Filling pattern for cutted elements

Filling pattern for cutted elements

renanrr3
Enthusiast Enthusiast
2,857 Views
7 Replies
Message 1 of 8

Filling pattern for cutted elements

renanrr3
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Hello guys,

 

I am currently starting to work with Revit, and I have a doubt that I do not even know how I could name it, and therefore it has been very difficult to find a solution in Google. 

Basically, what I would like Revit to do is to apply different filling patterns to elements depending on their position in the project, considering if they exist above and/or below the current level being displayed. It is better explained with an example. Consider the structure below:


1.JPG

 

 Also, consider I want to obtain a plan view from the level circled below:

2.JPG

 Notice that the elements 1, 2, and 3, have different continuity considering this level. Element 1 ends in this level, element 2 starts on this level, and element 3 exists below and above this level: it continues through it. What I would like to know is if it is possible that Revit represents the columns 1, 2 and 3 with different filling patterns. Therefore, from the plan view, I could know if a column ends, starts or continues in that level, as is typical in structural plans.

 

3.JPG

 With the standard (default) options, it is possible to differentiate between element 1 and elements 2 and 3, but I am having problems with differentiating elements 2 and 3. Anyone has a hint where can I find such options or configurations?

 

0 Likes
Accepted solutions (1)
2,858 Views
7 Replies
Replies (7)
Message 2 of 8

Alfredo_Medina
Mentor
Mentor

Isn't it enough to provide a set of coordinated views, plan and elevations, sections, etc, as usual, to describe a 3d element? The elevation and 3d view will help to understand the element, without the need for different patterns in the plan view. No?


Alfredo Medina _________________________________________________________________ ______
Licensed Architect (Florida) | Freelance Instructor | Profile on Linkedin
Message 3 of 8

ToanDN
Consultant
Consultant

@renanrr3 

 

Have you asked over at Revit Structure forum see what other engineers deal with this?  IMHO you are applying AutoCAD drafting mindset to Revit job.  If it is for maintaining your graphics standard is one thing.  But if it is for coordination and understanding drawings then it is totally unnecessary.  Revit gives you better tools for that purpose.

Message 4 of 8

renanrr3
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Hello all, thank you very much for your answer!


So, what is behind this idea is the fact that still, at least around here where I live, what is sent to the construction site is a set of 2D drawings, printed on paper. Therefore, it still necessary, in my context, to try and apply certain aspects and conventions such as this one that indeed came from an AutoCAD background, or even more, from the time where we all used to hand draw.

 

It can be traditional, but it is a very good solution to the problem of identifying what is happening to each column in a given level, taking into account one could only have access to 2D representation. With a glance the construction worker can see if a column should start, end or continue in a given floor. I could take elevations or sections to represent it, but again, they would all be substituted by a simple filling pattern, giving more direct understanding about the 3D object in a 2D representation.

 

I will take a shot in the Structure forum! I will keep this post updated with any useful answer I get there, and I welcome any new contributions here. I do not know a lot of representation of other disciplines, but this could be also applied to other filling conventions for other elements.

 

0 Likes
Message 5 of 8

renanrr3
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Hello,

 

For documentation purposes, I will post a workaround I have applied to this problem, which I found to be practicable enough for me, even though is not as automatic as I would like a BIM software to be. 

 

Consider the structure below and imagine we have a floor plan which typically matches with the top face of the beam. We would like the floor plan to apply a different filling Pattern to the columns A, B and C, since column A continues to the next floor, column B starts on this floor, and column C ends on this floor, considering the typical direction of structure execution.

 

 

 

1.JPG

 So, first of all it is necessary to divide the columns in Parts (Modify > Create > Create Parts), utilizing the floor levels as references for the division. Since I am working with Reinforced Concrete, this makes sense as each level will be executed in different phases and, although all the levels are part of a single column in the project, a column is executed, and sometimes designed, in parts, which aligns with this concept.

 

Ok, so the next step is defining complementary patterns for Parts and Structural Columns in the Visibility/Graphic Overrides panel, in the Properties tab for the floor plan view you are at. The "complementary" part will be evident further in the result below, but it basically means that the Cut Pattern for Parts should not be "overwritten" by the Cut Pattern for Structural Columns, and vice-versa. For example:

2.JPG

As you can see, the hatch for both Cut Pattern Parts and Structural Columns have different directions regarding each other, being visible if overlapped.

 

The last part is defining the View Range, most specifically the Cut Plane, which should cut above the floor plan level. A value of 30 cm is what I used here, but you can change that to any value that would cut above the floor plan, and below the next one. In this way, all the columns (A, B, C) are visible. Also, in the Properties panel, you should set the Parts Visibility parameter to Show Both, so the plan view shows both Parts and Original elements.

 

As you can notice, with this configuration, the column C will not be cut, as expected, and will show a pattern related to the Projection/Surface Pattern. The columns A and B will show the Cut Pattern for both Parts and Structural Columns, as indicated on the previous image. Here is the part where the workaround occurs, which is a manual configuration: you should select the Part instance of column B and, with a right-click of the mouse, select Hide in View > Element. This way the related hatch will disappear and you will have a different pattern for each column, as illustrated below.

 

3.JPG

 

It is not a manual workaround, and therefore it is very susceptible to human error, but at least you just have to apply this to the column that is starting on the given floor each time. Also, I have concluded it should not be possible to find a automatic solution to this within the actual Revit, since it only lets you apply to the same object just two different patterns, and I cant imagine any solution to obtaining three different patterns without using another object, such as Parts.

 

Last, this is definitely a question for the Revit Structure forum, but since it related to graphical representation I thought someone here could know how to solve it. I tried to post a question on the Revit Structure forum, but just now I have found that I forgot to upload it there. I will see if someone over there has a better solution and will post the link here.

 

 

0 Likes
Message 6 of 8

ToanDN
Consultant
Consultant
Accepted solution

Good use of parts.  Thumbs up to your persistence.

 

If you can have the columns span multiple levels then you can create view filters based on Base Levels to override the cut pattern.

 

Capture.PNGCapture1.PNGImage 2.png 

Message 7 of 8

renanrr3
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Hello ToanDN, thanks for the answer.

 

Now, your filter suggestion is closer to what I was looking for. Just a couple of questions:

  1. Is there any way to create a filter that would reference the current level? From what I tested here, I can only reference an absolute level (Level 1, Level 2). It would be nice to apply a rule that would verify if the Base Level is below the Current Level, allowing the creation of a single filter for all plan views. But nevertheless, it is a great tool, far more automatic than the process I described above.
  2. I have tried to implement this to a file I have here, but it has been giving unexpected behaviour when selecting the condition Below the current level. Lets say, if I am in Level 2 and create the filter Base Level below Level 2, I get no column inside that criteria, even though if I change the criteria to Base Level equals to Level 0 (which I have checked and is below Level 2), I get all the columns that should fill this criteria all right. Do you know if there is some trick regarding the Below condition?

Thanks for the awnser, and this method is definitely what I was looking for! No manual hiding of objects or some sort of hard to trace configuration to the model, which is something I am quite against of, except when strictly necessary.

 

Best regards

 

------------------

EDIT: Regarding question 2: Just now I have changed from Below to Above in the rule configuration and got it right, i.e., I am in Level 2 and set the filter "Base Level is above Level 2" and get all the columns with Base Level in Level 0 fill the criteria and apply the filter. This is the most strange thing, since I have perform the following checks:

  • Level 0 (height -118) is below Level 2 (+770);
  • In the properties panel, the columns have the Base Level property indeed equal to Level 0;
  • When creating the filter: Base Level is above Level 3, no columns fill that criteria (as I have columns only with Base Level in Level 0 or Level 2);

Anyone knows how to explain this behaviour? I am afraid I am not allowed to upload the file here since it is a real project I've been working on and other people have the ownership over it.

0 Likes
Message 8 of 8

ToanDN
Consultant
Consultant
Unfortunately I don't know a way to have a filter referencing the current level. I think you would need to have one filter per level.

I am not quite understanding your 2nd question. I need to open Revit in order to digest it.
0 Likes