The following problem pops up in our customer support every now and then and it is kind of frustrating to not know what to suggest. I managed to reproduce the behavior in a simple example which is attached (Revit 2018).
The setting is as follows: we have a room, which is as simple as it gets (4 walls, ceiling/floor both set to room bounding). Perhaps it is modeled in a structurally questionable way but I see no reason why my architecture room should not bound itself correctly from an algorithmic point of view.
The fact that makes it even weirder: Link the given architectural file into an MEP document, place an MEP-space at the same position and observe that it is correctly bounded. Can anyone give some advice to cure my headache?
Gelöst! Gehe zur Lösung
Gelöst von ToanDN. Gehe zur Lösung
Have you set the Room & Area to compute Areas and Volumes?
Truly weird. What are the Limit Offset and Base Offset Property Parameters reading?
Very fast and very correct. Seems like this is the default in most mechanical templates while it is not in architectural ones. I knew this option existed, but I did not expect this to be the cause of such problems. Makes sense now. Thanks! ![]()
True. Mechanical template has Volume computation as default because space volumes are critical for mechanical design.
Thanks. Interesting though; when I opened the OPs file, Areas and Volumes are already checked. Also, when I deleted the original room and replaced it with another, the room had a default Limit Offset of 5.55 which was automatically applied. I guess these settings don't zero out. Good thing to be aware of. At least they don't affect Volume calcs. Room is bounded properly.
Sie finden nicht, was Sie suchen? Fragen Sie die Community oder teilen Sie Ihr Wissen mit anderen.