Forums
|
Forums >> Revit Building >> Technical Support >> Displaying different floor types
|
|
|
active
Joined: Sun, Nov 6, 2005
41 Posts
No Rating |
Hi,
I want to do a slab layout plan and have different materials in different parts of the house, ie: tiles, timber, carpet etc... which are drawn over the slab as floor types themselves.
How do I turn them off so that they do not display in the slab layout plan, that is so that only the slab is visible. Or is there a different and better way to do what i am trying to do?
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
 | |
|
|
site moderator|||
Joined: Mon, Mar 14, 2005
777 Posts
 |
yes,
go to your visibility/graphic (VV for short) and under floors turn off surface pattern.
-----------------------------------
Integrator Architectural Engineering Construction KarelCAD |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Sun, Nov 6, 2005
41 Posts
No Rating |
This does not work... although the surface pattern is turned off, the linework around the edges of the different floor surfaces is still visible - this confuses where the actual slab eges are, whereas I only want the edges of the slab to show.
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
site moderator|||
Joined: Mon, Mar 14, 2005
777 Posts
|
OK, because they are all floors you can't really hide category. you can do 2 things (unless someone comes up with another way)
1- use the line work tool and click on all your finish slab edges, can be a pain if you have a few of them and different views...
2- use worksets, move all your floor finish to it's own workset and turn it off.
think of worksets as another sets of filters 
HTH
-----------------------------------
Integrator Architectural Engineering Construction KarelCAD |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Tue, Oct 5, 2004
42 Posts
 |
I typically use the "split face" tool on a single slab to etch the boundaries of my floor patterns. Then I use the "Paint (bucket)" tool to paint the patterns into the boundaries. When you use this tool, keep the paint bucket near the edge of the boundaries, TAB if necessary to make sure you dump the pattern in the right boundary.
The material paints the pattern as 2D linework, but it also contains the shade color and rendering materials for presentation views. You can use this same tool for applying patterns to wall faces. We use in early concept elevation studies as we review the use of trim boards, coyning, and vertical designation of materials on elevations.
As previously mentioned, we use the linework tool to make face region boundaries invisible with invisible linework. I would prefer a category as these are model lines - system family....The upside is we can leave the whole floor slab in tact as one object...especially on large commercial projects.
I posted DWF / PDF files on my blog in November that you can download and review how this command is used. We use the same techniques on commercial projects.
"Residential Design: Revit 2D Sketch Tools Define 3D Curb Appeal for Homeowners"
http://taylor-tech.com/blogs/getEntryById/52/entry.html
Happy Trails...
Post edited on 2006-01-31 10:29:39
-----------------------------------
LinkedIn Profile:
- http://www.linkedin.com/in/danielhughes1/
I author Bradley BIM Blog: http://bradleybim.com |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Sun, Apr 25, 2004
1207 Posts
|
I would not recommend the "painting" method as described in the previous post. Revit is a database of your building and your original method of modelling the floors as seperate entities is the correct approach. Doing the floors as seperate structures will give you what yu need to estimate and better manipulate the data included in your building model.
eldados' post gives you the correct options for controlling the slab visabilty you desire.
-----------------------------------
Tom www.reviteer.com http://twitter.com/Reviteer |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Tue, Oct 5, 2004
42 Posts
|
I understand the counter points that are being made. What follows is an explanation of our methodology and is not meant to be disrespectful to the advice shared by tomdinmn based on his experience and methodology. The relational database methodology on this question is not a “one way or no way” situation or a “correct or incorrect” procedure.
As the Forums are designed to share ideas we’ve successfully used with other members, I will provide a condensed explanation to our methodology. Over the last 5 years we’ve documented and updated these procedures for Revit for most of our national client projects. The procedures are applied and evaluated monthly for a national client base which is commercial, residential, design-build and design-bid-build. To date, our Revit clients have completed several hundred million dollars of design projects. Since we’re directly involved with Revit implementation, we’ve personally used them on our client projects.
Our Revit Best Practices Playbook has defined several reasons a user might consider breaking up a floor slab into smaller slabs. These are some of the more significant ones.
We create separate floor slabs for
1. Different structural floor slab systems that are designed on the same floor. This focuses on the floor slab’s sizing and material description of the “core” component. (i.e. 12” truss vs. 18” truss, 2x10 vs. 2x12 joists)
2. Recessed or pitched areas of the floor.
3. Structural engineers that feel they need to analyze point loads on floor areas that will carry different loads based on use of building (library vs. laboratory)
4. Construction phasing of the floor slabs for large floor plans.
5. The designer (architectural or structural) to needs to use Design Options for floor slab design.
6. The Structural engineer and MEP engineer to review ceiling height defined by B.O. Structure that may be needed for mechanical rooms, penthouses, and ceiling plenums between the floor slabs above.
When Revit 7 was released we revised our Best Practices for slabs realizing that structural would have a potential critical role to define the separation of floor slabs.
Relational databases pull data from various tables into a form view. In the case of Revit, I can pull estimating data from room tag or area tags to post accurate estimates of floor surface into my schedule view. I don’t need to pull surface material calculations from just the floor slab. I have creative options.
Based on the brief description that UNICORN provided us and reviewing against our field tested methodology, dividing the floor slab into pieces to accommodate a “hatching exercise” would not meet our significant criteria. I stand by the original suggestion of the “split face” solution.
UNICORN, you appear to have two proven methods that have been field tested. The ball is in your court.
Here are some additional blog posts that you may reference for additional insight to our proven methodology that guides our iRevit mplementations.
The Revit API: It's back to the drawing board for architects & engineers
http://taylor-tech.com/blogs/getEntryById/58/entry.html
Residential Designers-Builders Sell Their Projects Using Revit Design Options and Whole House Modeling
http://taylor-tech.com/blogs/getEntryById/50/entry.html
Construction Processes Drive ROI and Fee Schedules for Using 3D Design Tools
http://taylor-tech.com/blogs/getEntryById/41/entry.html
Cheers!
-----------------------------------
LinkedIn Profile:
- http://www.linkedin.com/in/danielhughes1/
I author Bradley BIM Blog: http://bradleybim.com |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
site moderator|||
Joined: Mon, Mar 14, 2005
777 Posts
|
jobcaptain,
not being disrespectful here, but it seems to me you guys are complicating things way too much.
the trick to Revit is that you model the way you build. sure you can have many ways to do things but the simplest way to keep everything in your model look as it should be is to model the way you build.
not doing it will only complicate things later on.
if you have 2 floor types, than this is what you build, so when you cut a section through, you will have a true representation of your building elements.
Sure, you'll have area where you need to be a bit "creative" in order to achive the same outcome without too much work, but I will limit these to as little as possibel.
Now, I'm not saying that you have to go and model everything in your building, you need to find the balance between 3D and 2D.
But a floor is a floor is a floor...
-----------------------------------
Integrator Architectural Engineering Construction KarelCAD |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Sun, Apr 25, 2004
1207 Posts
|
What this discussion proves is that there are differing opinions on what constitutes a BIM model. I should have qualified my previous statement that it was "my" opinion the original poster was using the correct methodology. This is based on my real world experience of 3 years in Revit, 3 years at AU, coupled with my relational database background and working with getting the BIM data into Timberline for a complete estimate. I have a different agenda than just making things look right on paper, but for some people who do not care about the downstream integration with estimating packages via IFC 2x2 the painting method may work just fine for them.
I do agree with eldados that the Revit mantra of model it like you build it works the best.
Tom
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Sun, Nov 6, 2005
41 Posts
No Rating |
Thanks for replies folks... am reading through all of them and the attachments.
I haven't reached the complexity of understanding of revit, and confess i am only ameteur at this stage.... so as an ameteur, and in life generally, I assume I only have limited intelligence and therefore look for the simplest, most obvious solutions. I also have a building background, and when i was told that one should 'build' models in Revit very much like one would build in real life, I took this literally because I could relate it to building, and i like that aspect of Revit.
So when it came to building the floors, I did very much this, just build the model very much like the way I would build it in real life... concrete floor slab, then timber floor layer etc... I didn't think much further ahead about the documentation stages later and problems of how things would get displayed.
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
| |
|
|
active
Joined: Tue, Oct 5, 2004
42 Posts
|
Actually we’re probably promoting the same cause; you can see it in the passion to help others with things that worked for us. You will also see that I have and will continue to reference the advice from people in this discussion to others…they’re very good resources. Five years ago it was tough to find anyone that could conduct this level of discussion.
http://www.revitcity.com/forums.php?action=viewthread&thread_id=2977
Our methodology focuses on the process of how a building is designed and constructed. It places a strong emphasis on preserving the integrity of structure. The first Revit classes that we attended, were taught by the original Revit A/E project implementation managers from Revit. They emphasized one point; preserve the integrity of objects that are involved in the building’s Structure; basically the CORE of Walls, Floors, and Roofs. Model the building as if you were designing the structure.
Three months later the Revit Implementation Manager for worldwide implementation (V. 2, 3, 4) shared his documentation from his playbook for the beginnings of our Revit Playbook. So I’m pretty sure we’re doctrinally correct with the early intent of Revit and what we now term, BIM.
I understand the points on downstream use of the building model, IFC, IAI, etc. Over the last year I have posted blogs, published whitepapers and given educational presentations to thousands across the Midwest for state AIA, CSI, & ALA chapters identifying that “deliverables, business models, fee structures and design services are and will change around the quality content of BIM-data-based projects.” If we want to expand our radar on BIM, spend some time on this site. BIM is going much farther than IFC viewers.
http://www.internet2.edu/initiatives/
It appears that with the current Revit toolset I have to prioritize and choose a methodology that
Prioritizes around upstream analysis (LEED, sustainable design, data schedules, space analysis, structural, site design, construction simulation & phasing) and readily available structural analysis tools (Revit Structure) for designing structure.
Or choose one that includes breaking up my floor slabs to accommodate a change of material on the surface of the floor slab.
I can’t seem to have my cake and eat too...yet.
I do quite a bit of work with Chicago design firms. The Chicago Tribune posted an article two weeks ago specifically naming Revit and outlining design-construction processes that are drastically changing both processes. The efficiencies they describe are definitely realized by design firms choosing “a” methodology that will accomplish what they’re doing on these fast-paced projects. Pre-planning is critical.
I posted it “Building Chicago with Revit Building”
http://taylor-tech.com/blogs/getEntryById/66/entry.html
I'm signing off on this one, clients await.
Thanks all...wish you all the best in your efforts…the adventure is going to get bigger.
-----------------------------------
LinkedIn Profile:
- http://www.linkedin.com/in/danielhughes1/
I author Bradley BIM Blog: http://bradleybim.com |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
Similar Threads |
|
Plumbing fixtures not displaying |
Community >> The Studio
|
Mon, Feb 6, 2006 at 1:12:33 AM
|
4
|
|
floor types won't seperate |
Revit Building >> Technical Support
|
Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 12:31:32 PM
|
5
|
|
Floor plan types |
Revit Building >> Technical Support
|
Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:51:17 AM
|
5
|
|
Displaying Recessed lights in ceiling |
Revit Building >> Technical Support
|
Thu, May 28, 2009 at 1:38:17 AM
|
2
|
|
How and where do you find floor types |
Revit Building >> Technical Support
|
Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 10:23:27 PM
|
1
|
|
|
Site Stats
Members: | 2056445 | Objects: | 23069 | Forum Posts: | 152325 | Job Listings: | 3 |
|
Search