Please see attached images and file. Now before I start I know this is not the best designed handrail in the world however space is such that this is how it has to be.
in the first image you see the half landing, because the handrail is meeting at 90deg Revit can't create a smooth connection and as a result the resulting section view (not uploaded) looks a bit rubbish.
Int he past I've found adding a radius to the corner helps this issue, however as you can see in the second image this works at the upper corner but it goes even more wrong at the lower corner where Revit has decided, randomly it appears, to add in an additional short flat section and it still doesn't connect correctly.
can anyone shed any light on how to tidy this up at all?
I have to say of all the things in revit that frustrate me stairs and handrails are probably top of the list...
Cheers
K.
Hi Keith,
I'm always struggling with stairs handrails. And I always regret to enter the struggle... ![]()
That said, the only (and obvious) question I can make is: have tried to modify the Angled Joins and Tangent Joins type paremeters?
Unfortunately it's all I can think for this matter.
Regards
Rodrigo Bezerra
Alas those settings seem to make no difference in this instance... ![]()
hi, is there anyways you can post your stair so we can check or send to me thru my email/pm. thanks
Hi,
I should be available as a link on the original post.
Cheers
K.
Keith
***edit... forgot to attach the images.. DOH!***
A lot of the issues people have with railing is usually down to how the sketch path is created. As with this case.
Revit is great, but falls short some places (railing being one of them) but once you understand the "why" it makes it much easier to figure out. Because the sketch segment is going from a slope to a flat 90deg angle, its too complicated (in most cases) for Revit to compute, so it breaks the rail (as the warning message says) So, if you edit the sketch of that rail, and simply "split" the sketch line at the landings then it makes Revit's job much easier.
see attached images, i have sketched a red line where i use the "split element" tool to split the railing sketch.
It may not be the exact desired outcome in 3D but there are no breaks and sections/details look good.
hope this helps ![]()
I see what you have done.
In this instance however the architect is looking for the handrail to slope upwards on the landing. Personally I think it's a terrible detail but I'm tasked with finding the best way of making that arrangment to work in Revit. I'll play around with this idea a bit more though and see what comes out.
thanks for taking the time to look at it.
K.
Keith
Always the Architect :@ haha
Id recommend just using the solution so it is a continuous rail and looks "decent" in 3D and just change the 2D details. It will save you a shed load of time.
If not, then use a model-in-place sweep using the underside of the stairs as the path and draw the profile of the rail whatever offset you require.
Good luck ![]()
Yeah, that's kinda where we're at.
TBH this is mostly and exercise for me from a purists point of view. Really just trying to establish how far Revit can go.
Personally I think until they introduce 3D stair path editing there are always going to be significant limitations with this unfortunately.
Once again I find myself back in the realms of handrails on stairs and once again I'm tearing my hair out... Of all the tools in revit this is definitely the one that is likely to drive me to insanity - IT JUST DOESN'T WORK!!! Period.
Please please please, Revit Developers - someone take this under your wing, make it a pet project, and fix it so that it works!!!
@Keith_Wilkinson They wont fix it cuz it works ...
(I will do it on the file you attached once I get home - I ve got only 2014 here
)
One just need to adapt the right rail to the right stair. Example: The OOTB rail would never adapt to the stair flights you got in the attached Revit..Ideally the rail on the landing shouldnt be slooped. It is slopped because of the last step on the 1st flight is aligned with the 1st step of the 2nd flight. If you go to the section on the landing and measure it you ll find that this alignment of risers is creating this 1 riser difference in height in the handrail. Three ways to fix this (...there are other ways though but those are my preferences) -
Case 1 and 2 give you the following results. First image is a combination of both 1 and 2 in order to reduce extension of the rail on to the landing. Second image is purely case 2 (Revit OOTB rail would never connect 1st flight rail to 2nd flight rail at this small distance if risers were aligned)
YOUTUBE | BIM | COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN | PARAMETRIC DESIGN | GENERATIVE DESIGN | VISUAL PROGRAMMING
If you find this reply helpful kindly hit the LIKE BUTTON and if applicable please ACCEPT AS SOLUTION
Firstly, thanks for going to such an effort.
My post today was not in relation to the original post, it was a different issue, I'm not looking for a solution but if I get a chance I'll record a video showing the problem.
In in answer to your first point though I have to disagree and I know I'm not alone. HandrailS on stairs in Revit are a complete PITA. Period. I could give you countless examples of how they fail and go wrong.
Your adaptive componeent solution looks looks interesting and worth pursuing but it's arguably a pretty advanced option beyond the reach of your average user and that's who I have to work with.
Keith; I respect your opinion but personally I believe that the OOTB rails in revit are really meant for the ideal situation...you cant make an exception and expect Revit to apply the best case scenario on it... Example is the stair uploaded in the original post.
1. alignment of last and first step on the landing (This is not ideal)
2. the sloped handrail on the landing (indicates error in step/riser calculations or stair geometry - if I get this rail on site I would fire the one who did it starting from supervising engineer down to the welder...well a good welder never does that; engineers do)
3. The number of riser count vs step width vs flight number in that file are more like for an attic and not a normal stair (way outside the norms)
If thats how one wants the stair to be then one cant go for OOTB Handrail and most definitly OOTB Stair to start with...you need adaptive stairs and handrails
YOUTUBE | BIM | COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN | PARAMETRIC DESIGN | GENERATIVE DESIGN | VISUAL PROGRAMMING
If you find this reply helpful kindly hit the LIKE BUTTON and if applicable please ACCEPT AS SOLUTION
To be fair, Keith is correct. Regardless of whether you're using OOTB or custom railings, the transition from sloped to flat to sloped, or continuously sloping, as the railing rounds a corner at a landing just doesn't clean up well. Sure, there are workarounds for making it look right in plan and section/elevation, but it's just not quite there yet as a tool. If you can offset your stair runs by one tread depth to get the sloped railing to level out before it turns the corner, then it all works out great, but we don't always have that much room to work with.
In some cases, we've resorted to breaking the railing into three pieces and custom modifying the slope and height of the U-shaped segment that rounds the corner. However, we would only do that where the railing is going to show up in a 3D view or rendering.
@rosskirby I'm not tweaking nor am I twisting anything to get the desired output from the tool! I'm just following rules and standards which have been there long before CAD and Revit. Try to use the Rule of Thumb on a scratch paper and you ll get what I mean...if that doesn't work call in the carpenter and the welder...I do that quite often when something doesn't work by the book and their advise does wonders on Revit.
PS: And in the example above I neither offset the steps, nor changed the design/layout nor added extra risers; I switched off the Revit offered start/end with riser (Which is not meant to be used for concrete stairs the first place) and used my own thread (embeded) + its riser
But hey! look at the bright side; long time back before CAD, people did design and/or execute stuff which are...^***&%%; the only difference between those days and today is that back then there was no software to blame so they used to blame the Architect; today they still blame the Architect but the Architect blames revit lol
YOUTUBE | BIM | COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN | PARAMETRIC DESIGN | GENERATIVE DESIGN | VISUAL PROGRAMMING
If you find this reply helpful kindly hit the LIKE BUTTON and if applicable please ACCEPT AS SOLUTION
I'm experiencing issues similar to what you have described. Revit just doesn't like it when i try to go round a corner. I've tried so many different fixes for this but can't seem to get it. I know this thread is years old but does anyone have any advice for this?
Just writing a page about these turns going from tangent handrail to cad and how to get the flow here.
Not a one click solution but hopefully helps.
https://knostairs.com/kno-how/draw-stairs/tangent-handrail-versus-cad/
https://www.autodesk.com/autodesk-university/class/Handrail-Hacks
I recommend this class for you sir, this will help you more to solve your problem.
Best regards,,
Sie finden nicht, was Sie suchen? Fragen Sie die Community oder teilen Sie Ihr Wissen mit anderen.