Wall sweeps behaving badly

[BATx2]

I'm having a problem with a wall sweep that doesn't behave consistently ... sometimes windows cut it, sometimes windows don't cut it ... I always want windows to cut this sweep.

The wall was originally created in phase 3 of our project. The wall is a stacked wall containing 3 basic walls. The basic wall that these windows are inserted in contains a sweep which should be cut by the windows. The "existing" windows inserted in phase 3 all cut the profile just fine. In phase 15 I demolish the "existing windows" and insert "new" windows in their place. The "new" windows cut most of the infill wall just fine, except for the wall sweep. If I insert a "new" window in a portion of the wall that did not previously have a (demolished) window, the sweep cuts properly.

The attached images show the phase 3 and phase 15 conditions (note that the one "new" window I inserted that does cut the wall properly isn't really supposed to be there ... is was just a test to see if the problem was with my "new" window family). I've also attached images of the stacked wall properties, basic wall properties and wall sweeps dialog boxes. I think I have the "cuts wall" and "cuttable" boxes checked appropriately.

Any Ideas on how to make the sweep cut properly?

[tamas]

You may try to unset the "Cuttable" property for the wall sweeps. It has a curious meaning that is not entirely intuitive.

Tamas

[Maximillian]

I'm sorry to say I cant help with the sweeps... but I was wondering if you wouldn't sharing how you created the detail around the windows? Part of the window family?

[tomnewsom]

I'm sorry to say I cant help with the sweeps... but I was wondering if you wouldn't sharing how you created the detail around the windows? Part of the window family?
Looks like it. Shouldn't the lintel stone be 'wide' rather than 'narrow' though? Proportions look a bit odd.

*pers out of window*

Yeah, the building over the road has the lintel at the 'widest' dimension of the stone reveals.

Oh, and I'm not sure what's causing your sweep problem!

[BATx2]

Tamas,

Turning off the "Cuttable" setting for the sweep in the basic wall did the trick ... the sweeps are no longer extending through the new (or existing) windows regardless of where they are placed in the wall. A strange thing happened, though, when I changed that property ... many (but not all) of the infills from the demolished windows reappeared even though the new windows were properly inserted. No worries though ... as soon as I deleted one window from each affected wall, the rest of the infills opened up again and I was able to copy/reinsert the one new window that I deleted. Bottom line is I have the result I was looking for. Any chance the Revit development team made that setting a little more intuitive in RA2008?

Maximillian,

The quoins around the windows (and else where on the building) are not part of the window family. I didn't create those objects and the guy who did is out of the office today ... but ... it appears that each set of quoins is an in-place generic family that is somehow attached or locked to the wall face. Each quoin is a separate 1/16th inch thick solid extrusion. I think he created one extrusion and then copied it around in the family using the control grips to resize each quoin appropriately. There are fairly repetitive patterns that allowed him to copy families around the building instead of creating each individual instance. Maybe there was a better way, but given that this is our first Revit project, he did it in the first way he though of.

Tomnewsom,

If you want to criticize the lintel design, call Leo A. Daly III. His grandfather's signature is all over these drawings from 1931. I'm sure he'd love to hear what you think of his grandfather's lintels. :) (actually I can't really verify if it was Mr. Daly himself or someone else from the firm who designed this building). We're modeling the existing facility as accurately as possible so we can show our client the before and after of what we are planning to do.

Thanks for the help Tamas

[tomnewsom]

Sorry about that, I did get a bit carried away there :o
That smiley does not look embaressed, but it should.