Conduit Types

[CoreyDaun]

The current Conduit Type names are: "Conduit with Fittings"  and  "Conduit without Fittings"

Often (from what I've seen), a user will see these Types and think "Of course I want my conduit to insert fittings as I draw it", so logically he will choose to use Conduit with Fittings.

This user is wrong. The former intends that the Conduit will have fittings once it's actually installed while the latter intends that the conduit will be construction of continuous segments of conduit. These terms have caused some confusion amongst many users. Since the term "Fittings" in Revit is more associated with the Family Type (i.e. Duct Fittings, Conduit Fittings), one would think that is what these Type names are referring to, which is the root of the confusion. The same applies to Cable Trays.

Does anyone else think that it would be a good idea to get these renamed to something like:

            "Conduit with Fittings"  and  "Conduit with Bends" ?

                                                       -or-

"Conduit as Segmented Run"  and  "Conduit as Continuous Run" ?

[julianjameson8403]

That is an intersting explanation although I am not quite sure how that will work. A couple of thoughts:-

• Real world - aside from flexible conduits, most conduits come in fixed lengths so will need fittings to connect. The type of fittings vary but they will still need jointing, even if you pull the long radius bends using a pipe bender etc. Cable tray can be installed without "official" fittings but would wtill need some form fitting to allow the cable to transition direction whilst supported fully and maintaining their bending radii.
• Revit world - as with any other system families, you need fittings to change direction unless you have independent, unconnected objects. The same with cable tray to some degree I feel.

I'm interested to hear more on your thoughts though as perhaps I'm missing something.

By conduit I am thinking of 20mm/25mm tubes as opposed to rectangular trunking.

[CoreyDaun]

I was thinking of it in terms of how Revit must interpret it. Yes, in the real-world, conduit is not installed in a 210' single-piece run. Revit, however, must see this distance as continuous for the purposes of determining the total length for materials. So, in terms of Revit, yes it is a 210' single-piece conduit run. Hence, the Conduit Run Schedule totals conduit "sticks" and bends together.

This Type ("Conduit without Fittings") does not literally mean that the segments are magically fused together or anything. It just means that it is accounting for the conduit being bent in lieu of installation of an actual fitting for the purposes of determining total length. One can determine that this many 10' conduit sections are needed for a given run, and can account for that many joints as well.

[CoreyDaun]

As a simpler solution to the above, an additional Part Type, "Bend", could be available in the pull-down list under Family Category and Parameters for Conduit Fittings. Such fittings defined as Bends would be treated as a part of a Conduit Run and would be included in the length calculations, exactly as the "Conduit without Fittings" interprets it. This would eliminate the need for the two different and confusing Types of Conduit.

[julianjameson8403]

Upon reflection of your previous post , I was thinking along the lines of something like that. However in the mean time I guess an interim solution would be to have a sheet with schedules for conduit and "conduit fitting - formed bend" with some form of conduit run numbering system so a QS could price. The bend would have a reporting parameter which ideally reported back the overall length of the formed bend so that the QS could add up the straight lengths and the formed bends.

Sounds easy in theory but I bet Revit will torpedo any plans of creating something along those lines!!

[smbrennan]

I like your thinking. I know this is 1.5 year later, but I agree, as a relatively new user to Revit, it is confusing. I'm happy I've found some posts and blogs from other people to help explain it.

In my honest opinion, I would like to see an complete overhaul of how conduit operates. How about we throw some wires in there, and let there be some defaults based on loads and distances? Automatic end-to-end connection reads to equipment names. As for physical features of the conduit, it was hit dead on earlier that we don't operate with 210' of conduit in a single piece ... 10' is a typical, and bends are guaranteed to be on one "stick." Fittings should be called couplings, and should help carry overall length through the run. Oh, and let us tag the conduit with a wire tick annotation that actually reads the circuits inside of that conduit.

I can go on about this all day. If you're interested in knowing more, I'd be happy to go in more depth.

[tim.west]

A bit late to the party though I have 2 scents to add.

I design continuous stainless conduit. We have no 'fittings' as such, though I use fittings for Elbows in Revit.

We are charged on a schedule rate per lineal metre of tube and per bend, and schedules reflect this correctly.

Should I be using "with" or "without" fittings conduit?

What is the difference in how Revit handles these?