Floor points

[tkrich00]

We are using the floor family in 2008 with points to create a sloping parking garage floor. Of course it is not a continuous floor for 5 levels but broken at each floor since a floor cannot not overlap itself.
The issue we are having is we created a floor once and the upper floors are identically so we copied up the floor slab. When doing this and changing the over all floor constraint from level 1 to level 5 the points on the slab always are in reference to the level constraint ie level 5 is really 50' feet but the point will say 5' not 55'. But when you take a spot elevation it is the correct elevation 55'.
The issue is; we are having to do a lot of math when to get accurate points when they change and normally LP and HP of a roof or floor of a slab reference the over all height not just the height from that level. If anyone has a good explanation for this I would to know what it is.

[Calvn_Swing]

The purpose of the points referencing the associated level not the overall height is to make things like modeling them easier, and copying them possible. If the elevations of the points were linked to overall height not the reference level, you could copy them all day long and they'd stay in the same place.

At issue here is the standard way of documenting them (overall height) is at odds with ease of modeling (from reference level). Not to mention that everything else in Revit is based off the reference level, not the overall height, so it is a matter of modeling and program consistency as well. Long story short, it still documents correctly (55' on the spot elevation) so I'm confused why you're complaining? This should involve less math, not more - unless you've already drawn it in CAD and are trying to convert it. (In which case, you should have used Revit from the beginning!)

[tkrich00]

I fully understand your position, and agree the points should be tied to the floor and the level constraint, but maybe the points should have an additional parameter that shows or provides and option for the overall height too. I was only inquiring why a new tool for creating heights for sloped floors that is normally document by overall height was not provided in the edit mode. I still find it odd that in the floor parameters have no listing of the overall height; only reference to the level.

FYI - Almost all of our projects are in Revit - this one happened to be done years ago in Autocad and is now under construction and we needed to check the points of the floor slab of the parking garage to confirm the floor slopes and clearances. Which in this case requires someone to do the math.

[Calvn_Swing]

Ahh, in that case it makes sense after all - the conversion from CAD to Revit. It was the only reason I could think of that I'd want to see the numbers in relation to the project elevation.

I admit, it would be nice to be able to toggle between the two - it isn't like the calculation is difficult for Revit after all. That's kind of the whole point for something like Revit - the information is there, so why not use it? You should drop this in as a suggestion on the wishlist forum.

While I don't think it is nearly as critical as some other things that need to be added to the program, it's still a pretty neat idea, and might not be that hard to program in. Give it a go, you never know but it might get in to the next release.

[PinkPantser]

If you have a spot elevation that says 55', or whatever it happens to be, can't you just select the object that you want to change the height of and modify the number in the spot elevation?