Floor below showing on my Floor above

[DoTheBIM]

This seems like odd behaviour to me. I started with a default file with 2 levels. I modeled walls on both levels then modeled floors on both levels. Made a new level below (basement) by copy the first one down 8'. Then I modeled another floor on the that level. I changed the associated level of that floor to the first level and offset it negatvie 3'. It now shows in my first floor plan (that don't seem right). moving it to 4' below makes it disappear. Any thing less than 4' below make it reappear on my first floor. My view properties are set to 0 for both bottom and view depth. Has anyone seen this before?

[DoTheBIM]

I sent this into the factory. Their response is:


Unfortunately, this is a known issue with Revit Architecture. Floor slabs are objects that will be visibly if they are 4’ below the level that is being shown. The workaround to the problem is to use the Override graphics in view, to make the slab not visible in that view. To do this right click on the floor slab in the view where you do not want it to be visible and select Override Graphics in View -> By element and then uncheck the box for Visible and click OK.

This seems more difficult to make the software to function this way than to just have the view fuction operate universally on all objects... which then (if true) begs the question what application does or did this functionallity prove helpful? Just curious really. This is very much a hinderance to any projects we do with crawl spaces.

[kate.morrical61357]

I posted about this yesterday in Revit Structure...who on earth made floors/slabs exempt from visibility rules? Ah well...thanks for posting your solution.

[aaronrumple]

This was done very intentionally by the factory to cover the greatest number of floor plan situations without special settings. If I have a plan with a stage, raised bar area, sunken pit area - all of them are on the same level - and I want to see them all. They just have a +/- relationship.

The crawlspace example is really an exception, not the rule... And it is showing you a true view down - maybe just looking down a bit further than you want. So it isn't technically wrong. Doesn’t the first floor hide the crawl space slab anyway?

Architects have drawn for a long time with some strange convention. And we haven't done it the same across the industry. Attic spaces are a great example. A lot of residential architects show a room in an attic with the walls cut at 4'. But then they don't cut the roof around it at all. Technically wrong. But something that is traditionally done. Revit has tried hard at merging the reality of true sections with a lot of architectural tradition. Most of the time it gets it right.

Note that a plan detail follows true section looking down rules. Maybe that would give you the result you want.

[iandidesign]

Not coming from a formal architectural background I have always mused at (or been bemused by) many drawing conventions.The 2.5D plan view is a good example. Nonetheless, since Revit has a view range setting it seems illogical not use this to accomplish the ±Level view that Aaron refers to. Is a crawl space really less common (the exception) than a stage or sunken floor area (the rule)? And does it really matter? When software tries too hard to anticipate the needs of users we end up with inconsistencies like this. Provide easy to use tools and predictable interactions. Then use templates to streamline the workflow.