Adding connection capability to non-MEP families

[fpmalard]

Is it possible to add connection capability to non-MEP families?

In theory, it is possible to create a Family, switch it to MEP fixture, add one of the available connector handlers (electrical, duct, pipe, tray or conduit), set the family back to non-MEP but, it is not clear though, how this family will behave.

The idea here is to allow families to connect to other compatible families without require them to be MEP. For example, you could create a connection behavior between chair and a desk so when a chair gets close to a desk it would connect to a predetermined position and orientation (like a pipe connection).

Any way to achieve this via Revit API or maybe a mix of native Family configuration and something through API like a custom cursor?

Thank you.

[fpmalard]

Is it possible to add connection capability to non-MEP families?

In theory, it is possible to create a Family, switch it to MEP fixture, add one of the available connector handlers (electrical, duct, pipe, tray or conduit), set the family back to non-MEP but, it is not clear though, how this family will behave.

The idea here is to allow families to connect to other compatible families without require them to be MEP. For example, you could create a connection behavior between chair and a desk so when a chair gets close to a desk it would connect to a predetermined position and orientation (like a pipe connection).

Any way to achieve this via Revit API or maybe a mix of native Family configuration and something through API like a custom cursor?

Thank you.

[jeremy_tammik]

Always tricky, trying to implement non-standard or anti-standard behaviour, fighting the system instead of going with the flow. Would it be possible to achieve this in a more standard manner, e.g., by implementing a microscopic 'additional connector' family that you could place instances of on the faces of the non-MEP elements?

[jeremy_tammik]

Always tricky, trying to implement non-standard or anti-standard behaviour, fighting the system instead of going with the flow. Would it be possible to achieve this in a more standard manner, e.g., by implementing a microscopic 'additional connector' family that you could place instances of on the faces of the non-MEP elements?

[fpmalard]

Jeremy,

Are you saying to create a small MEP-connector family instance and embed it into a Furniture family?

Will furniture instances connect? I mean, will Revit engine sees these embedded MEP connectors and snap them thus dragging their host Furniture families together?

Thank you!

[fpmalard]

Jeremy,

Are you saying to create a small MEP-connector family instance and embed it into a Furniture family?

Will furniture instances connect? I mean, will Revit engine sees these embedded MEP connectors and snap them thus dragging their host Furniture families together?

Thank you!

[jeremy_tammik]

Dear Fernando,

Ye is what I meant, more or less.

I was actually thinking one level simpler:

• Place the family instance in the project
• Place the MEP connector helper instance into the project as well, and host it on a face of the family instance

Obviously, the approach you suggest (and question) would be much better, embedding the connector within the furniture family definition.

I guess both approaches need validating and testing, and maybe some family experts can suggest something much better.

Cheers, 

Jeremy

[jeremy_tammik]

Dear Fernando,

Ye is what I meant, more or less.

I was actually thinking one level simpler:

• Place the family instance in the project
• Place the MEP connector helper instance into the project as well, and host it on a face of the family instance

Obviously, the approach you suggest (and question) would be much better, embedding the connector within the furniture family definition.

I guess both approaches need validating and testing, and maybe some family experts can suggest something much better.

Cheers, 

Jeremy

[fpmalard]

As a matter of suggestion, maybe Revit can provide something like "Generic Model Connector" family template where you can determine a relationship between any family thus avoiding you to use duct/pipe connectors to connect furniture or other non-MEP family.

I believe Structural does (or should) have also something similar thinking about Beams to Beams, Beams to Columns, etc. I remember visiting IFC specs in the past and they have some kind of generic connection spec but only structural elements use them for purposes of structural relationship.

Anyway, it is what it is.

[fpmalard]

As a matter of suggestion, maybe Revit can provide something like "Generic Model Connector" family template where you can determine a relationship between any family thus avoiding you to use duct/pipe connectors to connect furniture or other non-MEP family.

I believe Structural does (or should) have also something similar thinking about Beams to Beams, Beams to Columns, etc. I remember visiting IFC specs in the past and they have some kind of generic connection spec but only structural elements use them for purposes of structural relationship.

Anyway, it is what it is.

[jeremy_tammik]

Yup, sounds like a valid approach. No idea what ramification that might have. In order to submit this wish and assess its importance, I would suggest adding it to the Revit Idea Station.

Whenever you require new or enhanced functionality, the Revit Idea Station is the place to go.

Please search there for a corresponding wish list entry for the suggested functionality and add your comments to it, or create a new one, if none already exists:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/idb-p/302

Tag it as an API wish:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/idb-p/302/tab/most-recent/label-name/api

Ensure it gets as many votes as possible to underline its importance to you and the rest of the developer community.

The Revit Idea Station is currently one of the main driving input forces for Revit API enhancements.

The Revit development team look there. Your comment here in the discussion forum might be overlooked.

Thank you!

[jeremy_tammik]

Yup, sounds like a valid approach. No idea what ramification that might have. In order to submit this wish and assess its importance, I would suggest adding it to the Revit Idea Station.

Whenever you require new or enhanced functionality, the Revit Idea Station is the place to go.

Please search there for a corresponding wish list entry for the suggested functionality and add your comments to it, or create a new one, if none already exists:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/idb-p/302

Tag it as an API wish:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/idb-p/302/tab/most-recent/label-name/api

Ensure it gets as many votes as possible to underline its importance to you and the rest of the developer community.

The Revit Idea Station is currently one of the main driving input forces for Revit API enhancements.

The Revit development team look there. Your comment here in the discussion forum might be overlooked.

Thank you!