Ok, I’ve been using the piping tools in Revit for quite a while, and I’ve come to a conclusion – they fall a bit short in some areas…
It seems that you can either have no flanges, or flanges on every single fitting. In the real world, pipework is manufactured in sections with flanges only being put in to connect other pipe sections and valves – flanges are not put on every elbow, reducer, tee, etc, these would all be welded to the pipe. In Revit, you have an option to manually put in flanges, which works, until you stretch a pipe, or whatever, and it just deletes the flange you put in, because the piping type doesn’t have flanges in – it would be courtesy to be asked if I’d like to keep the flanges.
In 2013, with the routing preferences, you can now select different pipe segments and fittings for different pipe sizes. Why can’t you select preferred junction type to a size? Real world example, for a steel pipework 50mm and below, all the fittings would be screwed, and you’d have a tee, for sizes above that you might use welded fittings, and use a stub-on/tap onto a pipe instead of a tee, as it can be cheaper.
Fitting insertion length
In AutoCAD MEP you could define an insertion length, which is how far into a fitting a bit of pipe or another fitting could go in. At the moment, it just assumes fitings on pipes just go face to face, like a flanged connector would, but that doesn’t really show how a lot of real world fittings work.
Connector types and adaptors
Revit treats all pipes equally, you can use copper fittings on steel, and ABS fittings on cast iron. It would be nice to specify a connector type for fittings, accessories, that will only allow connection of a certain type of pipework, and ask to put in an adaptor if it needs to. For example, If I was running a 54dia copper pipe, and put in a 50mm threaded valve, Revit just puts in a 54x50 reducer, while in the real world, a 54x50 male or female threaded adaptor would be inserted.