Don't Like Framing Plans!!!

[zbubbas]

I am my wits end. What the heck are the structural elements trying to do!! Some times they shorten, some times they don't. I have a rim board (a wall element 1.25" thick) that I am butting joists to (1 3/4 X 11 7/8 plywood joist elements). I have spent the better part of the morning messing around with this. I don't want to resort to "dumb" lines to represent my joists because we just spent $15,000 upgrading from Autocad which draws everything with "Dumb" lines. As a structural engineer, I need this stuff to work. I love this program but this is a major problem that needs to be fixed. Why not just have a parameter that will cut the joist back if selected. If the program is too smart, it might start assuming things that aren't true, as in this case. I understand autodesk wants to hook the model up to third party analysis software, which is awesome. Isn't there a way to make a "dumber" structural element that I can control. If any one has any ideas, I'm all ears. I will try anything at this point including export my building back to AutoCAD and finish it that way (that would suck and I don't want to do that).

[aaronrumple]

For this reason I've changed may of the structural families to generic families for more control... Dumbs them down.

[Joef]

I have been through this mess as well and have yet to find anyone from Revit who admits that there is a problem. I don't hold out much hope for a fix.

[zbubbas]

Hey Arron,
How did you dumb them down? Would you be willing to post and example? I'm not looking for a free lunch here. I don't mind making my own families but I have no clue as to how you would dumb them down. Thanks again for the quick reply.

[aaronrumple]

Open up the family. Setting->Family Category and Parameters. Change to Generic Model. Save with new name or in new location. Also copy or rename the type catelog as needed....

[Joef]

I just tried this. I changed the family category to generic. I loaded a 2x10 as a componenet but it doesn't allow me to enter a length. It stays at 4'-0" even though the default length is 5'-0" It's really really dumb :-) Maybe a bit too dumb.

[gallienhanson]

Hi Z,
I'm working my way there on some roofs, and I'm not sure this will work, but reference line the perimeter less 1.25, use dimensions to set lines, then beam system, set your joists in that, use line command to trace area, finish sketch. Pick beam (under structural) choose or duplicate your rim and draw it in?? let me know if that helps

[Scott Hopkins]

. As a structural engineer, I need this stuff to work. I love this program but this is a major problem that needs to be fixed. Why not just have a parameter that will cut the joist back if selected. If the program is too smart, it might start assuming things that aren't true, as in this case. I understand autodesk wants to hook the model up to third party analysis software, which is awesome. Isn't there a way to make a "dumber" structural element that I can control. If any one has any ideas, I'm all ears. I will try anything at this point including export my building back to AutoCAD and finish it that way (that would suck and I don't want to do that).
You may have to wait for the new structural version of Revit to come out (hopefully this spring) before you get any real satisfaction.

[Joef]

The question is: Will this be a different product called "Revit Structural " that will be extra $ or will the structural part of "Revit" be fixed? Time will tell.

[zbubbas]

I would like to take back my negative comment on the framing capabilities of Revit. I love framing building with this program. There is not a situation that I have run into yet where I couldn't frame all of the members. I'm not talking frame each stud, but all of the structural members that make up the structural system. Beams, rafters, walls, floors, joists, retaining walls, foundations...etc. Just wanted to say thanks for making my job more fun and for all of the RFI's I haven't been getting lately.

[zbubbas]

Here is some more framing goodness.

[BillyGrey]

Real nice job zbubbas.

Do you mind if I ask if your plans have improved because your skillset has progressed, the framing/struct. elements have improved, or maybe both?

tia

Bill

[zbubbas]

I give all of the credit to Revit for being easy to work with. I was extreamly frusturated in the beginning because I didn't take the time to go through the tutorials and learn the basic concepts. I didn't take the time to learn how revit handles different situations and just assumed that I would force revit to produce drawings (like I do with autocad). If I just build the model like they (the contractor) will in the field, Revit produces great drawings. To answer you question better, the latest Revit is head and shoulders above the previous releases and has made learning even easier. I seamed to run into every bug right off that bat. With the latest version, I haven't hit a bug yet. I haven't changed the way I frame sense version 6. I haven't dove into the new properties of the structural members (the ones I use are the stock ones from 6.0 that I have upgraded each release). Any way, my whole point is that Revit is making my work fun, at which point it isn't work. Never thought I would say that about a piece of software that autodesk made. Now if they would only make Revit work on an Apple. Revit is the only reason I own a Windows based computer.

[Batman]

Revit is the only reason I own a Windows based computer.
You're not the only one. I really don't see much benefit in owning a windoze platform apart from the need to run the Autodesk products. I wouldn't mind seeing these apps run on Linux either.

By the way, nice models. Is there a way to clean the beam/rafter intersections so they don't look like they are overlapping.

[blads]

I would like to take back my negative comment on the framing capabilities of Revit. I love framing building with this program. There is not a situation that I have run into yet where I couldn't frame all of the members. I'm not talking frame each stud, but all of the structural members that make up the structural system. Beams, rafters, walls, floors, joists, retaining walls, foundations...etc. Just wanted to say thanks for making my job more fun and for all of the RFI's I haven't been getting lately.

Nice work. They're very good framing plans.

[Nevine]

I am my wits end. What the heck are the structural elements trying to do!! I have spent the better part of the morning messing around with this.
I will try anything at this point including export my building back to AutoCAD and finish it that way (that would suck and I don't want to do that).

January, February, March, April, May, June,


I would like to take back my negative comment on the framing capabilities of Revit. I love framing building with this program.

Alleluia....
Patience is a virtue. Congratulations and welcome to Revit.

[ita]

LOL & Lol & lol.

[noah]

Great models! But what do the framing plans look like? How did you resolve the automatic beam shortening lengthening issue that I and everyone else seem to run into?

I'm assuming that I'm like you and am getting frustrated only because I haven't learned the subleties of the structural components. I hope someone can shed some light.

Also, on attic framing plans where the cut plane is through the roof do your rafter members cut properly?

Thanks!

[DoTheBIM]

Here is some more framing goodness.
If you don't mind me asking... since you've got it figured out for your purposes... how long did it take to do this once you had your families and what not set up? IOW if you now have to use the same framing member types on a differently configured house, how long would it take to lay it out fully dimenstion and labeled? I'm trying to get a feel for the value in doing this. Would you mind also posting a pic of what your final CD drawing looks like for those floors?

Very nice work.

[BillyGrey]

Thanks for the thoughtful answer zbubbas :)

[marty_rozmanith]

Nice looking stuff. Thanks for the recent Kudos. Nicolas can be proud of the improvements in structural over the last year.

[lev.lipkin]

Great job with models!

Here is some info which might be helpful (and recognition of understanding of need for improvement with wood framing from Factory).

8.0 adds shape handle at the end of structural framing which allows modification vs. default join position (taken from typical steel connection).

8.0 also automatically cleans concrete joins (based on Structural Material Type of the framing under Family Category and Parameters in Family Editor).

We are aware of need for improvement with wood framing and longer term plans are to extend joining of concrete to wood without cleaning of edges (which I posted on similar AUGI post a couple of months ago).

I would appreciate comments and concerns about this suggestion as well as example of cases which caused most of the pain for 8.0 users.

[zenomail105021]

Mr. Lipkin:

I was really rocked back on my heels (moved over to Revit 7 from ADT) when I found out that structural members wern't acting that way I was used to. Thank goodness there are plans to make them work in an architectural (as opposed to an engineering) manner. Thanks for plans to improve a very good product that given time and concern from you folks will surely become marvelous.


Bill Maddox

[rod.74246]

Speaking of Revit 7. Someone mentioned an issue with structural framing heights not being able to be changed and stuck at 4'? We too had this issue except stuck at 4m. I can only comment on the AUS - Metric stuctural families, but in our issue of Revit 7, we had this same issue. After a lot of heartache and a lot of investigation, we realised the core of the problem. In number of the steel column families ( the ones that install with the CD) someone forgot to lock the height to its reference plane. (Naughty Autodesk!!. ) Thus amending the heights made no difference to the model. ( am hoping this was fixed in Rev 8)