Storefronts

[sultarc]

I recently had someone from outside help me with a Revit model. I had already input the storefronts and he picked the project up and took it to the next step. We in the end finished the project but. In the process the consultant said he never used the stock Revit wall types, he always made his own because Revit's didn't suit him graphically or otherwise.

Question: Is this everyones opinion (power users) or is this one persons opinion? Am I doing it wrong?

[Adam Mac]

I think you'd have to be extremely lucky for Revit to have supplied you with every wall type you'll ever need, constructed exactly as per your local methods! Of course you're going to need to create some of your own walls or tweak the OOTB walls a bit - but it's the flexibility in Revit that makes it so easy anyway. I think your "consultant" was maybe making it sound like it was a big deal? It's not.

HTH

Adam

[twiceroadsfool]

Is he talking about actual wall types, or the storefront systems that are in the box? We're doing a large mall with storefronts, and there are only 5 or 6 different kinds of storefronts. We started out using the Revit storefronts, and building them to the right size and then copying them (horrible idea). Then we made model groups out of them (one with doors, one with just glazing) and weve been using them like that since. It works *okay,* but i DEFINETELY see shortcomigns, and understand why your friend did what he did.

If i had to do it over again, or if for some reason something warrants going back, i'll make them window families and door familes. The storefront systems dont behave well in terms of the door schedules (the to room and from room felds dont work right). They do if i make a new file, with five walls, 2 rooms, and a storefront, but in our malls, they dont work. Plus, the model groups are a little loose, and it will let one get out of whack now and again without hesitation. Thats no good. Some users in the office who werent present at the time of the inception of the model groups dont know what theyre doing and they change the axis/orientation of the model group, screwing up the efficiency when everyone else is trying to insert them by what WAS the centerpoint/endpoint. And aside from the door schedule, id rather have been able to schedule them by instances in a window schedule...

It seemed like the right idea at the time, but familes arent any harder to use. Next time id make custom familes as he said, and would use the storefronts just for the one off cases where there is a feature.

Just my experience, though.

[Adam Mac]

Good point...... didn't think of the "curtain wall" side of things.
Still...they're not THAT bad...are they??

[twiceroadsfool]

Nope, not at all. Like i said, its to the point where i recognize the shortcomings, and would do it differently if i was starting this project over. But even continuing with the next few phases of the project, were still doing it with the model grouped Storefront systems. Its working fine for us, and its easier (with the current group of users) to not be sending people in to the family editor all the time.

As for the graphical shortcomings... Everyone has issues with the way Revit drawings look, and im too young and too new to the profession for it to bother me, LOL. IMHO, we have a tendancy to harp over things on paper that never affect the end result, which is a building, and which will turn out as a building regardless of lineweight and symbology, provided its a quality set of documents. Thats the danger of looking back and walking forward. If you take tomorrows methodology and try to achieve yesterdays delivarables, you arent going anywhere good...