RST2010 - Metric Library Reference Guide

Revit Structural Suite 2010 Out of the Box Metric Library Reference Guide as installed in the UK. I originally created this document back in 2007 for version 2008 and catalogued all the typos and spelling errors in the Metric Library and sent it to Autodesk so that they could make the corrections for version 2009.

Download the Document

I’ve also used it in the past to catalogue and ask questions about UK Specific Content when released.

----
----
----



---
---
---
---
Autodesk have traditionally been very poor at documenting what exactly should be in the (metric) library. I’m hoping they are going to improve in the future (OK I’m an eternal optimist! ;0)
Recently in the service packs you get a ~Newfilelist~.ini that gives you some information about what has been added and a backup of what has been removed. However I firmly believe that each folder should have a readme,txt file that gives:-
----
----
----
Name of the folder
# Files Deleted ~ (with a full listing with some explanation of why they have been removed)# New files added ~ (complete listing)# Files Modified ~ ( with a full listing with some explination as to what has been modified and why?)# Files updated ~ (Those that are exactly as in the previous release but have just been upgraded to the current format)
Where Manufactures specific content is supplied it would be useful to have the manufacturers name and or product or trade name as part of the family file name

Hyperlinks to Manufacturers web sites would also be extremely useful. This information should be embedded with the family.
-

Guidance Note ~ Toposurfaces (Introduction)

Here are some Guidance Notes that I put together on Toposufraces for our companies Revit Users when we first got revit, I hope they help anyone who is just exploring Toposurfaces.

Click on the image or Here to download

Enjoy

PS Thank you "Anonymous" for the posing about Google and documents......

Learning Curve ~ Topo Surface III

.
Since my last posting about Topo Surfaces and looking at water and flooding, we seem to be having more lengthy discussions with the Environmental Agency these days with regards to flooding in conjunction with global warming and climate change.

The Environmental Agency provide us with maps showing the 1 in 200 year Tidal Events + 2070 Climate Change Prediction Depth Grid Maps centred on our site.

One assumes that they obtain levels from the OS Maps and or aerial photographs to build such models. Using Revit we are able to model the Existing and Proposed sites and show them more accurately the flood pattern for different levels of water.

We can also provide them with volumes of water held on the site.

The client can see to what extent his building is at risk from flooding.

Existing Site Layout 6.20m Flood Level.

Existing Site Layout 6.30m Flood Level.

Existing Site Layout 6.40m Flood Level.

Existing Site Layout 6.50m Flood Level.
Proposed Site Layout 6.5m Flood Level

Credit goes to Rikki Hartigan who created these models from AutoCAD 2D Drawings.
.

Hidden lines that hide so well you can't see them!

Here are links to AUGI threads and blog articles about hidden lines.

It would appear that although many of these issues have been raised some time ago, they have still not been properly resolved by “The Factory”.

Drawing hidden lines is a basic drawing requirement, and this should be available in the basic formation of the 3D model and not have to be added on the Plan, Section or Elevation as additional 2D lines.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



For slab opening edges (hidden lines) of holes in floors and slabs not showing up on sections and sectional elevations see http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=108409
.
.
.
.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For hidden lines on plan of doors and windows not showing up in walls and how users have developed work around and fudges to provide what is basically missing from Revit see http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=71267

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a neat posting over at the Bim and Beam blog about how to control hidden lines in Autodesk Revit Structure by setting a parameter called: Display in Hidden Views http://bimandbeam.typepad.com/bim_beam/2009/07/concrete-beam-hidden-line-display-parameters.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a posting about showing the hidden lines on plan of an anti-heave slab thickening, in the original posting the lines at 45 degrees from the corners were missing and the image was updated. Again this is a temporary fiddle and not a real fix to the problem which should be addressed by The Factory

http://bimandbeam.typepad.com/bim_beam/2008/05/slab-edge-hidde.htmlhidde.html
.
.
.
.
.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How to Create a Rebate in a Concrete Beam

.

The previously explained method of creating a rebate in an object with the use of an extrusion does not work for a concrete beam.

A pocket in a concrete beam does involve a bit of a fiddle but it works.

1. Draw the beam

2. Cut a full depth slot through the beam with a plan size the same as the plan dimensions of the pocket. (Use “Modify” – “Opening by face”).




3. Draw a new beam with the depth equal to the depth of the parent beam, less the depth of the pocket and adjust the length and width to suit the plan dimensions of the pocket



4. Make sure the top of the inserted beam is at the same level as the bottom of the pocket and insert it in the hole



5. As the materials of both the beams are the same, they will join to appear to be the same element.
.

How to create a rebate in a floor around a hole

I have found that getting the formatting of pages with multiple graphics on this blog very time consuming and frustrating. (I've now added the guidance note as three jpg's to the foot of this posting)

If you would like an Adobe pdf copy of the Guidance Note I've created for the Revit Users at work about how to form a rebate around an opening in a slab then please email me and I will happily send you a copy.

Guidance Note

Page 1









Guidance Note
Page 2

Guidance Note
Page 3

Learning Curve ~ Steel Channel Serial Size Question

.
I recently received the following question about UK serial sizes and materials not being included in Revit:-

“Hi Alan,

Just on the subject of UK serial sizes.

While I find that most steel sizes quoted to me by Engineers are the same as the serial sizes and weights in the Revit families, the C channel sizes are always slightly different - e.g. 180 x 75 x 20 channel specified by Engineer, nearest in Revit is 178 x 76.

Have you come across this - or can you suggest why this should be - my local Engineer cannot see why they should be different.”

The answer is progress and marketing.

The Channel Sections your Engineer is specifying is based on the current Dimension and Properties from the Corus brochures and is based on a Parallel Flange Channel to BS4-1:2005.

The sections you are finding under:-

\Metric Library\Structural\Framing\Steel are Channels to BS4 Part1:1980

Take a peek just below the Corus Advance folder under Steel i.e.

\Metric Library\Structural\Framing\Steel\Corus Advance

And you will find UKPFC-Parallel Flange Channels

Being an old engineer I liked the old channels especially for use in external exposed locations as the rain and water would run off the sloping bottom flange.


Parallel Flange Channels were only introduced about five or six years ago, perhaps if your Local Engineer is a young chap who only knows the PFC and not it’s predecessor.

According to the 4th Impression of the Historical Structural Section Handbook printed in 1991 there has been changes to the dimensions of the Channel Section in 1904,1921,1932 and 1962

Whenever there is a change of basic dimensions there will always be a crossover period until all the stocks of the old profile have been sold and only the new profile as available.

Due to the difference in profile the Section Properties for I and Z will be slightly different, and one should not be used instead of the other without checking with the Engineer.
.

Learning Curve ~ Topo Surface II

.

I was asked the question about Revit being able to do cut and fill calculations by one of the Partners at work. He wanted to model a car park, then establish how much it will flood and the maximum depth with a certain volume of water.

So not actually cut and fill more like fill and flood!

.

I made a small scale trial/example to see if I could get the information out of Revit. I picked a square pyramid shape because I could easily verify the answer by hand calculation.

Revit reports the values by making a comparison between a surface of one phase and, from a later phase, another surface whose boundary lies within the earlier surface.

The example above shows a square pyramid with a 5000x5000 base x 3000 high

The water level topo is set at 1500 high

Base Area /3 x height should be (2.5 x 2.5)/3 X 1.5 = 3.125m3 but Revit gives me 3.155m3

I've tried re drawing and even turning the pyramid up the other way it still gives me 3.155m3

Is it me or is Revit just not very accurate with cut and fill?

It could be a rounding error. or
Conversion from imperial to metric, or
The algorithm used to calculate the volume or
Just a Bug in Revit!

The % of the error is small, but it is a small model, but as the model gets bigger is the % error the same or worse? Who knows?

I have reported this to Autodesk and will let you know what answer I get.

For true cut and fill by time an allowance has been made for bulking etc we are talking peanuts, but it's the principle, if your going to give figures to 3 decimal places they should be correct.

Here is the car park in question, the maximum depth of water and extent of flooding has now been established. For those that notice I'm not quite at 200m3 I was told by the Partner wanting the information that I did not have to get it to the nearest mm, the nearest 10mm would do for his purposes.

As you may have seen on my first Topo posting, there is not a default view called "site" in the metric template supplied with RST2010 called Structural Analysis_DefaultGBRENU.rte

Autodesk please take note, Structural users also need a "site" view included in the metric template not just the Architectural users.

The frequency of the contours is set by

Then set the intervals of value

.

Learning Curve ~ Topo Surface

I have a site that has a storm relief sewer cutting across it at approximately 45 degrees.

The north east corner of the site is approximately 1.8m above the north-west and south east corners.

The water authority have granted building over on condition that we create a reduced loading zone over the sewer which we will provide using cordek cellcore. This seemed an ideal opportunity to jump into topo surfaces.

I linked an AutoCAD 2D drawing of the survey with the idea of tracing the spot levels and got stuck at the first hurdle. The following message popped up when I tried to place the first point

Open a 3D or site plan view? ~ “how is a site plan view different from a level view and how do I create one?”

I searched the help and could not find anything about how to create a site view and I looked in Visibility Graphics and could not find a tick box for Toposurface?I knew I must be missing something simple and it’s me but I could not see the wood for the trees

A tutorial On Revit Zone at called Topography: Creating a Basic Toposurface (Part 1 of 3)
Seems to suggest that " Your new Project File should contain default View called Site:-"

There is not a default view called "site" in the metric template supplied with RST2010 called Structural Analysis_DefaultGBRENU.rte ??????

I posted this question and a request for help on the AUGI forum, and again peer to peer support came up trumps, a user called Derek informed me.....

“Yes, you are correct. They are assuming you are in Revit Architecture. RAC templates all include a default view called site. The only different parameters for a "Site" plan view include things scale, Crop view, default view template settings...that's about it. Simple "Duplicate" your lowest level and name it site, then adjust the view settings....”

I answered Derek that I thought it was crazy why not include the "site" view in the Revit Structures Template as well as the Architecture Template!

I later found a posting on David Lights Revit web site called Site Plans in Revit Structure which explains how to create a Site Plan View

I don’t understand why a "site" view is not included in the Engineering templates but it’s sure one that may make it to our final template.

.

Learning Curve ~ Piles and Ground Beams

After what feels like and is months of waiting, I finally have access to Revit 2010!

The company I work for have finally installed Revit 2010 on the network and booked formal training…… “yippee”

As soon as I discovered about the new ribbon and the change in user interface, I lost interest in playing with the trial version of Revit 2009 at home and wanted to wait until I could get my hands on 2010.

I knew I would be able to use a fully working copy. You can’t save your work with the trial version after 30 days, you can you can only go so far with learning on a trial version that can’t save what you have created.

After being set up with right to the subscription centre I harvested all the software and supporting material so our IT guy could install on the network as we have purchased four licences.

Not naming names but, the reseller who supplied our company sent 2009 boxes and we are still awaiting a boxed set of software for RST2010. In the mean time I have spoken to one of the older more established UK resellers that I’ve dealt with in the past who have very kindly sent me a trial box and software. You may have seen my posting about the getting started manual not being supplied in the box.

So the first thing I did was download the RST 2010 Tutorials (metric version) off the Autodesk web site

My objective is to play with Revit in advance of the course so that I can make sure I get answers to questions that have cropped up during my pre course play time and thus get the maximum out of the training.

In a discussion "Making the transition to REVIT" on the 2D and or 3D Top CAD Experts Group on Linked-In it’s been muted that Autodesk suggests the best way forward is

1. Self exploration in the program
2. Class room training
3. Establish standards/templates
4. Pilot Job (w/consultant if needed)
5. Refine standards/templates

Which I was very happy to see as this was the logical conclusion I had come too and is my approach to making the transition to Revit.

Looking at step 1. ~ It still begs the question “Why take the getting started manual out of the trial pack” ….. back to the plot…

I started working my way through the tutorials, but was itching to start modelling something real. I’m currently working on a few housing schemes and one is so none rectilinear that it begs attempting in Revit 2010. (there’s nothing like jumping in at the deep end)



I loaded the AutoCAD drawing and traced the layout, and made the piles short at the moment as normally in AutoCAD you would only show the tops and have a break (Ummm can this be done in Revit? note to self, must ask when on the training course)

I placed grid line along the centre of all the beams and turned off the bubbles both ends on those that I only wanted centre lines shown on.

For some reason there were occasions where intersections of grid line not at right angles to one another were not found when placing the columns (piles) (Check this when on the training course)
What I did not appreciate at the beginning was that the grid lines would not show because the elevation was not perpendicular to the grid lines, and I drew this layout a couple of times trying to find out what I was doing wrong, until my query was answered on AUGI forum (what a great resource for peer to peer support).

Next Learning Curve posting will deal with the problems I found with the shape of the beams on plan and walls and floors …..

.