Creating a compound wall

[pcore]

In the wall that I am trying to create, I want there to be wood panels from 4' 1/2" down and gyp. board from that point up. They are in the same plane and are the same thickness. There is a sweep in between the two. Any ideas? Thanks.

[twiceroadsfool]

One method to use is a stacked wall, although many people do not like using them.

We are using them in a situation identical to yours, where the different sections of wall are the same thickness, but have differing materials. Build the lwoer portion as a basic wall, and the uppoer portion as a basic wall, and stack one on top of the other in a Stacked Wall Type.

The only place they have irritated us so far is when we go to attach the bases of them to Roofs for facades, and in that case we just use the Break Apart command.

[pcore]

Thanks. Isn't there a way to do it with splitting and merging regions?

[twiceroadsfool]

Probably... Maybe someone will chime in and we'll both learn something today... :)

[aaronrumple]

Sure - see attached....

[Calvn_Swing]

So, I've got a slightly different scenario to work with, and I'm curious what the best way to handle this is...

We've got a school building with sound isolation requirements for the classrooms. As such, on the second floor, we've got a lot of walls that attach to the sloped roof. Below the ceiling these need gyp on both sides, but above the ceiling we can dump the gyp off one side completely. I know you can unlock the alignment of a layer from the top/bottom of a wall, but then you have to go to each wall instance and move the layer to where you want it. We have a consistent height, which was why we choose to use a stacked wall originally.

Of course, now we want to use filters to control the visibility of walls in fire code plans, but you can't add parameters to stacked walls to use. You don't even have the ubiquitous "comments" parameter in stacked walls.

How should we handle this situation???

Thanks!

[aaronrumple]

So, I've got a slightly different scenario to work with, and I'm curious what the best way to handle this is...

We've got a school building with sound isolation requirements for the classrooms. As such, on the second floor, we've got a lot of walls that attach to the sloped roof. Below the ceiling these need gyp on both sides, but above the ceiling we can dump the gyp off one side completely. I know you can unlock the alignment of a layer from the top/bottom of a wall, but then you have to go to each wall instance and move the layer to where you want it. We have a consistent height, which was why we choose to use a stacked wall originally.

Of course, now we want to use filters to control the visibility of walls in fire code plans, but you can't add parameters to stacked walls to use. You don't even have the ubiquitous "comments" parameter in stacked walls.

How should we handle this situation???

Thanks!
A. Do you even need to show what's above the ceiling? I would think that there are only a handful of sections where you'll be showing this stuff in the drawing set. It might be faster just to draft a few lines in where needed and leave the walls stopping just 6" above the ceiling.

B. If you do need to show the studs- I typical do then as just a separate wall. Stacked walls might be fine, but I usually end up having to break them up if the ceiling steps a lot.

C. If you draw the wall all the way up, you can later use the split tool in section to break the wall in two and change to a stud only partition above.

[Calvn_Swing]

We're an integrated construction/architecture firm. We actually use the Revit model for estimating, scheduling, and construction. So, we have to show it as it is a significant cost. The problem with splitting the wall in two is that then it doesn't schedule correctly, estimate correctly, etc... The problem with it being stacked is that we can't control the visibility for documentation.

So we're in between a rock and a hard place basically. The estimating / scheduling / construction is more important so we won't be doing two walls. The documentation is secondary for us, so we'll deal with it. I was just hoping once again that there was something I missed - like that you could unlock the layers and then dimension the difference in the wall structure so it would behave like a type parameter. Alas...

We'll have to find a cheating way to do the code-plans.

[Calvn_Swing]

You know, just like with any other "multiple" selection in Revit, all the parameters that the objects share should still be available in the properties dialog. There really is no excuse for this not being present for stacked walls. If both/all of the basic walls it is composed of have the same parameter, you should be able to access that parameter for the stacked wall.

Plain and Simple.

Bad Revit!

Bad!

Sit...

Good Revit...

[pcore]

Aaron,

Thanks, that is what I was wondering; I see what you did, but how did you do it?

[pcore]

Actually, I just figured it out. In the Edit Assembly dialogue box, I split two regions at a certain height, then I merged the regions from right to left for the lower portion and from left to right for the upper portion. Then I could select the outer boundary and edit the temporary dimension to get the right thickness. In the attached image, I am about to merge the grey region into the blue region.

[captainbunsaver]

For Calvin;

For the above-ceiling condition - how about unlock the top alignment as you have done, and then set the "Top Extension" in Element Properties to a negative number. Of course, this won't work for stepped or sloping walls.
hth

TC

[Calvn_Swing]

Not a bad idea at all - I had forgotten about that...

I'll give it a shot and see if it works the way we need it too...