Structural Display Dismay

[studio3p]

I have a sense that I'm missing something obvious. I have a framing plan (see attached) using I-joists and LVL beams. They display properly in the sense that the joists are offset from the beams to indicate that it is a hanger condition. What I'm not understanding is how I get the lines to show up differently. I've changed the line pattern in the Object Styles tree, changed the usage for the various members accordingly, and have made sure that the view is set to Structural. As far as I can tell I'm doing everything properly. Does anyone recognize something I've missed?

[aggockel50321]

What are you trying to show in the view?

Have you tried changing the view's properties to medium or fine detail?

[studio3p]

I am trying to show the joist/beam layout. I can change the view detail but then it shows the outline of the framing members which is more fussy than it needs to be. The plan should be a "traditional" framing plan with one line representation of the members. That helps the guys in the field recognize when I'm showing 1 vs 2 or 3 members.

[bclarch]

I'm not that familiar with the intricacies of the structural member families so this is a shot in the dark. It occurs to me that the display might be tied to the view scale, not just the detail level. Check the family properties and/or linetype scale display settings.

[studio3p]

Check the family properties

I'm able to manage a work-around by changing the object styles subcategories in the family files and then reimporting, but the issue I'm not able to resolve is how I manage the display of elements according to their usage, ie - joist, girder, etc.

[Scott Hopkins]

I think you may have to open up the structural families and edit the line type for beam symbols there.

[christo4robin]

Your strategy of opening the structural family and changing the model line there (or its object style) is the best way IMHO. This shouldn't be all that tedious - change a few families, save to a your preferred family locatin, and presto! All framing plans from that point forward will show the linetypes as you wish.

Cheers!

[studio3p]

I have done that. And that's the workaround that I stumbled upon. But I am under the impression that the display of that symbolic line is supposed adjust according to usage type. At least that's what I understand from the help.


Click a value from the Usage menu to set the structural usage of the beam.
The usage depends on which structural elements you are connecting with the beam. Consult the structural usage table included in this procedure. By default, the value is set to automatic. This means Revit determines the usage based on which structural elements you are connecting.

The line style for a beam changes based on its structural usage. You can change the settings of this using the Object Styles command.

[bclarch]

Maybe the program only converts beams to girders if other beams frame into them, but not when the only things framing into them are joists.

[christo4robin]

3p-

I hadn't read that section of help. Based on that, it certainly seems that the lack of a linetype change is a bug.

Can anyone second this?

[ita]

Please explain the difference between a "beam" and a ""girder". we dont use the term "girder" as such! :?:

[beegee]

Girder
(n.) One who girds; a satirist.
(n.) One who, or that which, girds.
(n.) A main beam; a stright, horizontal beam to span an opening or carry weight, such as ends of floor beams, etc.; hence, a framed or built-up member discharging the same office, technically called a compound girder. See Illusts. of Frame, and Doubleframed floor, under Double.
Bowstring girder, Box girder, etc. See Bowstring, Box, etc. Girder bridge. See Bridge. Lattice girder, a girder consisting of longitudinal bars united by diagonal crossing bars. Half-lattice girder, a girder consisting of horizontal upper and lower bars connected by a series of diagonal bars sloping alternately in opposite directions so as to divide the space between the bars into a series of triangles. Sandwich girder, a girder consisting of two parallel wooden beams, between which is an iron plate, the whole clamped together by iron bolts.



I reckon its number one, but could be two...

But to be serious, I think a girder is a main beam that can support other beams, that in turn could support framing... Thats my guess.

[studio3p]

Beam and Girder may be used interchangeably. I've typically heard these members referred to as beams, but they're really one and the same. Usually Girders are referenced in steel construction. A Girder can carry other beams which in turn carry joists. Actually, Beam seems to be missing from the Usage Type for structural members. Another Usage Type option is Purlin which refers to a spanning member (used in roof construction) supported by Beams, the Purlins then carry a structural deck (either wood or metal).

[Dean Camlin]

In regular usage in the US, "girder" seems to apply to major open-web members, such as long-span trusses, which carry other members such as beams, open-web joiss, or singular wood trusses. For example, a wood truss-girder is often simply seveal standard trusses ganged together. "Beams" are most often solid members such as rolled steel shapes, laminated wood or solid timbers. \pedantic mode off\

[bclarch]

Girders are often open web truss members because that is an efficent member type to use for large loads. But they can certainly be solid steel (think of Mies' Crown Hall roof).

The critical question in this situation really is, what is Revit programmed to recognize as a girder vs. a beam. So, would one of the programmers like to jump in with a clarification?