page]

If patricks solution came close to what you want, wouldn't you use the filter trick - so just on your fireplans all firerated walls get there cut pattern overridden with this draughting pattern?

[CADMama]

We've just been using drafting fill patterns for the core layer's cut graphic for several years now, patterns that I found here on AUGI. Can you repost those pats? I can't find them now. Must be on my personal computer or else I left it at the last job......

[kmarquis]

If patricks solution came close to what you want, wouldn't you use the filter trick - so just on your fireplans all firerated walls get there cut pattern overridden with this draughting pattern?

We represent the CMU wall at all scales as well as the fire rating graphic. See the jpg

[patricks]

Can you repost those pats? I can't find them now. Must be on my personal computer or else I left it at the last job......

Thar ya go, the zip file in post #3 is what we've been using ever since that thread was posted in 2006: http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?39807-Fire-Rating-Partition-Tape-using-Revit-9-0-Wall-Hatching

While we have materials set up to use those patterns as their cut pattern (like Metal Stud 1-HR or Wood Stud 1-HR or CMU 2-HR, etc), we also use those patterns as the Coarse Scale Fill Pattern for all rated walls, while all other walls get a solid black hatch at Coarse scale. This is used in our Life Safety plans so that rated walls readily show up as different than all other non-rated walls at 1/16" scale.

[CADMama]

Skipped right over that one. DUH!

[ttiefenbach]

I'll chime in on this really quick because we dealt with these issues a ways back. Our fire tapes are generated using railings. we can filter them to apply color for when we have to submit to our state's healthcare code reviewers. The reason why we needed this solution over all the ones previously mentioned on here is we have more than straight walls. Fill patterns can't go in a round wall and maintain the pattern. With a modeled line component you have to make a new type for ellipses and round walls too, plus it's not continuous like a railing can be. The railing is modeled so it shows up everywhere, but has no actually modeled element except a vertical <invisible line> so you always cut through it.

Have you tried this solution and had trouble?

[kmarquis]

I'll chime in on this really quick because we dealt with these issues a ways back. Our fire tapes are generated using railings. we can filter them to apply color for when we have to submit to our state's healthcare code reviewers. The reason why we needed this solution over all the ones previously mentioned on here is we have more than straight walls. Fill patterns can't go in a round wall and maintain the pattern. With a modeled line component you have to make a new type for ellipses and round walls too, plus it's not continuous like a railing can be. The railing is modeled so it shows up everywhere, but has no actually modeled element except a vertical <invisible line> so you always cut through it.

Have you tried this solution and had trouble?


I never thought of this. How do you get the graphic of the Dash Dot or do you not represent that?

[ttiefenbach]

It's not really that easy to write out in text so I attached an RVT file with our standards. It works on everything we've tried so far, except exports to AutoCAD where it puts them on a railing layer, but that's minor to us since our office is 100% Revit. Our baluster family (the dashes and dots) also are set to display wider at Course scale so that when we have a huge hospital and we have a scale of 1:20. Let me know if you have questions and I'll try to help!

[patricks]

Hey that's pretty slick and looks real nice. I would try it myself except for the potential coordination issue. I know you can align/lock the rail sketch lines to the walls and all, but still they would probably end up disjoined at some point and have to be shuffled around and put back in place again.

[ttiefenbach]

We show our fire tapes on all our plan views so whenever someone is moving a rated wall they see the tape and know to move it with the wall. You can align/lock the sketch of the railing to the walls and as long as the sketch shifts correctly the sketch won't fail and the railing is drawn. We've never had the issue of someone moving a wall and not updating a fire tape cause if they do, we flog them. ;)

[kmarquis]

Wow this is pretty fancy. I like it.

[LP Design]

Wow, you guys really surprised me. I think -brace yourselves- that I've changed my mind. :shock:

I showed the hatch-and-filter option to our BIM manager who immediately liked it. Fortunately our firm doesn't deal with lots of curved walls all that often, and when we do that could be an easy "override by element" and finish it off with some detail lines. The railing as fire tape is interesting, but we try to stay away from all of the railing based workarounds in Revit. It's still a great option though. Thanks for sharing, Anthony.

Of course, I still have to get buy-off from the PMs and Principals, but once that is approved it is really just a matter of minutes to import the hatches and set up the view templates. We will probably also mess with the hatches to more closely match our line types but that's fairly minor as well. Great topic!

-LP

[CADMama]

OK - so the rethinking goes around. We are looking at the immediate pros and cons:

Hatch pattern - Pro:automatic - Con:full wall layer thickness so inconsistent thicknesses
Rail - Con:duplicates work by having to add another element to keep up with - Pro:thickness is consistent

Jury is still out but the thought is possibly going with the rail for one more reason - it can carry on outside of the walls such as through the corner columns we are dealing with and it has the same pattern continuing at the same width.

[Alfredo Medina]

I don't like to the idea of adding railings to the model if they are not really railings. If not filters, why not use a line based detail component, then?

[kmarquis]

I don't like to the idea of adding railings to the model if they are not really railings. If not filters, why not use a line based detail component, then?

I was trying to avoid a view specific drafting solution since it's a graphic we want to see in all our plans at all scales. I'm just trying to avoid the management. What don't you like about the railing?

[Alfredo Medina]

...What don't you like about the railing?

Because it is a railing. Have you considered a line based model family?

[kmarquis]

I did something like that which was the original purpose of my post to see what the forum thought about it. I posted the family to this thread. It's got some issues which I described earlier. I'm not sure if it was the right execution. Maybe you could read the explanation I had about the family and play around with it?

[CADMama]

Because it is a railing. Have you considered a line based model family?

For one - I have a boss that HATES the thick lines with rounded points. The rail family ends cleanly.
Another - line has to be drawn - rail has to be drawn - both have to be aligned and relationship maintained.
Lesser of the two evils - rails are cleaner in their look.

Best -Will Revit ever listen and FIX THIS!!!

[kmarquis]

I don't really see the problem with using railings. Have you read Mastering Revit Architecture? They have a whole section in there on ways to use railings creatively...Parking lot light posts, Bollards...

One of the reasons I think Revit works well for me is because there are so many different ways to problem solve. One time I considered making countertops out of floors and making sinks floor hosted so they would cut the sink hole :) I didn't do that since it's a little crazy but utimetly we're putting out a set of drawings. Yes...there are schedules and construction managers that will possibly get the file but do what works for you, as long as it's clean and simple and is an elegant solution that doesn't make people jump through hoops as a workaround. No one schedules railings anyway.

[Alfredo Medina]

Well, some people do egress paths with railings, too... I would do a line based family. As you say, there are many ways to solve a problem. All these are workarounds anyway. The best thing would be to have a tool especially designed for these purposes in future releases.

[hworrell]

I really like this idea of railings, and thank you for sharing! Who all has been using this? Any downfalls to this approach?

Thanks!
-Heather

[kmarquis]

I've played around with it and it seems pretty cool. I noticed than when you do a detail callout as opposed to a Floor Plan callout that the railing doesn't show up in the detail callout. That's something that I needed to see. Other than that I like it.

[Bimmer]

I really like this idea of railings, and thank you for sharing! Who all has been using this? Any downfalls to this approach?

Thanks!
-Heather

I have been using railing for fire tape since 2008. It is very flexible and easy to use. The only downside to it, and a big one, is that the wall does not understand the railing (fire tape). It goes against the smart modeling and BIM.

Another very minor (preference) issue is that in 16th scale, it can be small to read . . . if the detail componets are to fit inside a typical 4-6 inch wall thickness.

Autodesk really has no "real" solution for fire rating. Technically, they want each type of fire rated wall to be a wall type. In reality, you will have double or quadruple the number of wall types in your project. This is not practical.

To make smart fire rated walls, you have to go with view filters that filter by wall parameters. Then, control views with view templates. Yes, this can get very cumbersome too because you have to manage lots of view filters (say you have 11 different types of fire rated walls). For the visual crowd, you have to different what is the best hatch pattern that will work with all view scales (hatch patterns in walls are drafting only). Then, pick your poison . . . . railings or wall parameters/view filters but not both.

I haven't learn to attached a photo to this post, but our railings have colors built-in, shows dash dots variations, and diamond for smoke rating.

[CADMama]

How do you make your legend from this? Rails do not show in a typical legend and we are struggling with this right now.

[kmarquis]

Just draft in with filled regions or drafting lines what the railing fire tape looks like. You only have to draft it in once.

[L Wood]

If you are willing to bend the rules and make a railing family... why not just make a wall sweep that populates inside of the wall layer, at an elevation above your door openings etc. Not an embedded sweep, just a typical wall sweep. Then manage your views to hide or show that particular sweep via object subcategories. You could have your sweep take on whatever line style you wanted.

Maybe make a view that had all the model elements turned off except for that fire rating sweep. Overlay the fire rated line view in the world of sheets...

Just a thought.

[ttiefenbach]

Another very minor (preference) issue is that in 16th scale, it can be small to read . . . if the detail componets are to fit inside a typical 4-6 inch wall thickness.
We got around this by using the Course mode to show the tapes larger. Typically, we show the fire tapes at 3" wide on less than 1/16"=1'-0" (Which we show at Medium or Fine mode), and 12" wide at 1/16"=1'-0" and larger (which we show at Course mode).


If you are willing to bend the rules and make a railing family... why not just make a wall sweep that populates inside of the wall layer, at an elevation above your door openings etc. Not an embedded sweep, just a typical wall sweep. Then manage your views to hide or show that particular sweep via object subcategories. You could have your sweep take on whatever line style you wanted.
Even if you could get this to work effectively, you'd still see the fire tape as a line and have little to no control over the visbility. The issue with the lines is everything is rounded edges and corners. So at larger scales the rounded edges of all the dashes run together. With the railing I'm able to make the dashes and dots look like squares which makes it look much cleaner.


Maybe make a view that had all the model elements turned off except for that fire rating sweep. Overlay the fire rated line view in the world of sheets...
This does not sound like a good idea when working with large projects and multiple team members. This would be VERY dangerous.