AutoCAD MEP

[#1]

In the course of modelling a mechanical room for a large college campus,
I've run into the problem that I need larger pipe diameters than are
available standard. I assumed this was a simply as adding a size to a
parametric part, which is documented in both the concept guide and then help
documentation.

I went ahead and in the content builder, selected "Schedule 40 Flanged Pipe
US Imperial" from Pipe and Fittings US Imperial->Schedule 40->Flanged->Pipes
and then chose "add part size" This opens the parametric part environment.
At this point I click on "Size Parameters" and select "Edit Values". This
brings me to the "Edit Part Sizes" window. I scroll to the bottom and add a
new row. Since calculations determine all fields except for the diameter
and nominal diameter, I only fill these out. I select "Schedule_40" for my
gauge and "Carbon Steel" for my material. Calculations generate the
remaining fields. I then select
"OK". I then run validation tests that return no errors. I save the part
family and then try and use my new pipe. I am able to select the new pipe
size in the "Add Pipe" dialog, but when I try and place the part I get the
following message:

No pipe with selected gauge and connection type exists in the current
catalog

You must change either the gauge or connection type, or switch to a catalog
that contains this combination before you can add pipe.

I thought that I might have to regenerate the catalog to create the new
parametric part size, so I did that and it did not help. I'm not sure where
to go from here....I really need to be able to add new pipe sizes, and I am
aware that this requires creating new elbows and tees, but I figured I make
sure that I could make a pipe first.

On a related note, I later looked into creating an elbow of the same
diameter. I noticed that a number of the parameters are not calculated, but
entered. These are figures like raduis of curvature. If this is a standard
raduis part, then calculations would define these numbers, but there are no
calculations in these fields. Leaving me to go and determine the radius of
curvature for a standard elbow at a 36" diameter for all angles from 1 to
90. That should be fun. Autodesk you have effectively restrained me, and
realistically everyone else from creating new pipe diamters, because
calculating these values and then entering them in would prove way to time
consuming to be cost effective.

That being said I'd love to be told that I'm completely wrong and the
process is painfully simple, cause that would be the logical way to develop
a program, allowing for the customization the the most commonly used parts,
so that a MEP consultant can ACTUALLY USE IT. Sorry for the vent there but
this experience has seriously degraded my view of this program, which I
pitched to my boss and he subsequently bought.

And one last thing...roughly 4k for the initial purchase and $900/year for a
forced subscription cannot provide a place on your website for the uploading
of parts that were created by the users of your program, for the use in the
program, even after people have specifically asked for such space? I wonder
where it all goes, cause my guess is that you already have the
infrastructure, and it simply requires making available maybe 15-20 gigs
initially for part uploading. I guess the management doesn't read their
customer feedback.

I feel that a large weight has been lifted off my chest.

Kyle Bernhardt
Mechanical Engineer
Dagher Engineering
29 Broadway
New York, NY 10006

[#2]

Hi Kyle -

You can add pipe sizes, but not in the method that you have tried. Pipes are
not simply parametric parts. They are segments, and as such require some
special considerations. Content builder was not created to edit segments,
but was created to edit parts and fittings. To add to the list of availible
segment sizes you will need to use catalog editor, rather than content
builder.

You will need to make two edits in catalog editor to create a new pipe size.
Launch catalog editor, and open the Pipe US Imperial.apc file. Navigate to
Schedule 40 -> Flanged -> Connectors. Now I don't have a pipe table in front
of me to tell me what these values are going to be, so I'm going to "guess"
some of the values.

I need to add a new row at the bottom of the Basic Table, with a ND1 of
36.0, a D1 of 40.0, D2 of 40.0, CL1 of 2.0, and CLE of 1.6.

Now I need to expand the pipes item, the expand Schedule 40 Flange Pipe,
expand Basic Table. Add a new row to the bottom of the table with and ND1 of
36.0 and a D1 of 36.0. Now we need to save the catalog and do a catalog
regen. Now pipeadd will recognize the new pipesize.

It doesn't matter what pipe size you try to add, if there isn't a connector
in a specific size allowed for that gauge and material, it won't be a valid
pipe size.

The fact that the parameters for the fittings are not calculated, but are
based on tables is because if you take a look at these parts in the real
world, these values are not calculated, but based on tables. It would have
been much easier for us to base the pipe fitting sizes on equations as well,
but they aren't manufactured that way. You are welcome to use equations for
these fields, but we felt that it was better to do more work and get you a
pipe catalog that meets manufacturer standards than to provide you with
something that was completely wrong just because it was easy.

The pipe catalogs are hard to customize. Even harder than the HVAC catalog.
That is because pipes and pipe fittings are manufactured differently that
duct and duct fittings.

Actually if you make the pipes, the fittings can be "approximated" based on
the existing sizes in the catalogs, so if you want approximations, you don't
have to even create most of the other fittings.

We are working on a place for user to put parts, but we don't want everyone
to have to be an expert in catalog editor and content builder, and to know
that then need to put parts in a specific place in the catalogs and run
catalog test and catalog regen to get to the parts, so we are looking for a
solution that is better than a newsgroup to post files. Until the site is up
that will allow this you are welcome to post parts to the cf newsgroup as
some people have already done.

hth

jason

"Kyle Bernhardt" wrote in message
news:A31EBDC0A09930860B145EDEDEB879F5@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> In the course of modelling a mechanical room for a large college campus,
> I've run into the problem that I need larger pipe diameters than are
> available standard. I assumed this was a simply as adding a size to a
> parametric part, which is documented in both the concept guide and then
help
> documentation.
>
> I went ahead and in the content builder, selected "Schedule 40 Flanged
Pipe
> US Imperial" from Pipe and Fittings US Imperial->Schedule
40->Flanged->Pipes
> and then chose "add part size" This opens the parametric part
environment.
> At this point I click on "Size Parameters" and select "Edit Values". This
> brings me to the "Edit Part Sizes" window. I scroll to the bottom and add
a
> new row. Since calculations determine all fields except for the diameter
> and nominal diameter, I only fill these out. I select "Schedule_40" for
my
> gauge and "Carbon Steel" for my material. Calculations generate the
> remaining fields. I then select
> "OK". I then run validation tests that return no errors. I save the part
> family and then try and use my new pipe. I am able to select the new pipe
> size in the "Add Pipe" dialog, but when I try and place the part I get the
> following message:
>
> No pipe with selected gauge and connection type exists in the current
> catalog
>
> You must change either the gauge or connection type, or switch to a
catalog
> that contains this combination before you can add pipe.
>
> I thought that I might have to regenerate the catalog to create the new
> parametric part size, so I did that and it did not help. I'm not sure
where
> to go from here....I really need to be able to add new pipe sizes, and I
am
> aware that this requires creating new elbows and tees, but I figured I
make
> sure that I could make a pipe first.
>
> On a related note, I later looked into creating an elbow of the same
> diameter. I noticed that a number of the parameters are not calculated,
but
> entered. These are figures like raduis of curvature. If this is a
standard
> raduis part, then calculations would define these numbers, but there are
no
> calculations in these fields. Leaving me to go and determine the radius
of
> curvature for a standard elbow at a 36" diameter for all angles from 1 to
> 90. That should be fun. Autodesk you have effectively restrained me, and
> realistically everyone else from creating new pipe diamters, because
> calculating these values and then entering them in would prove way to time
> consuming to be cost effective.
>
> That being said I'd love to be told that I'm completely wrong and the
> process is painfully simple, cause that would be the logical way to
develop
> a program, allowing for the customization the the most commonly used
parts,
> so that a MEP consultant can ACTUALLY USE IT. Sorry for the vent there
but
> this experience has seriously degraded my view of this program, which I
> pitched to my boss and he subsequently bought.
>
> And one last thing...roughly 4k for the initial purchase and $900/year for
a
> forced subscription cannot provide a place on your website for the
uploading
> of parts that were created by the users of your program, for the use in
the
> program, even after people have specifically asked for such space? I
wonder
> where it all goes, cause my guess is that you already have the
> infrastructure, and it simply requires making available maybe 15-20 gigs
> initially for part uploading. I guess the management doesn't read their
> customer feedback.
>
> I feel that a large weight has been lifted off my chest.
>
> Kyle Bernhardt
> Mechanical Engineer
> Dagher Engineering
> 29 Broadway
> New York, NY 10006
>
>

[#3]

Jason,
Ahhh....that certainly makes sense, although I don't remember reading that
in help documentation. I'd say you might want to add that to the help file
to be included in the first SP. Question on your instructions though...I
have figured out that the "CL1" parameter is the thickness of the flange,
but I haven't been able to determine what the "CLE" variable means. I'd
like to be able to do this again on another pipe size, but I need to have a
understanding of what I'm defining so I can do this again.

As for the upload space, I was thinking that an intermediate spot would be
adding another newsgroup in the ABS listsings, like this one and abs.wishes,
rather than the AutoCAD one. I know this isn't the best for people less
proficient in ABS, but I think that this would be used a lot more due to
it's location, and foster a more "open source" environment for the program,
which I think is only good for the program.

Kyle Bernhardt
Mechanical Engineer
Dagher Engineering
29 Broadway
New York, NY 10006

[#4]

Jason,
My newly created pipe does not have a normal looking flange. The flange
does not look like a disk, but rather a slice of a pyramid. This occurs
only on the 36" pipe, I created 28" and 32" pipe successfully. My connector
is defined exactly how you said, and the Pipe Basic Table is defined as 36.0
for both "ND1" and "D1". This follows the convention of other pipe sizes.
I also am experiencing the same issues with a 42" diameter pipe as I was in
my first post. I have defined the connectors and the pipe type in the
catalog editor and regenerated the catalog. This size was created at the
same time as the other working sizes, so I puzzled. My connector settings
are ND1=42.0, D1=D2=50.0, CL1=2.5, CLE=2.0, and the pipe is defined in the
basic table with ND1=D1=42.0. Let me know where I've gone wrong,

--
Kyle Bernhardt
Mechanical Engineer
Dagher Engineering
29 Broadway
New York, NY 10006

[#5]

Hi Kyle -

Not sure why your pipe isn't working correctly. I've attached some images of
the 36" I created with the settings that I gave you.

The CLE param is Cut Length Extension... This has something to do with the
distance that the segment is cut back to allow for the "flange" to be placed
at the end of the pipe. I'm not in the office for the rest of this week, but
when I get back in I'll try to get with out expert on this and figure out
exactly what the CLE is used for.

Would you mind posting your connector and pipe xml files (or you can just
email them to me directly). I'll see if I can figure out why your flanges
are busted.

jason

"Kyle Bernhardt" wrote in message
news:C266DFC2D1507CDA3BB3CDB33B3621DB@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Jason,
> My newly created pipe does not have a normal looking flange. The flange
> does not look like a disk, but rather a slice of a pyramid. This occurs
> only on the 36" pipe, I created 28" and 32" pipe successfully. My
connector
> is defined exactly how you said, and the Pipe Basic Table is defined as
36.0
> for both "ND1" and "D1". This follows the convention of other pipe sizes.
> I also am experiencing the same issues with a 42" diameter pipe as I was
in
> my first post. I have defined the connectors and the pipe type in the
> catalog editor and regenerated the catalog. This size was created at the
> same time as the other working sizes, so I puzzled. My connector settings
> are ND1=42.0, D1=D2=50.0, CL1=2.5, CLE=2.0, and the pipe is defined in the
> basic table with ND1=D1=42.0. Let me know where I've gone wrong,
>
> --
> Kyle Bernhardt
> Mechanical Engineer
> Dagher Engineering
> 29 Broadway
> New York, NY 10006
>
>

[#6]

Ooopsss, no images... Try again

[#7]

Jason -

The Cut Length Extension is exactly that. It is the length of pipe that
would go into a slip-on flange, for example. It was done to more accurate
model the actual lengths of pipe for scheduling purposes. It wouldn't be
that far of a stretch to add additional lengths for pullback and
gasketing...

I hope this helps!

"jason martin [Autodesk]" wrote in message
news:3979518476F04751656AA68A7A23F27D@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Hi Kyle -
>
> Not sure why your pipe isn't working correctly. I've attached some images
of
> the 36" I created with the settings that I gave you.
>
> The CLE param is Cut Length Extension... This has something to do with the
> distance that the segment is cut back to allow for the "flange" to be
placed
> at the end of the pipe. I'm not in the office for the rest of this week,
but
> when I get back in I'll try to get with out expert on this and figure out
> exactly what the CLE is used for.
>
> Would you mind posting your connector and pipe xml files (or you can just
> email them to me directly). I'll see if I can figure out why your flanges
> are busted.
>
> jason
>
> "Kyle Bernhardt" wrote in message
> news:C266DFC2D1507CDA3BB3CDB33B3621DB@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Jason,
> > My newly created pipe does not have a normal looking flange. The flange
> > does not look like a disk, but rather a slice of a pyramid. This occurs
> > only on the 36" pipe, I created 28" and 32" pipe successfully. My
> connector
> > is defined exactly how you said, and the Pipe Basic Table is defined as
> 36.0
> > for both "ND1" and "D1". This follows the convention of other pipe
sizes.
> > I also am experiencing the same issues with a 42" diameter pipe as I was
> in
> > my first post. I have defined the connectors and the pipe type in the
> > catalog editor and regenerated the catalog. This size was created at
the
> > same time as the other working sizes, so I puzzled. My connector
settings
> > are ND1=42.0, D1=D2=50.0, CL1=2.5, CLE=2.0, and the pipe is defined in
the
> > basic table with ND1=D1=42.0. Let me know where I've gone wrong,
> >
> > --
> > Kyle Bernhardt
> > Mechanical Engineer
> > Dagher Engineering
> > 29 Broadway
> > New York, NY 10006
> >
> >
>
>

[#8]

Jason,
I fixed the problem myself. It was my fault cause I originally defined the
pipe wrong, and did not purge the objects from the drawing and then
regenerate. Doing this solved the problem and I now have 42" pipe and
correct looking 36" pipe.

--
Kyle Bernhardt
Mechanical Engineer
Dagher Engineering
29 Broadway

[#9]

See, that's why you DON'T want an electrical guy answering questions on
flanges. Thanks for the follow up Pete!!

Kyle -

Glad you got the flanges working correctly.
"Peter Terwilliger [Autodesk]" wrote in
message news:53ADE3E2EF9D48F66100134BED5C2888@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Jason -
>
> The Cut Length Extension is exactly that. It is the length of pipe that
> would go into a slip-on flange, for example. It was done to more accurate
> model the actual lengths of pipe for scheduling purposes. It wouldn't be
> that far of a stretch to add additional lengths for pullback and
> gasketing...
>
> I hope this helps!
>
> "jason martin [Autodesk]" wrote in message
> news:3979518476F04751656AA68A7A23F27D@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Hi Kyle -
> >
> > Not sure why your pipe isn't working correctly. I've attached some
images
> of
> > the 36" I created with the settings that I gave you.
> >
> > The CLE param is Cut Length Extension... This has something to do with
the
> > distance that the segment is cut back to allow for the "flange" to be
> placed
> > at the end of the pipe. I'm not in the office for the rest of this week,
> but
> > when I get back in I'll try to get with out expert on this and figure
out
> > exactly what the CLE is used for.
> >
> > Would you mind posting your connector and pipe xml files (or you can
just
> > email them to me directly). I'll see if I can figure out why your
flanges
> > are busted.
> >
> > jason
> >
> > "Kyle Bernhardt" wrote in message
> > news:C266DFC2D1507CDA3BB3CDB33B3621DB@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > Jason,
> > > My newly created pipe does not have a normal looking flange. The
flange
> > > does not look like a disk, but rather a slice of a pyramid. This
occurs
> > > only on the 36" pipe, I created 28" and 32" pipe successfully. My
> > connector
> > > is defined exactly how you said, and the Pipe Basic Table is defined
as
> > 36.0
> > > for both "ND1" and "D1". This follows the convention of other pipe
> sizes.
> > > I also am experiencing the same issues with a 42" diameter pipe as I
was
> > in
> > > my first post. I have defined the connectors and the pipe type in the
> > > catalog editor and regenerated the catalog. This size was created at
> the
> > > same time as the other working sizes, so I puzzled. My connector
> settings
> > > are ND1=42.0, D1=D2=50.0, CL1=2.5, CLE=2.0, and the pipe is defined in
> the
> > > basic table with ND1=D1=42.0. Let me know where I've gone wrong,
> > >
> > > --
> > > Kyle Bernhardt
> > > Mechanical Engineer
> > > Dagher Engineering
> > > 29 Broadway
> > > New York, NY 10006
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>