Structural beams?

[aliya14]

Good day everyone,
I had a query regarding the structural beams.when i place two beams in a plan using the chains option the ends don't meet i.e i don't get a clear trimmed joint at the intersection at corners.Could anyone tell me why i don't get a clear end corners?
Regards,
Aliya

[roy.70844]

As far as I know, Revit 7 does not join structural elements. You could represent the beam with an in place sweep.

I would love it if someone has an answer to this, or perhaps a suggestion for future releases.

Roy.

[luigi]

Unfortunetely the reason is that for structural, the connection should be shown that way, and the real problem is that there isn't a good way to show a structural component in an architectural way. I believe, but I could be wrong, if you go to the original family and change the family from structural to something else, the beam will behave differently. As I mention this, I will of course check to see if that is true, but nonetheless, maybe when a future release of Revit comes out, we'll have more control in how to show structural elements.

For example there is no way to overide a connection between a beam and a column if they are close to each other. You should be able to overide the connection like we can with walls.

[luigi]

Of course it worked, it will not join to a structural column....BUT...

I added a "length" instance parameter and it won't allow me to stretch the beam individually like we can other components....will try a few more things, and then.....give up!!!

[luigi]

I give up...

[anthony.67953]

I don't know why the factory does not correct this. I think the drawn beam can connect the way architects want it to, and have the symbolic lines have the traditional space to show which beam pass' through the connection.

[dpasa]

Maybe now that Revit becomes more like a structural application, someone from Autodesk will think about this kind of problems.
At least I hope so.

I understand that connecting steel beams is not easy. Revit will have difficulties trying to find which side to trim from what kind of beam etc.
Also sometimes we use metal plates. It is not easy to have details on that kind of joints.

Still the "flying beams" is not something you can show to the customer.

[Adam Mac]

I don't know why the factory does not correct this. I think the drawn beam can connect the way architects want it to, and have the symbolic lines have the traditional space to show which beam pass' through the connection.

Agree 100% - it definately needs urgent attention - as well as the connection override for beams and columns as has been suggested!

[Steve_Stafford]

Are you saying that you want Revit to join the beams with actual beam connections in the model?

[dpasa]

All I am saying is that now we have "flying beams". I know that complete representation of a connection would be rather difficult or even impossible.
Steel structure is often visible as clients think it would be better that way and cheaper because they won't have to make false ceilings etc. So we have to present a model showing the steel beams and columns.

[Adam Mac]

G'day Steve -

what I am thinking is that in 3D views any steel framing/structure would look "finished"
i.e. not necessarily bolted or cleated but columns and beams would connect, as would horizontal beams that met end to end - as opposed to what we see at the moment - "broken" joints everywhere.

In model and elevation views it would be nice to have a check-box to control if you want connections to show dis-jointed (as they do now) or cleanly - even if they may be slightly "un-real".

It would also be nice to have some control over whether or not, in plan, the lines repesenting structural beams actually did meet or not.

[roy.70844]

I agree 100% with Adam's suggestion!

Roy.

PS How do you start one of those sticky poll thingys, I think this would be a good subject!

[mlgatzke]

Perhaps, a better way to get what you are looking for, would be to have the ability to turn off Revit's attachment intelligence for structural objects (maybe on an Instance basis). This way we could place them wherever and however we'd want to without Revit trying to "help" us.

Also, "sticky poll thingys" must be one of those highly-technical, engineering terms.;)

[A3D]

I kept asking about the same thing - until one day I received an email asking for my problem. I explained it and Nicolas Mangon (Revit Structure Product Manager) told me that this join problem is going to be solved in the next release.
He even posted an image attachment showing a fixed join.

So, hopefully we can use the structural elements Revit has.

[mlgatzke]

arquitrad, were you told that we'll be able to use this fix in Revit Building? Or, will it only be resolved in Revit Structure? Your statement was a little unclear.

[beegee]

May be best to get the beta and see.

[pc7]

I can't get all my team members to install the beta...
Is there a work around? Thanks...

[Alvin_Alejandro]

Cantilever beam...does it help