Structural Components

[muttlieb]

I have a couple of questions regarding structural components...

1. Why is it that when you choose the structural wall tool from the design bar you choose the depth of the wall rather than the height (like a non-bearing wall) in the options toolbar?

2. Similiar situations with beams. If I have a two-story house with an exposed beam on the first level supporting the upper level floor, I want the beam to display on the first level. And I want to place and draw the beam while viewing the first floor. Now, I can choose level two as the plane to draw it in, but it does not show by default in level one. It shows up in level two, but I don't want to see it on level two. It seems to me that the beam ought to display in the level one view by default. Isn't that a pretty basic drafting convention? I tried changing the underlay to 'show level above', but still no beam. Am I missing something? Or is there a "workaround" to get the beam to display the way I described?

[aggockel50321]

1. Why is it that when you choose the structural wall tool from the design bar you choose the depth of the wall rather than the height (like a non-bearing wall) in the options toolbar?

Seems that Revit went to that convention for all structural componets in 6.1. It's also true for columns. Not a big deal, just have to get used to it. If you want to see them as you place them, go to view range & drop your bottom down to say -1ft, & it'll show.


2. Similiar situations with beams. If I have a two-story house with an exposed beam on the first level supporting the upper level floor, I want the beam to display on the first level.
Once again a view range thing. If the beam is at say 7' to the bottom, look in a reflected ceiling plan.

Also, keep in mind, if you're using the wood framing members, you have to set your view detail to medium to see their actual 2d representation. In coarse, they just show as sticks (heavy lines)

Once you get used to all of the above, then you learn to deal with how they join...

[muttlieb]

Seems that Revit went to that convention for all structural componets in 6.1. It's also true for columns. Not a big deal, just have to get used to it. If you want to see them as you place them, go to view range & drop your bottom down to say -1ft, & it'll show.

Ok, I can deal with that, but can anybody explain why they chose to do this?



Once again a view range thing. If the beam is at say 7' to the bottom, look in a reflected ceiling plan.

That's fine and all, but it really doesn't help me actually show the beam in my floor plan view. I ended up temporarily changing my cut plane to cut through the beam, use linework and then reset my cut plane. In addition, the beam won't even show up in the first floor view unless the detail level is set to medium. This all just to get it to show up in a primary view. Seems clumsy to me. And please don't suggest I represent the beam with drafting lines. I'm not interested in that. If I want to do that, I'll go back to ADT. Does anybody else find this aspect of Revit frustrating or is it just me?[/QUOTE]




Once you get used to all of the above, then you learn to deal with how they join...

But I don't want to get used to it. I want it to work the way it ought to work. At least how I feel it ought to work :) Does someone have a strong argument or explanation why Revit works this way?

[David Conant]

1. Structural components (walls, beams, columns) have behaviors that are designed to work for structural engineers. Unfortunately, engineering requirements are sometimes in conflict with architectural. Structural engineers typically show things below the level whereas architects usually show things above. When engineers put elements into a plan they expect them to be the things holding that level up. In the default template shipped with Revit there are preset view templates for architectural plans and structural framing plans that adjust the view range to show the things each discipline expects to see.

2. Things above do not automatically appear in standard floor plans. This is by design, since there is no good agreement on what should be seen. (there have been several other threads about this) To see beams above, the best method is to place them in the plan of the level above. Then, in the plan of desired level, underlay the level above. Use linework on the edges of the beams to display them in the line style you want. After turning off the underlay, the linework will remain. Since the linework shows the actual element, it is always up to date with changes.

3. Level of detail. Beams show as lines in coarse and as solid in medium to provide the correct representation for structural framing plans. You can use Visibility/Graphics (VG) to override the level of detail for any category in a view. Thus in a coarse view, beams can be displayed in medium. These overrides can be recorded for application to other similar views by saving a view template.

[anthony.67953]

I agree Revit is very difficult when it comes to doing framing plans for wood frame construction, We have even considered using a totally different program for drawing our framing drawings. It seems we are talking to deaf ears on this matter.

[muttlieb]

Thanks for the reply David. That helps me better understand how Revit works with structural components.

However, your solution for getting the beam to display in the view I want is not working for me. If I draw the beam in level two, with the plane set to level two, it draws the top of the beam attached to level two and extending down toward level one. This is what I want. But when I go to level one and turn on level two as an underlay the beam will still not show up, no matter what the detail level is set to.

[aggockel50321]

Does the beam show in the level two plan? Typically they don't, if your view range bottom is level 2. Try dropping it a few inches and see if this doesn't solve your problem.

[Arnel Aguel]

Thanks for the reply David. That helps me better understand how Revit works with structural components.

However, your solution for getting the beam to display in the view I want is not working for me. If I draw the beam in level two, with the plane set to level two, it draws the top of the beam attached to level two and extending down toward level one. This is what I want. But when I go to level one and turn on level two as an underlay the beam will still not show up, no matter what the detail level is set to.

In the view range adjust the view depth to something like the depth of your beam that will solve your problem

[muttlieb]

Does the beam show in the level two plan? Typically they don't, if your view range bottom is level 2. Try dropping it a few inches and see if this doesn't solve your problem.

The beam does show just fine in level two. The top of the beam is attached to level two, and projects down toward level one. So the view range for level two is not the problem. I do want to see the beam in level one however. The only way I've been able to do that is to move the cut plane of level one to cut through the beam (making sure detail level is set to medium) and using the linwork tool on the beam. I guess I can learn to live with that, but it seems like a clumsy workaround to me.

[muttlieb]

In the view range adjust the view depth to something like the depth of your beam that will solve your problem

In which view? I want to see the beam in level one.

[Arnel Aguel]

My method will yield the same result as Andrewg.

One thing that I just don't understand why you want the beam supporting level 2 floors to be shown on level 1? In normal structural plan convention, you will show and label the framing plan to which it is attached to.

[muttlieb]

My method will yield the same result as Andrewg.

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to achieve. Your method works for displaying the beam in level two. Acually, I didn't need to do anything to get it to display in level two.



One thing that I just don't understand why you want the beam supporting level 2 floors to be shown on level 1? In normal structural plan convention, you will show and label the framing plan to which it is attached to.

I am a residential designer. The normal convention for residential construction documentation is to display exposed beams overhead in a floor plan as dashed lines. The beams are displayed in this way because they are typically not only structural elements but also architectural elements that relate to the design of the space. So one would want to see how the beams relate to the space when looking at a first level floor plan view. The beams would also be displayed and noted on a framing plan.

So as you can see, your method does not work for what I want to achieve. The only way I've been able get the beams to display in the first level view is to change the cut plane so it cuts the beam, use the linework tool on the beam, and reset the cut plane. I also found today that if the beam moves, the linework goes away and I have to redo it. I'm still hoping someone has a better solution or the Revit team is working on a better solution for us residential designers.

[Arnel Aguel]

Now its clear, your method and David's method are the closest to this kind of situation. Otherwise try drafting it.

[muttlieb]

Otherwise try drafting it.

This is NOT the answer I wanted to get when I started this thread. (Nothing personal, I know you're just trying to help.) And I realize there is still a place for 2D drafted elements in the creation of construction documents. But not when it comes to important model geometry that will be seen in at least 3 different views. If I wanted to continue to do that, I would have stuck with ADT. No, I'd rather deal with the workaround until (hopefully) the Revit team comes up with a better solution. I'm still hoping someone else has come up with a better way to deal with this problem than my solution.

[archjake]

I've used ceiling plans for most framing plans. The joists and beams are then modeled, and then I will go over the beams with a drafted lines to give them a punch.

Jake Boen

[Steve_Stafford]

If you only want one or two items above to show up, then the view range trick and using the linework tool or using detail lines locked to the beams is the way to go. If not, read on...

Duplicate your second floor level plan and call it first floor framing plan, change the display settings so just your framing is visible. Alter the display settings so they are dashed or whatever your convention is. Then place it on your sheet as an overlay on your first floor

Refer to the images below:

They both have all model objects turned off except for structural framing.

The one on the left:

View uses Coarse detail level setting and default view range settings
Force the stick symbol object style sub category for the framing to Overhead and gray color with a lineweight of 5.
Tagged them and applied half tone to the tags.
Placed first floor plan on a sheet
Placed the framing plan on the sheet, Revit snaps them together as you move one over the other
Set the framing plan viewport to have no view title.
Make sure the framing plan doesn't look too far down (view range) so it sees other framing below if there is any....(but this example didn't need any modifications)
The second image (right side) is similar except it is using a medium detail level setting so you see (barely) the width of the dimensional lumber joist instead...similar settings except applied to the structural framing object style itself (view overide)

Lastly, do this once and make a view template from your finished effort and apply it to any future plans.

[SkiSouth]

Muttlieb:

You are trying to use a standard family to accomplish a task it will not easily - See Steve Staffords comments. I think I would simply modify the beam family if this is a typical use for your application. One size family doesn't fit all, so using the power of Revit, simply change the standard family to what you need. In your case, you need a 2D plan representation of the actual beam that Revit will use in Sections and elevations, etc. If I am reading your comments correctly.

While not straight forward, you can do this, but be sure to work on a copy of the family, as the possibility of messing the base file up is very real.

Attached is a modified Laminated Beam Family to reflect what I believe you are requesting. It required adding a dimension to set the height above floor (I did this to make it easy on my old brain) I also deleted the stick figure representation used by structural engineers and changed the visibility of the beam to be visible in coarse views. Additionally, there is a "layer" called Overhead Beam which will control the visibility of the beam in plan view. If you don't want to see the beam in plan, turn that layer off in View properties, Structural Framing - Overhead Beam. So you can see there is a little bit to changing the family, that's why you need to work on a copy.

See if this is what you want. If you need more info on how to do this to the other structural families, let me know. Try on your own first though. That's the best way to learn and understand what Revit is doing.

[muttlieb]

I want to thank everybody for all of your help. Obviously I'm new to Revit and what at first seemd like a major hassle now doesn't seem like such a big deal. It was definitely a good learning experience and now I better understand how Revit works and how to make it work best for me. Thanks again!

[Nevine]

I opened the beam family and drafted symbolic lines. So the beams show on the first floor.That worked for me.

[Andre Baros]

Not directly related to solving the problem in question but still helpful...

I set up seperate framing levels and architectural levels. For example, my first floor framing plan is set to "top of foundation" (which is then noted in all my sections) while my architectural is set to "top of finish floor". Likewise, on the second floor I have "top of steel" or "top of framing" plans and seperate architectural. Since the majority of my structure is hidden I just using the linework tool on the floor plan below to dash in the expressed structure. (from that point of view, I think it would be awefull if most of my second floor structure showed up on the first floor plan and I had to turn it all off).

[Martin P]

Once you get used to all of the above, then you learn to deal with how they join...


Or dont join.

[SkiSouth]

(from that point of view, I think it would be awefull if most of my second floor structure showed up on the first floor plan and I had to turn it all off).

No different than an AutoCAD layer command. You set your "lines to show" in your family,
when you don't want them, just turn the layer off - One click of the mouse...

Good Ideas on how to use levels. It does help doing that,especially for steel layout. To be able to show your structural engineer how YOU expect him to frame something can be worth the price of Revit alone, especially on a complex framing system. It's very easy to coordinate with your consultants when you can clearly communicate your thoughts, and the fact that you spent a minute or two trying to work the "real structure" out...