steel detailing

[scoe]

I posted this in Revit General but got no responses, so I'm hopeful this post will generate some suggestions.

We need to have mitred steel joints and splayed end...see attached... is this possible using Revit Structural elements? If not, I suppose I can do mitred I-beam condition using extrusion command in massing, but I'm not sure how I can splay an end...help! see attached sketches for examples.

thanks.-

[Paul Andersen]

Apologies for missing your post in Revit General. I've attached an RS model which outlines one method that can be used to miter the intersection. You can apply this same method to achieve the splayed end. We've only run into issues with this method on some tube steel applications.

[ryanmcin]

Scoe: I just want to clarify something since it didn't seem to be clear. You mentioned that you originally posted in the General Revit fourm and your post mentions using Revit Structural elements, I don't know if you mean the structural families or the Revit Structure program. The method that Paul has outlined will only work in Revit Structure, the ability to cut the framing member with a reference plane is not included in Revit Building.

[scoe]

You are correct...we aren't using Revit Structure. So how can I acheive the desired result in Revit Building?

[david_peterson]

In RB can you apply a Mass void to the end of the beam you want to cut, or is that the option that dosen't work. Personally I'd love to see the addition of cut planes to structural elements similar to those in ADT. You can create some of the coolest looking thing this way.

[scoe]

makes little sense that you can't mitre structure in RB but can in RS...just another example of our needing to do something Revit can't do. Frustrating!

[Paul Andersen]

I agree that this is an odd feature not to offer in both packages. It's been a while since I played around in RB and didn't realize that this couldn't be done. Hopefully this is an unintentional omission and not a feature that is being used to encourage the purchase of RS. Perhaps someone from the factory could provide some insight. If they would be giving up too much crossover by adding this functionality to RB perhaps an Architectural Beam Tool is in order.

I did do some experimenting in RB at home last night by adding an adjustable void to the end of the beam family with mixed results. Depending on how many you need to place you are probably better off using in place family sweeps with steel shape profiles and trimming the ends with voids. The nice thing about the sweep method is that you can change the profile if the beam sizes change and if both members coming into the mitered corner are the same size you can draw one path and the corner cleanup is automatic.

[scoe]

the beams are the same size so sweeping them is the best solution.

I still haven't quite figured out how to handle the column though.

thanks.

[erikbjur]

Here is how I do it. Use a brace for the tilted member. Cut the top with a referance plane. Then cope the other end to the column. For the mitered beam, use a concrete beam and then change the profile to the wide flange section you want.

[david_peterson]

.....For the mitered beam, use a concrete beam and then change the profile to the wide flange section you want.What happens to the analytical model when you change the profile of the concrete beam to a wide flange? That just doesn't seem like a functional idea. If the factory guys want us to create the analytical model in RS, I don't think you can cheat like that. There has to be a better way.

[scoe]

Here is how I do it. Use a brace for the tilted member. Cut the top with a referance plane. Then cope the other end to the column. For the mitered beam, use a concrete beam and then change the profile to the wide flange section you want.


was this done in RB or RS...I don't see a category for vertical bracing....all I see is horizontal bracing.

[erikbjur]

Cut a detail or section, then under modeling, select brace. That should do it. As for the analytical model, I believe you can edit the structural properties. Please note, this is not the way it should be. I hate work arounds, that is why I thought we had the Beta projects. These items should be fixed in the beta projects so we don't have to have work arounds.

[Paul Andersen]

Erik, just to clarify, you are using RS correct?. With coping and the cut geometry tool used in conjunction with a ref plane almost every end condition can currently be handled in RS quite effectively without damage to the analytical model. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for other/faster ways to accomplish this, perhaps an additional beam join tool (similar to the wall join options) or an enhanced trim command that could miter the corners automatically. I'm just interested in what workflow you are looking for so we could add it to the wishlist. Have a great weekend.

[ryanmcin]

I agree that this is an odd feature not to offer in both packages. It's been a while since I played around in RB and didn't realize that this couldn't be done. Hopefully this is an unintentional omission and not a feature that is being used to encourage the purchase of RS...

I don't know this for a fact, but when I have discussed this topic (cut planes in RB) with the factory it has mostly been ignored. I believe that they have little to no intent of adding this function to RB anytime soon. It seems to me that they have no intent of adding any new structural functions like this (coping, beam systems, etc) to RB as a way to inflate sales of RS.

[erikbjur]

I am using RS 2.0. I aggree with you about the ability to model most conditions, however it is not as simple as it should be. It is still a "Workaround" and should be addressed. A program of this caliber should handle something like connections between members in a way that mirrors real world connections. It would be great if you could choose whether the connection is bearing on something or hanging off of that something. If that something is a column, the column should shorten to the bottom of the beam if that beam bears on it. If a brace if framing into a column, we should have the option to deside what happens at the end as the brace hits the column. Right now we have to jump through hoops to get it right. Braces to gusset plates are easy, everything else is hard. I think more attention needs to be paid to the "Everything else" catagory. I also think that more attention should be paid to the wood member connections. Right now we have to manualy drop the column to fit under the headers. I believe this should be automatic. For other connections, there is not much you can do right now but to make the lines invisible in the detail and redraw the end correctly.

[Paul Andersen]

Good points Erik and I agree that there is still a lot to be desired with regards to connections and end conditions in general. I am less familiar with the wood limitations but with regards to steel it would be nice if some auto coping functionality could be developed. Currently I only bother to cope members that are going to show up in a section due to the fact that the process is a little tedious at best. The ability to globally set a separate web and flange offset for the cope (which could be overridden per instance) and have a toggle which would allow the members to automatically cope or not upon placement would be a big time saver in my opinion and would significantly reduce the bulk of these workarounds. Other software that I have used and experimented with have this ability. I would also like to be able to define parametric connections that can be placed with the beam and adjust automatically as beam sizes change.

Ryan, I hope there is something more to it than that. It seems to me that the motivation to buy RS should be whether or not you need / want to be able to leverage the analytical model not whether or not you want to graphically show a connection or end condition correctly.

[rrijswijk104343]

Hello,
you can create mitered steel joints. However, you have to stop using the different detail levels. Try using the M_Concrete_Rectangular Beam.rfa.

If you study this one you will see this one is just defined with one solid (and not three for coarse, medium and fine). However, when this kind of beams are joined it all goes well. Even 3 beams will be joined this way.

So, remodelling this family into a Steel one is 1 minute work. Just load the Fine or Medium profile into this. Change sweep profile, material and Structural Material Type (in Family Category and parameters). Unfortunately, you have to set it on Concrete to let these miter. Another thing is that the miter line is not drawn by Revit. Okay, add a model line to it. Then you are ready....

It is a workaround. Revit should support this in a better way

Renzo

Another issue is that attahing a concrete column to this "steel" beam (it is concrete) will give problems. Because Revit will say that both elements are concrete and automatically will join them....

[ashwin]

Mitered Joints can be done!
This was done in RS4.
Analytical Model unbroken as well.

[rrijswijk104343]

Yes, this works fine. However, try this horizontally. So just in a structural plan and join some beams together....

Thanks anyway, Renzo