Associating items with system name

[HN_arucker]

I feel this should be an easy one, but I haven't been able to figure it out. How do I place items (ducts, accessories, fittings) onto the same system so they are associated?

The client does not want us to use MEP, nor are we allowed to make/edit families. The downside is we have to break the duct into individual parts which breaks the association.

[Alfredo_Medina]

Fittings placed in ducts inherit the duct's system parameters. That is not a problem.

When you say that you have to break the ducts, are you talking about fabrication? That is different. Fabrication parts don't have System parameters.

[HN_arucker]

True, connection fittings and accessories are not difficult, but rather time-consuming to do in a file that is 100MB in size and over 60k items.

Earlier, I said we are not allowed MEP, I had meant Fabrication MEP. So to 'break' the duct, I mean we have multiple duct segments placed in a line "connected". We thought this would be enough (6 months ago) but the client wants them on the same system or associated. The only way we have found to do this is by dragging the node from one duct end to the adjacent duct, but this causes them to combine into one piece.

I was hoping there was a quick way to select items and just move them to a new system together.

[Alfredo_Medina]

If you break a duct using the Split tool, the segments will still be part of the same system

If you break a duct using Fabrication tools, the segments won't be associated to any system.

So, I assume you need to use the Split tool. Is there another way?

[HN_arucker]

So I have been trying this but Revit throughs in a Union item between the two. wouldn't this mess with quantities?

[Alfredo_Medina]

Yes, Revit puts a union in between two segments of duct if you split it. Even if you go into the settings and try to change that. I think that would be necessary anyway since the duct will have segments anyway. The thickness of the union is 1/4". I don't think that is significant for your quantities of duct. 

[HN_arucker]

So there is no way to take the duct we have already broken out and place it onto the same system?

[Alfredo_Medina]

How did you break it that caused the segments to lose their system? As I said before, if you use the Split tool, the system remains.

[HN_arucker]

Since the slive tool was slower and added a part, we took one section of the length we needed and just copied it from end to end as we went.

[Alfredo_Medina · Accepted solution]

Oh, that is painfully slow. Well, you have to choose a method:

1) Split tool: lots of clicks, adds a union, keeps ducts in place, keeps system in place and keeps system's information

2) Convert ducts to fabrication pieces > optimize lengths: very fast, but brakes system information

3) Your method: even more clicks than method 1, very slow, breaks the system

[RSomppi]

You're trying to do fabrication level work without the right tools. It is going to take a long time. There are ways to do it but it needs a fair amount of front end work to make the content suitable. You will probably want to get an add-on to help with this with system duct.

Have you looked into fabrication parts in Revit?

[HN_arucker]

Indeed, but as we have been told not to use Fabrication MEP items, we are having to make due. I can ask about add-ons to help, I have never looked into them before. Would you have a suggestion of where to start?

[RSomppi]

Personally, I would start with the requirements of the project and if they are being interpretted correctly. It seems conterintuitive to be asking for a fabrication level of detail with system ductwork. This kind of direction is often misdirected or misinterpretted.

[HN_arucker]

This seems to contain the available options. After talking with the coordinator, we will be doing the 3rd method. 1st may have worked at the beginning and with the connection family made to use as the union. The 2nd would have been my choice at the beginning, and even now, however, we are not allowed to use FabricationMEP for this particular job.

[Alfredo_Medina]

ok, thanks for the updated information.

[HN_arucker · Accepted solution]

An update on this topic. The add-on Microdesk allows for the connections needed. While this is still slow, it is not as painful as a process as our previously used method. We will likely be using this tool later, even if the non-MEP duct is connected at the beginning because sometimes things need to be cut in, and this tool allows us to connect quickly.