I feel Cliff's, as well as mine and others to boot, point and sometimes frustrations stem from that fact "that we ""CAN'T"" do it. Not that we'd necessairly do it.........just have that option..........I know there are times when having 'that option' would have been great. Just my 2c.
I certainly hear and appreciate your opinions...
I guess I just don't see the value of piecing and parting a ceiling.
During construction - do they go by area - or how many ceiling tiles are shown?
Maybe I am a bit to practical for it.... But just because you can do something does not mean you should.
I had a guy put in the 1/8" caulk joint on the windows in his model - his reasoning? Because he could.... But when he printed it looked horrible. There was no need for it - he could have just detailed it once and been done with it.Which would have saved time and money.
Good point Mike.
My concerns were brought up because eventually I am going to, eventually, coordinate this information. When it is ALL correctly modeled, tiles, grid, hangers, let's me sleep better. Then I know I can easily represent that information for BIM coordination, the most important reason! Now a days...
Yes - very good discussion...
I exported a model into navisworks and I was not able to 'see' the grid lines but the ceiling was there.
I have seen it in navisworks with a ceiling with a grid pattern... I will have to see if I can reproduce this.
Again--then WHY is it "OK" to accept real 3D curtainwalls, railings, etc. but NOT ceilings?
Curtainwalls and railings can also be "faked" by drawing model lines (or even worse--detail lines). But we would never do that, because it's not "BIM".
So--yes, we CAN model all the balusters, posts and rails in a railing, and most Revit users do so--and simply accept that it's "OK" to do that.
But if someone suggests modeling a simple 2 x 4 ACT, why is that "NOT OK?" It's actually a lot LESS 3d geometry
than a railing or curtainwall, so "overmodeling" is not the answer............
@Lisa..............I whole heartedly agree..........."just because you can, doesn't mean you should". My point being, there are times when doing some really "wild" Ceiling layouts when doing my Models for Coordination, that I have run across that need. Not always......again Options.
And I too think modeling a caulk joint for an "Entire" Model is over the top.
I do understand what you are saying - I guess I really don't have a sufficient 'why' not to have it. I think that would ultimately be up to the developers to say...
So - Autodesk developers - what are your thoughts....
So, I guess after all this discussion...it is not really possible.
We also do the workflow previously suggested, that we give MEP (autocad/magiccad) 2D and 3D dwg exports. They can xref the 2D dwg to get our room names, and to line up their diffusers with the grid. They can xref óur 3D dwg export to check heights of diffusers and available space for ductwork.
The current workflow requires us doing two exports, instead of one (not ideal but only a small hassle). But the workflow also requires the MEP consultant to manage two distinct xrefs, which I think would be a hassle.
From our end it is better than modelling a curtain wall or model lines to represent the ceiling grid, so I suppose we will stick with the two separate exports for now.
applem, both good points, and part of the reason for my question. There was a conversation during a BIM meeting and the qeustion was asked of me, "could I export that grid". The MEP tradesman had always been curious if it were possible.
Managing xref's equals another possiblity of inaccuracies....
One model to serve them all! <-- That sounds like a trademarkable tag line!
3D ACT grid models in Navisworks are very helpful. A quick way I have found to create them is to export the Revit RCP to a dwg. file. Open the dwg file in AutoCAD, explode the ACT grids, extrude the ACT grid lines the thickness of your ACT framing, and elevate the extruded lines to the ceiling height.
Access a broad range of knowledge to help get the most out of your products and services.