Phasing: workflow issues and Revit assumptions

[dbaldacchino]

I'm working on my first phasing job in Revit (Existing construction with additions and renovations) and of course nothing is nice and clean.

I've noticed a few workflow problems and wanted to post them out here and see if other users have encountered this and perhaps see what their solution was.

A) I have an existing large roof and part of it is going to be demo'd. I cannot tell Revit what part is being demo'd as it only does that per element. It would be great if I could define an area that needs to be removed; some sort of sketch mode. Currently Revit exhibits good intelligence when it comes to demoing windows for instance, as it'll place an infill in the empty space for you. But when it comes to partial demolition, we don't have any tools. In my case I had to make a duplicate of the roof, trim out what needs to be demo'd, then go to the other roof and do the inverse, setting its Phase Demolished to New Work (both need to be created in Phase Existing). Now I can show Existing views with the whole roof on the building and Existing to Remain views with the demoed parts taken off.

B) Similarly, I have beam systems that I placed and I need to take off a few joists....no such luck. The Beam system's phase is controlled as a whole, so my only option is to re-configure the beam systems and split them in two, just like in the roof. It's not going to be pretty :(

C) Once more, some beams need to be cut/shortened and I'll have to duplicate and shorten each piece accordingly until they touch. EDIT: Using the split tool will be actually pretty easy in this case, although these beams will try to join and thus leave a gap at the join. I couldn't find any setting to correct this. I think I'll have to edit linework in some views as I might see the intersecting points of what's existing to remain and what's existing to be demo'd (same is happening on the roofs that I had to split in 2). Once more...it won't be pretty.

This presents substantial re-work with this workflow. The demo tools in Revit currently assume the user will always demo an entire existing element. In my case, since we're attaching to an existing structure, we have considerable "trimming" to do in order to fit the new addition and make the whole end result look like it's always been built this way.

So what do you guys think? (see pic below....purple is existing to remain. Notice the demo'd aprts of the roof. The new construction is still not fully modeled but you can see the walls and doors below).

[rjcrowther]

I too tend to take the approach you have. I did not know that there was any other way. Sometimes it has been useful to make up the short fall in modeling with the linework and fill regions tools.Again a similar approach to yours.

With roofs I have just drawn the initial roof, use it as a guide and then draw with detail lines the correct outcome. Not really in the spirit of Revit but quicker. The initial roof is then hidden in Visibility graphics.

Rob

[gordie_v]

I have had similar issues to phasing as you have.
I would recommend filling a support request with the information you have here
you have outlined the problems very well

[Andre Baros]

This actually worked better in old releases... You would phase an opening in a roof or wall and then could go back and fill it in however you wanted. Now the functionality of openings is the same as editing the sketch so you can no longer phase it.

Once upon a time there was a switch in the .INI file which would enable to to specify a gap when using the split tool, I never used it so I don't know the details or if it's still there.

[dbaldacchino]

Thanks guys. I'll have to check the ini file. In this case I don't think it has much to do with splitting....it's really a function of when two beams join (their start and end extension defaults to -0' 1/2" and you just have to re-set to 0). When you split, they automatically join (the analytical line becomes continuous) but I wanted the geometry to also look continuous.

I've had to edit the beam system and create a new one for the demo'd part. It just took some deleting and re-copying of the new layout and the split beams. Another little odd thing I noticed was that the copied objects were set to the view's phase instead of what the copied object's phase was; I was expecting the copy to have the exact same properties as the original member.

[Mike Sealander]

I was involved with a post like this about two months ago. I ended up demolishing part of an existing roof with a void during a "demo" phase. Revit created the demolished part and assigned it the "existing" phase. By toggling the phases and the "show" parameters (like show all, show complete), you can get views of the existing, demo and new that seem pretty good. This should keep you from having to build two roofs with different phase assignments.

[dbaldacchino]

Ahhh, so you created an in-place void of the roof category? I gotta try that out.

[dbaldacchino]

Ok, I tried and it works, but not without it's associated problems :(

You place a void extrusion in the new phase and it will cut the existing roof and show the cut piece as demo. The only catch is that I seem to be unable to modify this void once you finish editing. I can select the edge of the cut roof and hit edit, but then I cannot pick the void. I copied the roof to a new file and pasted there and was able to edit the void. Not sure what is going on (I know my phase filters were set correctly as otherwise I would have been unable to pick the edge and click the Edit button, which only shows up if you select the in-place family). The only thing I seem able to do is to delete the void and start over.

One other quirk of this method is that if I try to edit the existing roof for some reason, I get a message that the base sketch is invalid and I have to delete the in-place void. This error comes up while I'm still in sketch mode, editing the existing roof. This kinda renders this great method quite unuseable :cry: I wonder if it's a bug.

[Mike Sealander]

Yes, this method of in-place voids has limitations. I don't know what else you could do. Basically, demolition with voids means you get one chance to create existing conditions, one chance to do the demolition. After that, you really can't go back and fiddle with the previous phases. For what it's worth, reality is like that; it's too bad the software is equally limiting.

[dbaldacchino]

Ok, I figured a way to work around the problem of getting an invalid sketch warning for the void when editing the roof.

The best thing to do is make all the voids under one family of course, so you only have to edit this one in-place family. Before you edit the roof, select one edge of the roof being cut by the void and click Edit...now you're in sketch mode. The voids can be tricky to show up but they're there. Sometimes using a section box might make it easier to expose them. Now select the voids and don't allow them to cut the roof. In their properties turn them to solids and exit sketch mode. Now edit your roof sketch and go back to the in-place family and turn the solids back to voids. Now cut the roof and you're done.

[Mike Sealander]

Wow.
Thanks for posting this.

[bowlingbrad]

David,
As you may already know, this issue also applies to floors and ceilings. We have taken the same approach as you and have made demo puzzle pieces. I guess we're just getting used to this now and don't think of it as a problem anymore. I do like the idea of a demo sketch as long as it works better than the split face tool. I want to be able to have edges touching without the whole sketch going bonkers.

[dbaldacchino]

I actually made a suggestion of having something like a "Demo Void" tool, which would be a multi-category void which the user could assign the categories to cut with it.....floors, roofs, structural framing, ceilings....all with one void or a number of voids. This way you can control shape and extent in 3D. If say you have 4 categories of elements to be cut back to a certain point and two more elements to be cut back to another point, you'd build 2 of these voids and assign the right categories to each. Of course I have no clue if this is even programmable :) Just dreaming out loud.

[dbaldacchino]

Ok, yet another quirk of this method....even though fascias are a subcategory of roofs, the void does not demo them. EDIT: Actually you can...you have to make a separate void to cut fascias. Each void cuts one object type so you'll have to add one for the roof and one for the fascia. You cannot even use add/remove segments on fascias attached to a roof that is being cut by a void in the New Construction phase. The fascias become sort of locked to the infill that Revit places to cover the cut area (you can see this when you set your phase to Existing and use a Phase Filter that shows existing).

EDIT: One more thing....in a previous post I pointed out that I'm unable to edit the void and select it for further editing. I figure out why.....if the void is in a phase other than that of the roof it is cutting, it won't display. I think this is a bug so I'll report it and see. To work around this, just set your roof to the same phase as your void (or your void to the same phase of your roof), edit it and once finished, re-set your phasing for the roof/void.

[Mike Sealander]

Do you mean you are creating the roof in the existing phase, and creating the demo void in the existing phase also?
If so, does this let you look at the existing phase prior to the demolition?

[dbaldacchino]

No, the roof is Existing and the void is in New Construction. But to be able to select and edit the void, I selected the edge of the cut roof, (which selects the void although it doesn't show it), then set it's phase to Existing. Now click Edit and you'll get in sketch mode. Hover over the edge and the void becomes selectable. Play around with the attached file.

[truevis]

It's nice how voids will cut roofs. I was wondering if I could do the same with structure, tried in-place void in the Structure category and failed to cut beams with it. Too bad, eh?

[dbaldacchino]

I know, I tried that yesterday. I was really getting excited.....for nothing :( Oh well, maybe someday the concept of a multi-category demo void will catch on!

[tamas]

Look at my suggestion in this thread: http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=30579

I think it will work for you as well. (Substitute wall with roof.)




- Draw your wall without the opening in the Existing phase (never demolished).
- Select it, Ctrl-C, Paste same place to make an identical wall on top. (ignore the overlap warning)
- Now select one of the walls (they are identical, so does not matter which) and make the opening on it.
- Use the Join Geometry tool to join the two walls! This will change the wall without the opening to become the perfect infill piece. (Picking order is important to make sure that the wall with the opening will cut the other.)
- Select the wall that is now filling in the opening and change its phase to created in Existing and demolished in New.
- Voila

I like this approach, because if you need to change the opening later, the infill wall will take on the proper shape automatically. You could also lock align the two walls together, so they do not go out of sync.

The same technique works for openings in floors, roofs, etc.

Tamas

[dbaldacchino]

Tamas, thanks for this suggestion. This works great when you need to show openings created during New Construction (showing dashed in plan), although I guess rather than having overlapping elements, I might opt for creating a door that is just an opening and then insert it in New Construction. I feel like I'm missing the boat here :) The drawback of this method is that if you try generating shaded views, you get a horrible result since you have coplanar surfaces. The void method has worked great, but there are some "hidden" issues that I see as bugs, but such behavior might be by design. We'll see!

[tamas]

Tamas, thanks for this suggestion. This works great when you need to show openings created during New Construction (showing dashed in plan), although I guess rather than having overlapping elements, I might opt for creating a door that is just an opening and then insert it in New Construction. I feel like I'm missing the boat here :) The drawback of this method is that if you try generating shaded views, you get a horrible result since you have coplanar surfaces. The void method has worked great, but there are some "hidden" issues that I see as bugs, but such behavior might be by design. We'll see!That is not the case. The overlapping elements are there only temporarily until you do "Join Geometry" between them. That effectively subtracts one from the other and eliminates the overlap.

Thus the final result has no overlap and appears as a whole element (without opening) in the existing phase. All views (shadow or not) will look just fine.

The benefit from this approach is that if you later need to adjust the opening, the hole will be filled automatically by the other element.

[dbaldacchino]

Ok, I must be doing something wrong.

- Draw your wall without the opening in the Existing phase (never demolished).
- Select it, Ctrl-C, Paste same place to make an identical wall on top. (ignore the overlap warning)
- Now select one of the walls (they are identical, so does not matter which) and make the opening on it. Well, if my view's phase is New Construction, they won't be identical...one was set to Existing and the copy will default to New Construction. Is this good?
- Use the Join Geometry tool to join the two walls! This will change the wall without the opening to become the perfect infill piece. (Picking order is important to make sure that the wall with the opening will cut the other.)
- Select the wall that is now filling in the opening and change its phase to created in Existing and demolished in New.
- Voila

I attached an example. I must be misunderstanding something. Take a look at the 3D views and their phase & filter settings. Thanks again!

[tamas]

As I understand you want to demolish parts of the existing wall in the new phase.

In other words you need the existing wall to have the opening filled in when viewed in the existing phase, and not filled in when viewed in the new construction.
The fill-in piece is also a wall, with a shape matching the opening.

So let me write my recipe a bit differently:

Do everything in a view in the existing phase:

Make two identical walls (overlapping temporarily).
Join Geometry between the two identical walls(!). (This will subtract one from the other, temporarily eliminating one.)
Now cut the opening.

Magically, the opening is cut, but immediately filled in by the other wall (because the subtraction excludes the opening). Notice, that both pieces are still in the same phase. (existing, never demolished)


Now you are ready to demolish the opening. Just use the demolish tool on the fill-in wall or set its phase parameters to "created in existing, demolished in new".
Done.
In short, by the end of step 3 you have the original existing wall modelled in two pieces so one can be demolished (in step 4).

This same method works for other elements that can have openings (roofs, floors, slabs, etc)

I attached an example. You can even change the elevation profile of the existing wall to create non-rectangular openings to be demolished in new construction.

Tamas

PS: In my example I added locked alignments between the two wall's top, bottom, end faces, so when one changes, the other follows. This can easily be done at the end of my step 1.

[dbaldacchino]

Thanks for your persistence! I understand it now and I like it.

I was mainly trying to deal with partially demoing a roof and structure, but as you said this should apply too....the thread is getting quite long so you might have not read it all :) The reason I like the void method mentioned initially by Mike is that if you create voids in New Construction, Revit automatically places temporary infills in Existing for you, without having to make copies of that element and lock it. But I'm sure I'll find a way to use it and now it's in my arsenal of techniques!

[Mike Sealander]

This has been a really good thread. Thanks both to David and Tamas for working through all this. I had my first small Revit remodel job a few months ago, and it was a pain in the buttox. I'd like to suggest that if there is a way to write these methods into the OOTB help files, a lot of people will probably benefit.

[tamas]

I am glad I could help. I know about the void based inserts creating automatic infills, but sometimes it is more flexible to use sketched openings, or even edited profiles on walls.

I'll request this info to be included in the help tips section.

Tamas

[ws]

Excellent thread this, thanks (all my jobs involved altering existing buildings).

I see what Tamas is doing and it's ingenious.

However, following his instructions in my own walls and openings I have trouble picking the fill-in wall to demolish.

Is it, as I imagine, just a case of tabbing forever until you manage to get the fill-in wall or is there a tip to getting the object you want with exactly overlapping objects?

[tamas]

However, following his instructions in my own walls and openings I have trouble picking the fill-in wall to demolish.

Is it, as I imagine, just a case of tabbing forever until you manage to get the fill-in wall or is there a tip to getting the object you want with exactly overlapping objects?

Well, it is a minor(?) problem with our UI. Revit only lets you select objects at their edges. In this case the joined fill-in wall has no visible edges for you to pick it. I think you can still do it in plan/section views where its side faces are cut.

So add a temporary section that cuts through the opening and then you should be able to select the wall to be demolished.


Tamas

[ws]

So add a temporary section that cuts through the opening and then you should be able to select the wall to be demolished.

thanks Tamas :)

I still can't get used to the idea of creating and throwing away sections...
they used to take so much effort to create ;)

[david.fannon]

Alternatively, just grab the wal and use a temporary hide/isolate to hide it, then grab your infil at will.

[cdsuggs]

As I understand you want to demolish parts of the existing wall in the new phase.

In other words you need the existing wall to have the opening filled in when viewed in the existing phase, and not filled in when viewed in the new construction.
The fill-in piece is also a wall, with a shape matching the opening.

So let me write my recipe a bit differently:

Do everything in a view in the existing phase:

Make two identical walls (overlapping temporarily).
Join Geometry between the two identical walls(!). (This will subtract one from the other, temporarily eliminating one.)
Now cut the opening.

Magically, the opening is cut, but immediately filled in by the other wall (because the subtraction excludes the opening). Notice, that both pieces are still in the same phase. (existing, never demolished)


Now you are ready to demolish the opening. Just use the demolish tool on the fill-in wall or set its phase parameters to "created in existing, demolished in new".
Done.
In short, by the end of step 3 you have the original existing wall modelled in two pieces so one can be demolished (in step 4).

This same method works for other elements that can have openings (roofs, floors, slabs, etc)

I attached an example. You can even change the elevation profile of the existing wall to create non-rectangular openings to be demolished in new construction.

Tamas

PS: In my example I added locked alignments between the two wall's top, bottom, end faces, so when one changes, the other follows. This can easily be done at the end of my step 1.
How 'bout this one?

In an existing wall to remain, cut a demo piece out by:

1. switch View Properties to new construction
2. in Modeling tools select Create
3. pick Wall as the type and name it
4. select Opening and pick the wall in which said piece is to be demo'd
5. sketch the opening and finish sketch
6. finish family
7. edit the Opening's properties such that it's Phase Created = Existing and Phase Demolished = New Construction, click OK

This seems to do the trick, however the Demo'd piece is noticable in New Construction and it doesn't look like I can assign it a material. :(

Thoughts?