Level Height Schedule

[jholmes.138425]

Anyone know if it's possible to create a schedule of the level heights? I'm trying to figure out if it's possible to put the Elevation Heights shown by the Level Heads into a schedule. It would look like: 1st Floor - 0'-0"; 2nd Floor - 12'-0"; etc.

I have searched all the AUGI and RevitCity forums and I have found just a couple seeking a work around for productivity, and these have graphic-based suggestions (i.e. create a view and turn everything off except elevation tags). What I am trying to do is create a schedule to use as part of the Zoning and the Architectural Analysis portions of our documents that lists each floor level height of the building.

This seems like a very straightforward thing to do, since each level has a unique name and elevation height. However, the Elevation never appears as a possible field in any schedule I try. In addition, it is impossible to create any Shared Parameters in the Level Head family (or any parameters for that matter). Please help. Thank you.

-j

[dbaldacchino]

Levels are datums and are not schedulable. I mean, think about it...it's like you're asking to schedule dimensions or structural gridlines. You want a height of a level relative to what? Relative to the one before, after, first floor, last floor or some arbitrary point?

You can schedule objects and what level they are on, but the position of a level is not something you can quantify. Your best bet is to do a section or elevation and turn on visibility of levels and dimensions only, then place a running string of dimensions between all of them (if what you want is a relative distance between adjacent levels). After all, this would sort of display like a table with one column of information and it does give you the information you're after anyway: just not in the schedule you're envisioning :)

[jholmes.138425]

dbaldacchino, thanks for your quick response. You have saved me a lot more trying at this. At least I know this is not possible in Revit yet. But I don't think it's as unreasonable an operation as you imply. The thing that makes the Level datum not at all like a dimension is that it has an identity, a name. This name is even linked to the view name it creates. I don't see why it's unreasonable to assume that it can be scheduled.

The number I am after is simply the Elevation height dimension that appears in the level head tag itself, not relative to some other object. You say that "the position of a level is not something you can quantify," but Revit quantifies it automatically and displays it in the Level Head tag based on where I set the datum. So, why can't I get that same number to display in a schedule? I can get the Level name to appear, why not the Level Elevation (they represent the same parameter!)?

Of course we are not talking about any schedule here, but one specifically created to display this datum data. This kind of data can also be useful for gridlines as you mention, since you would get data on proximity to the origin (linear dimension, grid offset angle, etc) very easily, and use it (for example) on the structural coordination plans that you would have for a concrete superstructure, etc.

DATUM SCHEDULE: This is definitely one for the wishlist.

Thanks, again.
-j

[bracey.d]

Levels are datums and are not schedulable. I mean, think about it...it's like you're asking to schedule dimensions or structural gridlines. You want a height of a level relative to what? Relative to the one before, after, first floor, last floor or some arbitrary point?

You can schedule objects and what level they are on, but the position of a level is not something you can quantify. Your best bet is to do a section or elevation and turn on visibility of levels and dimensions only, then place a running string of dimensions between all of them (if what you want is a relative distance between adjacent levels). After all, this would sort of display like a table with one column of information and it does give you the information you're after anyway: just not in the schedule you're envisioning :)

I have to disagree with dbaldacchino, standard drawings sets for large buildings include level elevations right on the plans, this is either shown as a distance above sea level or ground level. Revit automatically calculates this as a distance above ground level (really Level 1) on the level tags in elevation view. I'm working on a way to display this in a schedule. If I figure it out I'll post the solution here.

[twiceroadsfool]

You wont find a way, because its not possible. On Plans, you cna achieve what youre talking about with a Spot Elevation tool, placed on a floor, which will give you the elevation at a particular spot.

And if you think about it a little more, David's concerns with it are pretty valid. The Level itself really has NO BEARING where the floor is, where the ceiling height is, or what the floor to floor is, since we can offset/change/alter all of the Floors/ceilings/Walls/Components.

Simply put, "Level 1" and "Level 2" only give you concrete information about the building in the model, IF everything is constrained to the levels, and nothing is offset. that doesnt happen a lot of times.

Using Spot elevations for this purpose keeps the reporting tag intelligent with what is ACTUAL in the model, and not what is IMPLIED by the Level.

I hope this helps a little bit. :)

[dbaldacchino]

That's exactly what I mean. I can model (painfully) a 100 floor building using only one level for example, with offsets from that one level (positive or negative offsets). One needs to tag model elements with spot elevations to safely get their position in space. I'm not saying scheduling levels is not required by some. I personally don't see a point, but I'm one in hundreds of thousands of users :D

[twiceroadsfool]

Im not disagreeing that someone might need it either. Fact of the matter is though, that it doesnt really report... well.... anything, lol.

Its like scheduling drafting lines, but with slightly more intelligence...

[jholmes.138425]

Im not disagreeing that someone might need it either. Fact of the matter is though, that it doesnt really report... well.... anything, lol.

Its like scheduling drafting lines, but with slightly more intelligence...

What I said before (and maybe -if you think about it a little more- you might see my point) is that I'm interested in getting the level data into a schedule. The schedule would report the level name and level height. Levels are not drafting lines, and as such they embody this data. It might be easier for you to understand this if you weren't thinking about a tall stack-of-pancakes skyscraper. Try considering a group of masses with different level heights for 1st floor, 2nd floor, etc. It can get complex, and a reference chart can be handy.

As a side comment, I'm not one to really create macros in autocad, but it would be interesting to see how revit can open up it's platform to allow user-defined actions/commands/views. In this way, maybe it would be on the easier side to assemble a schedule view for levels, since the data is already presented in the level head automatically.

[twiceroadsfool]

Try considering a group of masses with different level heights for 1st floor, 2nd floor, etc. It can get complex, and a reference chart can be handy.



Thats exactly what i was thinking about. What happens when one of the masses goes from Level 1 to Level 2 with an upper offset of 4'6"?

What happens with another mass has a base offset of 2'?

Reporting the LEVEL wont do much, reporting the bottom and top of the ELEMENTS (spot elevation) would....

[jholmes.138425]

Thats exactly what i was thinking about. What happens when one of the masses goes from Level 1 to Level 2 with an upper offset of 4'6"?

What happens with another mass has a base offset of 2'?

Reporting the LEVEL wont do much, reporting the bottom and top of the ELEMENTS (spot elevation) would....

Twiceroadsfool, that's a good example, but it doesn't take advantage of the level schedule feature I was asking about. I feel it's ok, really, for you to do as you've described in a project. But I started this thread for my concerns above. I guess you are looking for the ability to schedule element geometry?

BTW, I haven't looked yet for threads regarding the open-platform-type things (macros, etc) I described in my previous post, but it's possible that there's some info on AUGI. Maybe that pursuit can help you get what you're after, but it would probably be on another thread?

bracey.d was on the right track for our thread topic here, but I don't think there's much more to be said that wasn't said above 18 months ago. At least not right now. I guess we'll wait and see what the revit future holds.

[twiceroadsfool]

I apologize if i was misleading... Im not looking for a solution for anything in particular.

A lot of people come on here, thinking of a "tool" that they think they would like to use for a certain application. A lot of it has to do with peopel migrating from other platforms. I liken it to someone coming here and asking where the "Point/Divide" tool is in AutoCAD:

If we answer their question, "There isnt one," is the answer they get. But if we focus on helping them get to the TOOL they want, we may even suggest they build a complex Line Based Family that automatically evenly spaces reference planes between two points, as this would basically do the same thing.

But if we (as an end user base) ask what the overal intent is of their query, we may discover theyre trying to evenly space windows on a wall, and in AutoCAD they would do it with points and divides. NOW we know we can tell them to use a DIFFERENT tool: Dimensions and EQ constraints.

So in summary, i meant no offense in suggesting an alternative route. I was simply pointing out that for what (i think) youre trying to do, there is a reason the tools do not allow you the particular method youve thought of, and hence: Ive offered an alternative solution to the problem, as often does happen here at AUGI.

Good day :)

[jholmes.138425]

I see your point. Thanks for trying to help out.

[djn]

That's exactly what I mean. I can model (painfully) a 100 floor building using only one level for example, with offsets from that one level (positive or negative offsets). One needs to tag model elements with spot elevations to safely get their position in space. I'm not saying scheduling levels is not required by some. I personally don't see a point, but I'm one in hundreds of thousands of users :D

I will have to disagree, and say that being able to schedule levels would be very useful. What you mentioned is an extreme that goes against the way Revit is set up to work. You have the ability to parametrically constrain your vertical elements so they are tied to a reference elevations, making vertical changes easier. Why not give us the option to manage this data from a schedule format, instead of having to do it graphically from an elevation view. Which is what I think it comes down to, being able to manage and manipulate the data in the model easier. If you look at any Structural engineering modeling software (ETABS, RAM Steel, RISA Floor) this is how they are set up. They all control the reference floor elevations from some schedule or dialog box.

[jholmes.138425]

Yes! This is what I am talking about. djn explains it well. Cheers.

[Elisa.jansen716257]

Hello, noticed this thread is pretty old but I still have the same question as jholmes.138425 . Is there a way to report data about level heights (relative or absolute) in schedules or annotations? Has this issue been resolved in more recent versions?

In this case what I am looking for is this: we currently write a note on our plans listing the typical ceiling height for that floor. We currently have to write that in a note manually, but it would be lovely to have that reported in a tag or annotation automatically (and for a variety of other reasons we currently create levels for both top of floors and underside of ceilings, so the distance between a level and the level directly above it is what I'm looking to report automatically).

Also I will completely agree with jholmes.138425 and djm by saying that as a small residential architecture office, almost EVERYTHING in our model is directly tied to a level, so that if -for example- a client decides on a different ceiling height on one floor, or if zoning bylaws require us to reduce overall heights, etc, the adjustment to the design can be made very easily. That is the whole point of having levels (vs modeling everything as an offset to one particular level), and one of the incredible advantages (for us) of REVIT over CAD. So being able to report / schedule the relative (or absolute) heights of levels seems like a pretty basic and useful thing.

[jholmes.138425]

It has been some time since I've worried about this problem, but I am still interested if any progress has been made in addressing it. Cheers.

[dbaldacchino]

Yes, level schedules have now been available for some time and they report the elevation of each level relative to the specificed origin (not relative to the level below).

[jholmes.138425]

Success! I see that one can now create a schedule using Levels, and also one using Grids as mentioned earlier in this thread. Thanks to whomever accomplished this. Cheers!