Revolve Void

[Anonymous]

In making this eccentric duct adapter, I had to cheat and add 1/32" to the center portions void diameter as shown in the image. For some reason it will not stay joined when I use the actual inner diameter value. Any ideas how to achieve the shape without fudging?

[Anonymous]

Just a thought - why are you worrying about making the fittings hollow as no other duct or fitting in Revit is hollow? By making it hollow, you are just adding more objects in the elements for Revit to calculate.

I think you have over-complicated the voids. Just make a single one on the transformation section. Set the base on the left reference plane and the top on the right reference plane. Map the calculated radii parameters to the circle radii parameters and use the center marks to align the circle. Also you may want to add a reference plane/line for the smaller offset duct connection and constrain your geometries to the ref planes.

[Anonymous]

I am adding the void becasue I am also exporting 3D to Autocad to be used in our software.

"Map the calculated radii parameters to the circle radii parameters"

This is the part of the procedure that causes a error "can't keep joined". I have tried a single void and still get the error. I am using Revit MEP 2010 and have access to 2012, if you wouldnt mind attaching the family in your image. Thanks for the response.

[Anonymous]

Fair enough. I have attached an upgraded family in 2012 as I see what you mean about the temperamental behaviour of 2010. Seems to work for each type.

I added a ref plane for the smaller duct and wasn't sure if you wanted to set the revolve to be constrained to that. Also pinned the main ref plane.

Category is still as Mech Equip as not changed that as wasn't sure what you were doing with this family. Hopefully this solves your problem.

[Anonymous]

Thank you kindly for attaching your work. I am stumped since I followed the same basic procedure as your 2012 version. I was thinjking maybe it had soemthing to do with units precision or the angle being too sharp, but I guess it is time to move on.

[Anonymous]

I couldn't get it to work in 2010 either. Something niggles in the back of my brain that there were improvements in 2011 to solid editing - but could be just imaging it