Steel Frame

[Arnel Aguel]

What is the best way of modelling this type of steel frame for industrial warehouse. I could have tried an extrusion then cut out with an in place void but all the steel members are tapered.

Perhaps anybody here that have already tried modelling this type of steel framing can shed some lights.

[Steve_Stafford]

There are two of these steel frame assemblies on RUGI. One imperial and one metric. Have you seen them? If not, check them out, at least you can see how they were done. I haven't looked but I'm assuming they were done with blends?

[Arnel Aguel]

Thanks Steve i'll check it out.

[Arnel Aguel]

Steve, I have checked out the metric frame family on RUGI and found out that it was done using extrusion and sweep.

It involves a lot of reference planes to control the thickness and height of the members. The Flange was created using sweep and the web using extrusion. It has no parameters yet for the thickness of web, flange and width of flange. To make matter worse you have to key in manually the actual size of the members no link whatsoever to the structural library of
actual steel sizes.

I just wish that they will improve Revit's structural capability or adopt ADT's structural capabilities.
In ADT this type of framing is done accurately and very clever. All you have to do is define a path for your frame and assigned different sections at every joint/node from the structural steel library and that's it you have already correct sizes of your steel frame.

[beegee]

Greg Cashen tells us the structural stuff is all happening in 6.0 !

[gregcashen]

It has been mentioned by many that the structural tools are one of the hotspots for new development in the upcoming releases of Revit. We have all seen the wishlist items for increased framing capabilities, more flexibility in the way the structural framing members are treated (auto snapping to faces) etc.

It is my understanding, though it is not confirmed until it is released, that 6.0 will begin the push for increased structural functionality in Revit. I don't know the exact details.

I think it is safe to assume that with all of the new features that have been requested and the bugs that need fixin', that 6.0 will have some new structural features; but I know for sure that Autodesk's strategy, as with all rollouts, is to do it in stages rather than all at once. I know there will be a lot of enhancements that will benefit the majority of users in 6.0. Structural is a very specific discipline that has not yet embraced Revit, so I don't see ADESK rushing into something if the market is not there.

Obviously, I still have my fingers crossed, and I know that they are working on it. :wink:

As for more specifics about your particular problem, I don't think it is a structural problem so much as a family creation problem. If the family on rugi doesn't work for you, I would suggest you tweak it.

[Arnel Aguel]

Is it fair to assume that we will have in the near future a Revit for Structural version or Electrical and Mechanical?

As in ADT they have structural tools built inside ADT and another one Building system (Mechanical, Electrical and Pumbing) which is also coded from the core technology of ADT.

[trombe]

With regard to Revit and AutoDesk rollouts and platform specialization....on the contrary:

One of the "constructive" things about Revit , is that it is a program in which the (mainly ?) Architect / architectural designer / Draughtsperson, can undertake a normal and full range, of design and detailing tasks. Although AutoDesk have those specialized platforms, I pray they do not make Revit into 3 programs as for me that would kill some of its inherent advantages / functionality.

I think Revit does need structural steel tools so I can do detailing for flanges / junctions and other normal architectural detailing as I need and see fit.

Engineers have sufficient software programs for their needs already - the value of cross platform / inter-operability notwithstanding).
If Revit was to become separate electrical , structural and an architectural programs, it would logically weaken the toolset for Architects / architectural designers - the very group Revit was designed to cater for.

ArchiCAD is not quite as narrow minded as this and surely that fact should not be overlooked - particularly when Revit is still in its relative early stages of development and also in terms of market acceptance.

Perhaps the inter-operability issue is the key for cross platform support - make it so that Revit can more easily communicate with others like ArchiCAD and VectorWorks already do ?

Please keep Revit intact as a complete, stand-alone entity.
Develop and integrate over time by all means but do not break it up into separate packages.

trombe.

[gregcashen]

Obviously I hope Autodesk does not split it up either. If they did, I would probably make due with the standard Revit and just use the existing structural tools within it. Unless Revit licensed structural engineering software and embedded it into Revit in a very useful way, I do not see the benefits of a Revit Structural outweighing the negatives of increased complexity, more software, higher costs and disparate platforms.

Also, if Revit is indeed moving toward an open API, then I guess it would be pretty stupid to split it apart, as someone could just come along and make a plugin that worked within the standard Revit (presumably).

In fact, I suspect this is what ADESK would do...just make a structural plugin for Revit. Again, it would have to have VERY SIGNIFICANT enhancements/features in order to make it worthwhile. Integrated structural analysis, auto framing that was spot on, interoperability (i.e. instant 2-way integration) with other structural engineering tools like Multiframe/STAAD/STRUDL/RAMSteel/SAFE/SAP2000/ROBOT Milleneum/Woodworks, intelligent understanding of the relationships of structural elements, detailed connection types as families, additional options for family parameter types such as logical operators, if...then...else, etc. Any or all of the above would begin to make Revit Structural Add-on a viable product.

[Arnel Aguel]

With regard to Revit and AutoDesk rollouts and platform specialization....on the contrary:

One of the "constructive" things about Revit , is that it is a program in which the (mainly ?) Architect / architectural designer / Draughtsperson, can undertake a normal and full range, of design and detailing tasks.


We have to remember that Autodesk highly promoted this revolutionary product as their BIM tool. If Revit will only be limited to Architectural sytem then BIM will not materialize. Building Information Modeling consists all of the elements within the building including Structural, Mechanical, Eletrical, Plumbing and etc. If they will not develop those other disciplines then Revit is not a BIM tool but rather an architectural tool only.

ADT is already very close to BIM, it can open ADT (architectural) models/drawings into their Building System (MEP) of which engineering consultants can incorporate their design into the architectural models/drawings.

I have seen at the Autodesk Revit site that in the future they will develop Building System as well but whether it is integrated within Revit or as a separate programs only Autodesk knows.

[Scott D Davis]

I see Revit being the complete tool, with the disciplines all being included in the software. Then, worksets will be used to share the model with the other disciplines so that they can add their part of the design. I believe "Save to Central" will become a location on the internet, probably a Buzzsaw site. Your model, and everything that goes into it, resides in one location. The complete A&E team will checkout the parts of the model they need to work on, and when they save back to central, everyone gets an updated model!

[beegee]

Wow ! Thats an impressive vision Scott...............

" I have a dream that one day Revit will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all workset disciplines are created equal." "

[sbrown]

Scott, I think you are definately on the right track. This will take some time, Autodesk estimated 10 years for the adoption of the complete BIM, whats really exciting is the parallel development of wireless web technology, how about being able to "save to central" in the airport in a wireless node.

[PeterJ]

I upgraded to a new phone today, Sony Ericsson P800, hoping that it will save me from carrying both a Palm Pilot and a phone - we'll see.

This phone has a spreadsheet viewer built in. I could take it to site and go round double checking my schedules and phone back any alterations straight away. The drawings would be ready for issue before I returned to the office.

How's that Scott?

[Scott D Davis]

Phone back your alterations? I think you will be connected wirelessly to the internet, so when you change your schedule on your handheld, and save, the info will be automatically updated on the main central file!

I think this 'future' is closer than we all may think. Yes, it takes time to develop this, but just think about where computing, the internet, and CAD were just 10 years ago, in 1993.

[msmith.tsap]

Does anyone have the steel framing files noted herein they would be willing to upload? RUGI is down so I cannot get from there. Am a newbie and we do a lot of pre-engineered buildings and trying to start one in Revit. Another post had one he was having problems with. Tried that one and could not get it to work either. Any assistance would be much appreciated.

[Allen Lacy]

Here's one of them.

[msmith.tsap]

Thanks so much for the upload. EXACTLY what I needed.You would not believe the hours I have spent on this. Totally excited about Revit. Each day learning more what it can do.