Light Tube Skylight, best practice

[Andre Baros]

We're adding a bunch of light tubes to a project... a skylight which has a flexible, reflective, connection down to a ceiling element below. The logic is that the skylight and the ceiling aperture can be placed independently and the flexible tube can work it's way down around structure ext.

The roof component and ceiling component are easy to create, the trick is the connection between them and having them relate. The whole reason to do this is tight coordination in the existing ceiling cavity and the various conditions which these need to negotiate.

It seams to me that this is more work than it's worth to build a single family which does it all and I was planing to make it as three separate pieces, any better ideas?

[robert.manna]

I think that you are right, it should be three pieces (if not more) because of the complexity. If you make it parametric I'll be very curious to see how you do it. Nesting families will be tricky as I'm assuming you want the ceiling and roof elements to be hosted. I guess you could nest the duct in one of those, but that might be more work then its worth. Might be better off with three seperate components that you just lock together in the project. It makes think that it would be a good time and place to co-opt revit system's flexible duct tool. I've seen the things you're describing, and really the tube is just an oversized flex duct. If you're willing to share, I would love to see at least some screen shots, of the finished product, if not the family itself.

G'luck,
-R

[jason.martin]

Actually the flex duct idea works pretty well<G>.

I created a couple pieces of "mechanical equipment" (one for the roof and one for the ceiling) both with round connectors and just connected them with flex duct. Either of the families can be moved and the flex updates itself "as needed" to maintain the connection.

[robert.manna]

Sweet! Though obviously you had to do it in systems, but it should translate to Building.... Just kinda of a pain though :). I'm glad I have access to all the product, :). But I feel bad for those who don't :(.

I think I would actually make the bottom ceiling piece a mechanical fixture, on top of a light fixture (for rendering purposes) or I guess you could put a studio light up there behind a transparent peice of geometry (as long as the thing is hollow).


-R

[archjake]

I think that using a work around like this may confuse the issue later. The family is of the wrong category. Its going to show wrong on your mechanical plans unless you cheat with filters.

Why stoop to this level for a work around? And a question for the developers: why is it so difficult to create a family like this in Revit without doing it in-place?

Perhaps we need a connector type of family. I've often had a case where I wanted families to speak to each other, or create connections like this. I haven't checked lately, but I want families to know what room or zone they are in without me having to set a manual parameter.

My $.02

[robert.manna]

I think that using a work around like this may confuse the issue later. The family is of the wrong category. Its going to show wrong on your mechanical plans unless you cheat with filters.

Why stoop to this level for a work around? And a question for the developers: why is it so difficult to create a family like this in Revit without doing it in-place?

Perhaps we need a connector type of family. I've often had a case where I wanted families to speak to each other, or create connections like this. I haven't checked lately, but I want families to know what room or zone they are in without me having to set a manual parameter.

My $.02
I agree, I hate to use work arounds and "cheats" take for instance all the things that railing families get used for, or ramps. However at the end of the day, when you need to produce a docuement set, and you need your drawings to look correct for the purposes of getting your building built, you've got to do what you've got to do.

I think too, that there has been some very interesting developments in families that have come out of MEP and Structural, and now Building merely needs to work to incorporating those features into its platform in a manner that is meaningful to us as architects.

-R