Continous footing's don't work.

[zbubbas]

I was stoked to see that Continuous footings have been introduced. However, you only get to use one continuous footing for the whole project. After I add another one (Duplicate, then change the heel and toe) and then try to change one footing from the original to the new type, the footing DISAPPEARS. I can't add another footing to that wall unless I undo. Then I can only add the original footing to the wall and I am back where I started.. I still can't change the size of just one footing with out all of them changing. What am I doing wrong? This is fairly urgent (Friday dead line).

[lev.lipkin]

Please post model (and journal, as simplified as possible) here. Changing type is working for me. Thanks, and sorry for trouble.

[bpayne]

Friday Deadline? A new tool comes out on a new version of your software and you give yourself a week to learn the tool and incoorporate it into a project with a pressing deadline?

If Revit Building was delayed a week you would of been in real trouble! :)

[zbubbas]

Attached is the revit file. I did finaly get the footing to change in the striped down version of the file, however when they change, the way the footing is cut is unacceptable. I have used revit with great success. I have had confidence in revit so far but this "bug" was a surprise to me. Any insight as to what I might be doing wrong would be greatly appriciated.

[zbubbas]

The first project I did in revit was an 80 unit semi custom home project in lake tahoe. The Structural Cd's took about a week. Revit is incredible. I don't think I have under estimated Revit at all so far. I was just surprised that if this was a bug, that it got through the beta testing with out being caught.

[beegee]

The automatic continuous footing tool will no doubt be improved on in future releases.

At this stage, there are limitations. Cleanup of types is one of these. Adding grips to the footing, or providing a footing join tool, similar to the wall join tool could be a solution for the developers to consider.

[Wes Macaulay]

I don't know why they even created this tool... floor objects as footings were working really well, and I think I'll continue to use them since I don't like the miter lines the footings make at corners.

Fie on me, tho... I'm sure the tool will develop to the point where I'll use it all the time!

[beegee]

Nothing to prevent using floor objects as footings, but the footing tool can still be useful in some situations.

[archjake]

Could an in place family work for the intersections?

Or, why not make a structural footing family to use at odd intersections until they fix that problem?

Just a thought.

[JTF]

Have not really looked into this tool yet but does it consider stepped footings?

Also Wes does the floor used as a footing address a stepped footing as well?

[zbubbas]

Up to this point I have used the stacked wall element to build the foundation. It has worked flawlessly but I guess I was a little "giddy" about the new tools and features that pertain to structural engineers. I think I will stick with the stacked wall method of building the foundation. If anyone has a better idea, I am all ears. Thanks for all of the replies.

[lev.lipkin]

There are 2 issues I noticed: stepped footings would require creating in-place footing family (and 'join geometry' to neighboring footings. There is also ability to pick wall faces with offsets if needed for in-place extrusion during creation of such family.)

Other issue which I noticed: mitering of footings of different resulting widths is understood as need to follow wall joining examples, instead of current hard-coded mitering along wall mitering plane (for which please accept apologies for inconveniences).

Did I miss other issues?

[JTF]

Lev, as being the Revit developer to respond to this issue am I save to say that this is your area of expertise, and if it is, the issues you mention are only minor setbacks on the road to a beautiful tool when perfected.

[bowlingbrad]

floor objects as footings were working really well

How does using floor families surpass using thick concrete walls? Can you explain your process?

[adegnan]

We found a few shortcomings in our LUG with the footings as well. We need to be able to control the end points and mitering of footings etc. So great first trial, let's work on improving things!

[jamesd10181097]

An additional concern of mine is how the continuous footing tool intersects with column footing pads.

[SkiSouth]

.

Did I miss other issues?

Lev,
probably not your department, but could you have someone look at this question?
HERE (http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=23279)

[Tom Weir]

Hi all,
Yes, there are limitations to the continuous footing, but improvements will be coming.
The other problem not mentioned is in regards to stepped footings. When you step the wall the continuous wall footing becomes discontinuous, with no vertical connection between adjacent footing portions.

Tom Weir
Los Angeles

[adegnan]

Looks like these issues are fixed with 8.1??

[Joef]

Continuing on the topic of continuous footings, I am just getting around to 8.1 and was wondering what improvements were made. I was also wondering how you select the type of footing you want before you go to place it. The method seems to be place and then change. That was the same in the previous release so I am assuming if they didn't fix this they didn't do much else.

[Nevine]

I haven't tried continous footings yet but so far a "footing" sweep added to my foundation wall works well for uncomplicated foundations. It doesn't solve the vertical fill of the footing but that is usually shown as dashed line in the elevations.
attached is the file.
oops for some reason couldn't attach the dwg.
I also just discovered you can pull the sweep separate from the wall...Interesting.

[Matt Brennan]

I agree the continuous footings needs to be improved. I even pointed this out at our mandatory Autodesk event in Orlando, Flodia. The solution I received was to use the wall clean up tool which 75% of the time doesn’t even work depending on the scenario.

The solution I find that works the best is to create a footing wall type. Create a “B.O. Footing” & “T.O. Footing” level. After creating the levels I will lock the height in.

From here you can apply a specific assembly parameter or new parameter that will decipher it from any other wall type in your project. Then you can create a wall schedule and filter out all the walls except your new footing wall.

But I have seen other clients use the floor tool and in-place components. What it comes done to is if works efficiently and accurately for you and your company, great!

[Scott Hopkins]

I am finally giving the continuous footing tool a try. It is very frustrating however as the eccentricity parameter will not allow me to align the footing with face of core. I have a 12" wide x 24" deep footing and I would like the outside edge of the footing to be flush with the face of stud. This is a very common condition. Revit's footings should be able to accommodate this. The footing tool will not even allow me to align the footing with the face of finish.

[Scott D Davis]

You can't align but you can set the heel and toe of the footing to any dimension which would place it at the face of stud.

[Scott Hopkins]

Yuo can't align but you can set the heel and toe of the footing to any dimension which would place it at the face of stud.
Thanks for the reply Scott, but maybe I am missing something. I have a 2 x 4 stud wall with 1/2" sheathing and 7/8" stucco. Using your suggestion of adjusting the heel and toe dimensions, the closest I can get the footing is to the face of finish. I still have and 1 3/8" to go to the face of stud, but Revit won't let me pull the footing any closer. What am I doing wrong?

[Scott D Davis]

Well thats a big Oops! No negative values allowed, and no "Footing Offset" parameter. You are right, the closest you can get is face of finish. The heel and toe lengths are actually calculated from finish face. Change your wall thickness, and watch your footing grow! I think we need to be able to tell the footing to align with "center of Core" or Center of Wall, or atleast provide an Offset param.

[bowlingbrad]

Well thats a big Oops! No negative values allowed, and no "Footing Offset" parameter. You are right, the closest you can get is face of finish. The heel and toe lengths are actually calculated from finish face. Change your wall thickness, and watch your footing grow! I think we need to be able to tell the footing to align with "center of Core" or Center of Wall, or atleast provide an Offset param.
Good one Scott. Thinking about it a little more, it would be logical for Revit to use the center of core as the starting point. Wouldn't that be more 'structurally accurate'?

[Scott D Davis]

Good one Scott. Thinking about it a little more, it would be logical for Revit to use the center of core as the starting point. Wouldn't that be more 'structurally accurate'?
Yes, it would. i wonder now where the Analytical Line (Revit Structures) of a continuous footing is located?