Structural elements are disjoined

[A3D]

Hi again...

I'll be short this time. I don't know how to join the structural beams with the structural columns. I don't know if it can be done or if the structural elements are just representation and never actually meet.

Thank you

I purged the rvt file, but I still get this size. Any clues?

[gravelin]

il faut que tu étires tes poutres ,jusqu'à ce que la découpe disparaisse. La poutre et le poteau sont alors imbriqués et si tu utilises "attacher la géométrie, tu obtiens le résultat . Mais attention il s'agit d'une "bidouille", en effet structurellement parlant, je ne suis pas sûr que ton modèle reste correct.
Nota : cela ne fonctionne qui si poutre et poteaux sont en catégorie béton (en bois ou acier : rien à faire)
voir http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=13668

You need to drag the extremity of the beam until the cut disappear. So the beam and the post are imbricated and if you use "join geometry" you you obtain the result. But be careful, it's a workaround, I'am not sure that doing so your structural model remain correct (think about lengh in schedules)
Nota: this works only with concrete structural categories (nothing with wood or steel)
see http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=13668

[A3D]

I find this to be most disturbing… Basically you want to draw the structure and you end up with a model that's impossible in the real world (beams suspended in the air). I know that for structural calculus they represent beams and pillars as lines and points, but this can't apply to an architectural model.
Maybe the solution would be to clean up intersections on medium and fine detail level and leave lines and point on coarse. Or just make another detail category, say "Structural".

Gravelin, thank you for your answer. However I did choose the concrete structure because using metal beams I had similar problems. The only difference is that the workaround you describe it's not working for metal beams and I thought that the solution would be more straight forward on a simpler model.
This sort of solution it's poor: you end up drawing something you can't use for what has been designed. Plus, it's not precise and you can't lock the beam's end to a grid or ref plane.

Is there another workaround like drawing "architectural" beams?

Don't know, at this moment I have a weird feeling that architecture and structure don't quite match in Revit - maybe it's just the fact that I'm so new, but I hope this gets fixed pretty quickly.

[Joef]

There are many problems with joining structural elements. Revit has a "system setback" for structural elements that looks great when used for single line structural steel drawings. The problem is Revit uses the same setback for concrete and wood elements, and doesn't change it when it goes from coarse view to fine. So you drag the end of the beam closer and closer until it jumps to the middle of the adjoining element. Then you drag it back and it jumps back and leaves a gap. There are threads around which discuss this "problem". I have no idea if it will ever be fixed, as it was obviously designed to work exactly like it is working.

[lev.lipkin]

If desired, Beam Family definition could be changed to provide sweep from the reference plane at the end of the placement curve, not from the reference plan at join. 'Join Geometry' command under Tools could be used for cleaning.

'Cut Length' parameter of the beam will compute actual maximal extent of beam geometry along placement curve.

Hope this helps. Requirement to improve cleaning of concrete beams is understood.

[A3D]

Thanks Lev
I tried what you said but didn't have any success... maybe I'm too tired, maybe too new to Revit.
Can I ask you for an example file?
I'm about to start a project in Revit and I'm a bit frustrated about this structural thing - I did some research on revitcity as well, but no solution yet.
I would really appreciate a concrete / metal example.
Feels strange... look at all those beautiful models and I can't even get the structure properly :S