Beam layers??

[Anonymous]

Hello!

I need a material takeoff of all the plaster in my project, including the one that stick to the faces of the beam. I tried to make layers in the beam, but it doesn't work like in the walls. Another way is to creat sweeps, but those also don't apear in material takeoff. So, what can I do?

[arunag]

For plaster area we can use Paint face on Beam. But by default Paint by face does not work on it. so here is what we can do..or at least I do..

I. If there is a floor above the beam..Just use once join geometry to the beam and floor. If not there put one & join geometry. 

2. Now use the Paint by face tool in Modify.. select the Material & click on faces of beam

3. Material take off the structural framing...its seen.

Even if you remove the floor later, once the command of join geometry is used..the paint face tool will work.

Hope it helps.

[constantin.stroescu]

In this case I'll made a new Family Structural Beam with a plaster layer:

1. in an existing Structural Framing , saved on another name - from Manage > Object Styles > Model Objects > Modify Subcategories > New - name it PLASTER
2. then in a Left or Right View - Create >Extrusion - draw a parametric closed shape as in attached image - extrude it an lock to the beam borders (or make an offset parameter for wall thicknes)
3. apply different material - plaster to the Subcategory PLASTER
4. Load into the project and create Structural Framing Material Takeof Schedule
5. In the schedule appears also the volume of the plaster

1.

2.

3.

4. 5.

[constantin.stroescu]

you can find this family in the attached file

[rosskirby]

Make a "Surface takeoff material" parameter and then "paint" that material parameter onto the exposed faces of the beam in the family editor.  Then schedule that parameter as a material takeoff in your project.  See images below.

[Seychellian]

This doesn't account for different conditions though does it? By that I mean, the plaster layer will not intelligently join with the plaster layer of an architectural element like a wall or a roof that has the same finish? If I understand what you are proposing correctly then for this solution to work you would need to set the extents of the plastering on your structural beam to perfectly match the depth of the slab so that the edge lands perfectly aligned to the plaster layer of the ceiling. If you thickened the ceiling width there would be an overlap in elements.

While this is workaround solution, it doesn't seem to take advantage of Revit's intelligence at all. To effectively achieve this workflow they need to allow structural elements to have layer assemblies. I really don't understand why they haven't done this. 

[ToanDN]

There is no physical plaster layer. You would paint the surface of the beam and use the material parameter to change the paint to different material in project ton match the finish next to it.

[Seychellian]

So what happens in sections when your wall has a plaster layer and your beam only has it painted on? You will see an inset at the beam which is not an accurate representation of what is to be built. Same applies to structural columns. Also, I think I am correct in saying that this can't be scheduled as a quantity either. At least not in the same category as the wall plaster, which is where it should be listed as the face of a beam is basically the wall.  

[ToanDN]

Exactly. It only takes care of the surfaces. If you want a correct presentation in sections then you have to model the finish layer separately.

[Seychellian]

---

@ToanDN wrote:
Exactly. It only takes care of the surfaces. If you want a correct presentation in sections then you have to model the finish layer separately.

---

Am I the only one who finds that workflow baffling? In order for your model to look and schedule properly you need to painstakingly add finishing layers to all your (potentially complex) geometries and manage how they intersect on a case by case basis?

Your alternative is to omit the layer and simply paint the finish in therein losing your scheduling data and having drawings that don't visually reflect the design. I must be missing something. 

[ToanDN]

The original question is about material take off, and using the Paint method can take care of that without modeling the plaster layer. Yours question goes further into the modelling and presentation territory, so obviously the previous answer cannot fully address yours.

[ToanDN]

First, that wasn't my answer. I only clarified it because I read your question and you misunderstood the approach. Look at the person provided the answer and the date when it was posted.

Second, it has been repeatedly said, in this thread and in the other thread that you asked the same question, if you need the correct take off, correct sections, correct renderings, clean joins everywhere then you have to model the finish layers in project. How? It depends on specific conditions, you can model them as walls, ceiling, model in place, or parts, etc... There is no solution that fits all.

[Seychellian]

ok fair enough. I would be curious to pick you brain then as to how to handle a hypothetical condition where you have a structure made up of architectural walls and structural beams columns and slabs and you would like to cover the entire thing in a single plaster layer (imagine you were spraying a thin skin of plaster over the entire structure). Lets also say that the structure is somewhat complex in that there are a multitude of intersections where these elements meet with offsets from one another (I specify this because a. it is reflective of most structures and b. because it makes dealing with every specific  intersection on a case by case basis effectively impossible).

Is there a way to achieve this hypothetical coating over the entire structure so that it is properly scheduled and reads as a continuous layer in sections, plans etc? 

[ToanDN]

"a structure made up of architectural walls and structural beams columns and slabs... cover the entire thing in a single plaster layer"

The walls and the slabs can have a plaster layer built in.  Create a plaster-only wall type to cover the columns.  Create model in-place sweeps to cover the beams.

[Seychellian]

---

@ToanDN wrote:

"a structure made up of architectural walls and structural beams columns and slabs... cover the entire thing in a single plaster layer"

The walls and the slabs can have a plaster layer built in.  Create a plaster-only wall type to cover the columns.  Create model in-place sweeps to cover the beams.

---

I personally feel that this description underestimates the intricacies of how elements can meet and intersect. What if there is a RC stair sharing a face with the beams leading between two levels? How would we integrate the plaster skin into this face? The minute the conditions become even slightly complex adding seperate skins and managing the intersections between them becomes inordinately complex. The display and selection of elements alone will become a nightmare. Then there is the issue of making changes to a structure that is built like this. I imagine all these skins you're adding will have to be constrained to the surface they're covering if they are to flex properly when the model is adjusted. 

It just seems like a no-brainer that you should be able to add material layers to every different type of element in order to avoid this complexity and let the intelligence of the program manage this sort of minutia. I refer specifically to structural elements in this particular example. 

btw I hope this doesn't come across as me having a go at you personally as I am not. Im simply relatively new to revit and am seeking guidance on how to handle certain scenarios which I don't find an intuitive solution to. On the contrary, I appreciate your feedback immensely. 

[ToanDN]

There are lots of things that seem to be a no-brainer for the program to "simply do it".  But it is not the case, hence the list of Ideas and wishlist is longer than Hitler's gas bill and Hollywood's allegations combined.

As I said, there are enough tools to accomplish all the things you have mentioned.  Some are easy.  Others are not.  None are a button for you to click to get it done automatically.  I don't see any problems doing all of your hypothetical conditions so if you are struggle with a real condition then come back and ask.