HELP! - problem with section in VERY large model

[pfrederico]

Hi people,

I have made a very large model of a college that needs several sections to be made to it. The issue? I also need to use a filled region that follows the section line in the section view. Am I making myself clear?

I need for everything that's on the section plane to be filled with a hatch. I want to make use of filled region but it's no good because when in sketch mode the lines won't snap to the lines that are on the section plane! How do I work around this??

Revit should be better in what it concerns large models...

[aaronrumple]

You are talking about a fil for walls, floors, roofs?
Set your view to coarse. Then set your object types to use a solid color coarse fill. No need to manually draw all that.

[Scott D Davis]

Are you saying in Section, that you'd like to see the "earth" cut below the building, and you are trying to use a filled region to do this?

[beegee]

If you're saying what Scott is saying, then we're saying to use the section poche -Settings - Site Settings - Section Cut Material ( earth ) and set depth of poche base ( - 3000 or whatever )

[pfrederico]

That kind of helps, but it's not what I want to do with the drawing.

I made a small example drawing in ACAD to show what I want to do with the large model:
the section lines serve as the limit for the hatch which is meant to fill the ground and all surrounding houses that are cut by the section, so the model I have in Revit follows the same example that the attached dwg gives.

I hope it was clear enough... Is it possible? And if so, how?

[beegee]

Ok, the site poche has got you 80% of the way.

Build the surrounding buildings out of mass elements, setting the material when cut to show a solid fill and you're there.

[beegee]

Result would look something like this.

[pfrederico]

Using mass to make the buildings should help, but what applies to the site doesn't. Because the site's been made using several different floors, walls, ramps... it's not made of earth. Using site poche base doesn't help :(
I've attached a picture of (part) what I've done.

I could make everything from mass elements... but... let's get real. It took me a full month to model this with Revit elements. I don't know if I have the time to do that. (I think not...)

Perhaps I could export it to autocad and import it as volume masses?! I'm on a tight schedule here and I'm really getting desperate :(

[luigi]

picture missing...

[Shaun v Rooyen]

In filled regions rather use the pick lines tool and trim up afterwards. That way you dont have to worry about snaps,+ it goes quicker!

[pfrederico]

That doesn't help!! I cannot pick lines that are on the section plane! :(

I know how much you must love the program but I'm starting to get the wide feeling that it ******* on me the moment I decided to make a large model because I need to present sections from it and... nothing. At least the way I needed so... It's really frustrating spending a month and having picked Revit because it should have been *easier* to use and come to this. Very frustrating...

[luigi]

I know how this can be frustrating, so please be patient with my questions/comments.

It is difficult for me to understand why you have a difficult time snapping to Revit objects that are cut in section for your filled region. The only problem I have had in the past snapping to sections was with the topography (which in that case I just turned off snapping and created lines that followed the topographical section) but you don't have any topography.

By Large model you mean file size, or area? Is it something that you can post (somewhere outside of AUGI) or email? Can you maybe copy a few objects that when pasted in a brand new project behave the same way, so that the file size may be smaller and you can attach it here in AUGI.

Love needs to be weighed with Reality, so don't worry about people loving the program, if it is bad it is bad, if it is good, it is good. And if there is a problem it will be fixed.

I am waiting for your response on attaching the model.

Sincerely,

[cosmickingpin]

You model doesn't seem that big, how many megs are we talking? Within each section view are you trying to default all existing to a certain uniform hatch? if so then you should make use of phase filters. By setting up a phase filter you can default all objects on the existing phase to dispaly in section with the same hatch regardless of objects type. If you want to "abstract" the sections and have Revit make choices about how to show things, well you are going to have to wait for artifical intelligence or for direct neural cortex user interfaces and other cybernetic technology for come into being just like the rest of us. Think about what it is you are expecting the computer to do.

Now you used floors and ramps to represent earth and site elements. export a 3d view to cad with only those lelments visible, that reimport that file back inot revit and use that DWG as the basis for a Topo. Create a topo and use the "use imported" feature and you will automatically create a accurate site topo which can then be use to create those site poches.

Now as to you feelings about Revit. Revit is not a magic drawing maker. After you model a site or building, each and any paticular view will need extensive drafting and 2d region(hatching), line work, and other modifications to make them coherent and presentable. You just can't build a model and poof, have tons of completed drawings from it in an instant. You will need to draft and modify the display of the underlying model object. With time and experience that process will be quickened and the pain reduced by your ability to foresee the outcome of choices you make about what to model and how to model it.


That doesn't help!! I cannot pick lines that are on the section plane! :(

I know how much you must love the program but I'm starting to get the wide feeling that it ******* on me the moment I decided to make a large model because I need to present sections from it and... nothing. At least the way I needed so... It's really frustrating spending a month and having picked Revit because it should have been *easier* to use and come to this. Very frustrating...

[luigi]

Cosmic, always nice seeing your post, even though they might seem weird for people that haven't met you... :)

Federico's problem, somehow, is that he cannot pick the object's lines from with in a filled region's sketch mode. Again, I am not sure why he is having problems, I can only imagine with the actual file, but he is trying to create a filled region in the sections.

Also, for the graphic he is trying to achieve the phase filter won't help too much, he needs the whole profile to be hatched...

[pfrederico]

Forgive my lack of objectiveness. I'll try to less subjective now.
By now I think I've made clear what I'm trying to achieve.

On the section view I cannot snap nor pick lines that are on the section plane. The file is very large. The sections are huge as well.

I tried taking out a section out of it, and no matter how much I trim down the file's always too big to be posted! The entire model has something like 9 meg...

[cosmickingpin]

Good to hear from you too Luigi. A strong sense of the sardonic is eaily misunderstood here in cyberworld without the nonverbal cues we use to disarm those we might otherwise offend, also known as charm.

I wonder why he can't export his site model geomerty to cad, then import it and then create a site topo based on it. That will take care of 90% of his problems. It is also important not to use revit objects in ways otherthan how they are intended. He used floors and ramps to represent objects we might use pads, topos and subregions, and as a result he is frustrated by Revit. and the way the objects are being displayed. He needs to be aware that many of these issues he himself did create by bypassing all of the site features built in to the software.

Another possible workaround is to split his section so that where he cuts through an existing building he places the cut right on the length of a wall. That way his sections will show up exactly how he seems to want them to. His section line will be perhaps very jagged, bt he can always hide it and create a references section line without the splits. (actually this might do the trick for him)

Another issue is that sometimes in revit you will have a different final product that what you might want. Each user has to decide if it is critical if the existing buildings are shown as solid hatches, or if they will show up exactly how he or she modeled them.

Federico if you are this upset you should call Revit tech support and have them work with you to find a solution. This is exactly the kind of thing you should call them about especially if you feel you have beeen let down by the software. I have called and vented with similar issues and have ended up learing a lot from them and always came away with a solution.


Cosmic, always nice seeing your post, even though they might seem weird for people that haven't met you... :)

Federico's problem, somehow, is that he cannot pick the object's lines from with in a filled region's sketch mode. Again, I am not sure why he is having problems, I can only imagine with the actual file, but he is trying to create a filled region in the sections.

Also, for the graphic he is trying to achieve the phase filter won't help too much, he needs the whole profile to be hatched...

[luigi]

Forgive my lack of objectiveness. I'll try to less subjective now.
By now I think I've made clear what I'm trying to achieve.

On the section view I cannot snap nor pick lines that are on the section plane. The file is very large. The sections are huge as well.

I tried taking out a section out of it, and no matter how much I trim down the file's always too big to be posted! The entire model has something like 9 meg...
Federico, I don't know why you cannot snap to them, I believe you though!!! But the problem is nothing to do with file size,especially if your file is only 9 MB. Can you email 9 MB? because I can receive up to 10MB through my hotmail account which you can access by clicking on my name.

I have done this process before, with stairs, walls, roofs, etc. We all need, once in a while, to fudge things, but I am finding out it is becoming less and less...but those smooth underside monolithic stairs!!!!!:mad: They still get to me!!!!

[pfrederico]

It's not my fault to have decided to use the revit components in a similiar way to that which is used in a tutorial to make a complex site.

I'll be posting a picture of the entire model so you can see what I'm actually talking about. It's NOT a small model and it's NOT something you can do just with topo tools, in case anyone hasn't understood that by now. The model is very large because of the ammount of elements needed to represent it.

Whatever path I chose I had to make use of elements not provided with the site tools or, otherwise, lose a lot more time doing the site model which comes to me as nearly unviable when I hear so many complains about the lack of better site tools and the tools being better than they are (which I personally attest because I already tried to work with them on several occasions).

The imported file from cad is 2D and hasn't the topo lines. It represents the ground a college which is mostly paved with concrete, it has ramps, it has walls... I don't see myself representing most of these with topo tools, so, once again I don't consider to be my fault that the program is lacking better features in its site components. If such I can be blamed for trusting the ability of the program to design something that it should probably be able to.

[Scott D Davis]

I don't think it would be too tough to build a site topo to go under your model. You have all the elevations, since you've built the model. You can use pads at the buildings, and then use the spot elevation tool to determine the heights of the elements you have created. Plug those values into the points of the topo. It's going to take a bit of time, but can be done.

[cosmickingpin]

I don't understnd the problem. You can export a 3d view with only your site elements turned on (floors, ramps etc.) to a 3d autocad file. then import that file back into revit, then create a topo and while in the topo sketch use the "use imported" feature to create a topo based on your model objects. That should fix most of your porblems. if you want to change or update you site, erease your topo, make the changes to your model objects, export the 3d file with those changes to cad, import that file back into your revit drawing, create another topo useing the same automated feature, and you in a few seconds have the topo updated. you don't even need autocad to do this, you can keep your topo updated without editing hundreds of elevation points and you should be L.LCool'n'da'gang. You can split your section so that when it goes through a building you want to show as a solid hatch it runs through the length of a wall, (parallel and through the wall), that will get your abstracted hatch.

I don't know what 2d cad file you are talking about, but make your own 3d cad file from your model and use that as the basis of your topo (which you can delete and update at will) Keep your modeled objects but create the topos to get the poche fill you want.


It's not my fault to have decided to use the revit components in a similiar way to that which is used in a tutorial to make a complex site.

I'll be posting a picture of the entire model so you can see what I'm actually talking about. It's NOT a small model and it's NOT something you can do just with topo tools, in case anyone hasn't understood that by now. The model is very large because of the ammount of elements needed to represent it.

Whatever path I chose I had to make use of elements not provided with the site tools or, otherwise, lose a lot more time doing the site model which comes to me as nearly unviable when I hear so many complains about the lack of better site tools and the tools being better than they are (which I personally attest because I already tried to work with them on several occasions).

The imported file from cad is 2D and hasn't the topo lines. It represents the ground a college which is mostly paved with concrete, it has ramps, it has walls... I don't see myself representing most of these with topo tools, so, once again I don't consider to be my fault that the program is lacking better features in its site components. If such I can be blamed for trusting the ability of the program to design something that it should probably be able to.

[pfrederico]

Cosmickingpin... that's not viable. I've tried and although the idea sounds neat the end result I have is way too messy to work out. I'll probably have to do this all over again if I have any hopes of making the model.

Thanks a lot revit. There goes a whole month to the garbage.

I'm not saying it's a bad program. I think it has nice features, but I'm pretty much ****** off that a month's worth work went through the window... and yes, I'm blaming the lack of better site features the program has for it.

[cosmickingpin]

one of which was to call tech support and get their opinion directly. A Whole month to do a site? Are you new to modeling? That seems like a really long time to build a site model. I can usually get them done in a few days or hours depending the level of detail needed. I wouldn't usually model everything to the nat's *** and have not ever done so. I remember you asking the forum a month ago how much you should model and my reply then to you was the same it was today. extensively modeling existing features may be unnecessary and perhaps even a waste of time. all your ramps and floors could have been done with pads topos and sub-regions managed (deleted and updated) from a 3d cad file, would show up the way you want them to.

Call Tech support and get their advice before you do something silly. So you have been working a month straight modeling a site and today is the first day you tried out a section? I use sections all the time when modeling, and if I have something in mind down the road I do a few tests upfront to see if I can do what I want. Always test your approaches out to gauge the results, that is good advice on any software. If you wasted a whole month and never thought to do a little section test at any time in the proceeding 30 days... Well let me raise my glass to you as the supreme optimist.

Best of luck to you, I understand your frustration, you just had your Revit cherry popped.


Cosmickingpin... that's not viable. I've tried and although the idea sounds neat the end result I have is way too messy to work out. I'll probably have to do this all over again if I have any hopes of making the model.

Thanks a lot revit. There goes a whole month to the garbage.

I'm not saying it's a bad program. I think it has nice features, but I'm pretty much ****** off that a month's worth work went through the window... and yes, I'm blaming the lack of better site features the program has for it.

[sbrown]

Revit first of all is a building modeller, not a site modeller. It does have some site tools which Revit explains are for aiding in the design of the building, not the design of the site. That being said I typically create a topo surface in conjunction with various other site families, extruded sidewalks, lines, parking spaces, etc. For my sections I cut the section then use the cut line of the topo as my tracing guide, you CANNOT snap to this line,don't worry about that just trace it, click SO (snap off) and draw as close to where it needs to be as possible. You CAN snap to other objects, so if your section is cut truelly perpendicular to other objects you can snap to those. ie the base of your buildings. Once the filled region is created you just turn off the topo under visibility and your done. Revit is truely a love/hate relationship in the beginning. It gets better and stick with it. Don't delete what you've done but do check and make sure your sections are perpendicular to the buildings, if they aren't you will encounter snapping issues.

[Scott D Davis]

At a minimum, you can draw those filled regions you were originally asking for by sketching them in rather than picking the geometry in section.

Did the model get you the sections you need, excpet for the fact that the ground was not 'shaded' in?

[pfrederico]

I am to blame for the detail than it was really necessary (although not as much detail as I asked for in the thread you remember). This was a mistake on me and probably my first lesson in 3D modelling: not model what's not necessary.

I did try several sections but at the time I wasn't thinking about the hatches... it skipped me back then as I was happy with the results the program was presenting in making such a large, complex model, so easy to build.

I'll probably try to the hatches as sketches... Nothing else comes to mind, really.

Looking at the picture of the model I posted in a few posts ago, can I model that with JUST site elements? It's because the ground isn't going to follow ramp sidewalks as it should, and there's a lack of other elements that aren't going to show up either...

EDIT: here's what I arranged for a final solution.

I needed to make eight sections of the college campus and I wanted to make the project in Revit, so I started by modelling the campus in Revit.
Given the complexity of the site, filled with ramps, sidewalks, etc... modelling the site with such tools may have not been the best idea, but I'm wondering if the regular site tools would have been enough...?

Revit can't exactly do what I wanted, the sections I presented some posts ago, so, following one of the last suggestions I opened the section drawing, turned off the thin lines; turned on shading with lines to make it easier to understand where I should go through with the contour of the filled region. Then I sketched the filled region with its contour going over the section lines.

The final solution looks good on print and if a line ends up being a little wider than I want I can always change it to a thinner or invisible setting. This is not what I had in mind at the beggining and it's going to take some work to do... but I suppose that this is one of those things I wished Revit could do better... or with less work and... it doesn't. I wished for something more perfect.

Now I sketch the