Revit Families Library

[m_r_meza]

This is just a complaint/suggestion. Revit needs to pay a little more attention to the library of families that it supplies, either on the web or with the program. I have com across numerous families that don't behave properly because of something ridiculous like what family they are categorized into when they are created. Autodesk obviously uses the fact that Revit comes loaded with families that are already created for you, but what they don't tell you is that they have not created all of them properly and you will have to go back and search for the component that needs to be modified.

[Steve_Stafford]

Can you provide some specific examples? When you encounter them you can contact support so they can deal with them.

[m_r_meza]

All examples are annoying little things, some are: Counter tops show everything beneath them, so in a bathrooms you can see the tile beneath the counter top. As with sinks. Bathroom stalls are categorized in specialty equipment, so when you go to take an interior elevation inside of the stall, it shows up like you are standing outside of the stall because being categorized as specialty equipment does not allow one to cut through that family. The list goes on but most of the time it takes less of my time to just fix it and move on rather than calling support and spending time on hold or spending time emailing. Bottom line is that I think Revit needs to be more on the ball with things like this that are used as marketing tools.

[BWG]

All examples are annoying little things, some are: Counter tops show everything beneath them, so in a bathrooms you can see the tile beneath the counter top. As with sinks. Bathroom stalls are categorized in specialty equipment, so when you go to take an interior elevation inside of the stall, it shows up like you are standing outside of the stall because being categorized as specialty equipment does not allow one to cut through that family. The list goes on but most of the time it takes less of my time to just fix it and move on rather than calling support and spending time on hold or spending time emailing. Bottom line is that I think Revit needs to be more on the ball with things like this that are used as marketing tools.

If you don't send it to support, then you have no complaint. They can't fix something they don't readily know about. Sure they should have caught it or thought about it, but most of the programmers are not architects, so they need our help in developing the program. As for the counter tops, I think they wanted to show the cabinets below and how they were arranged. Shouldn't have tile under the cabinets anyways, they normally go in on bare flooring.

[nrenfro]

I too have noted instances where something slight was not built properly with a family. However with the example of the see through counter top I can see where one may want the casework from below to show through, and it was most likely intently built that way. I see the provided families as starting points, and not necessary a prepackaged ready to use item. All offices have different graphical standards. The wonderful thing (especially since 8.0) is the ease at which families can be customized.

[archjake]

All examples are annoying little things, some are: Counter tops show everything beneath them, so in a bathrooms you can see the tile beneath the counter top. As with sinks.
I think this is a graphic standard sort of thing. Just modify the family, save it to your Firms library and move on. Besides, you should have multiple variations of counter tops that don't ship with revit. ie.: U shape, Straight with back & side splash, an ADA sink enclosure.


Bathroom stalls are categorized in specialty equipment, so when you go to take an interior elevation inside of the stall, it shows up like you are standing outside of the stall because being categorized as specialty equipment does not allow one to cut through that family.
This is one of my pet peeves. I agree that toilet room stalls are categorized in specialty equipment. The one thing that I think is a problem is that you can not cut a section through them. I have made custom families that utilize the visibility features to fix this. They turn off the solids, and show a section cut with symbolic lines. Did the toilet partitions ship with revit?

This is one I feel strongly about: I think specialty equipment should have the option of being cut in section!

Problems I have run into with families are labels. Its the first thing I take out because I can't control the visibility easily. Either its on or off for the family, not the view. This includes Electrical families, refrigerator, and water heater.

I've run into families that don't flex correctly. The residential range for example. The top piece with the controls / clock won't flex with the rest of it. An easy fix, but annoying.

[kpaxton]

OK, OK... my 2 cents...

I agree that if there is a problem, you have to notify someone there is a problem. Complaining doesn't do any good, if there isn't a solution proffered, or an explanation as to why it's not working. Currently in our office, we're running about 10% 'provided' families and 90% custom families.... if that. The ease of use of creating is only limited by your knowledge of the Family Editor!!

Now onto the 'Library' topic. I'm sure this has been talked about before, but let's rehash one more time, shall we? Even though we can create our own libraries, it becomes very tedious (and time consuming), when all you want to do is drag something from the library and drop it into your project. What is the status (if any) of having Vendors create their products, etc. in the Revit .rfa format? The closest thing we've all seen is perhaps the Anderson Windows Family, which is great, but is a wee bit buggy and heavy!

My other sugesstion (and this may not get far), is this: If we're going through the motions of 'building' a building the way it is put together in the field, shouldn't the Families be organized in a way that follows the industry? Has anyone modified their file structure differently? Just wondering.

-Kyle

[jbalding48677]

My other sugesstion (and this may not get far), is this: If we're going through the motions of 'building' a building the way it is put together in the field, shouldn't the Families be organized in a way that follows the industry? Has anyone modified their file structure differently? Just wondering.

-Kyle
I will chime in on this note. I have always held that keeping the organization the same as the organization from Revit as it greatly simplifies finding components and downloading them from a source that uses the same folder structure. Keep in mind that the CSI system is not a global system so it really does not work outside the US. That being said, I also feel that the filing structure and the filenaming, for that matter, will become moot soon as there are several mechanisms are being studied to manage content for you. i.e. a database storage and retrieval type system. With that in mind you could, for instance, search by CSI, UL, Family Type, Manufacturer or any number of other criteria associated with families.

On the content by manufacturers - pray...

[mmodernc]

Need to be consistent standards of family modeling and families should comply with local drafting standards. Part of problem is a lot of families have been made by different individuals at many points during Revit's development.