Stairs below level, How do I add a cut line?

[Jason_S]

I noticed that Revit likes to show the entire stair going down.  This works for me in a lot of cases but I have a project that the second floor is showing the stair all the way down to the first floor, and there is another stair going from the second floor to the third that I really need to see.

Plan regions don't seem to allow me to add a break line below the second floor and see the stair from the second to the third floor.

I looked high and low for a solution and am stuck.  The floors are on and the view is set to hidden.

The attached png shows the up stairs in blue that I would like to see and the Down stairs I would like to cut at the landing.

Thanks for all the help in advance.

[Anonymous]

Hi,

When we do our stair, the DN arrow always runs short of the last rise!

i.e. the arrow doesn't indicate the extent of a single run stair.  (please see attached)

Could it have something to do with a clipping plane?!?

How can I graphically show this on our drawings!

Thanks

[jagostinho74]

 As per a recent article by Autodesk, Stairs are exceptions to the rule in what regards View Range.

https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/revit-products/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2016/EN...

"Floors, structural floors, stairs, and ramps located outside the view range use an adjusted range that is 4 feet (about 1.22 meters) below the bottom of the primary range. Within this adjusted range, the elements are drawn using the projection line weight for the category. If they exist outside this adjusted range but within the view depth, these elements are drawn using the <Beyond> line style."

[Anonymous]

Your solution really doesn't solve the problem. Redrawing again defeats the whole purpose of BIM. 

[RDAOU]

The tool could use some improvements but using visibility graphics and/or simply overlaying two views on a sheet is one of the simplest workarounds to sort such issue out. When such OOTB modeling aids do not work one may always improvise…maybe convert the whole thing into a geometry 🙂

[kgetev0711]

Im not sure im following your steps correctly

[kgetev0711]

Revit will not allow this to happen automatically, or at least I cant find it under VG. You have to draw it manually. In theory it makes sense because a cut line makes sense if the floor plan actually has a stair to a level above so its actually cutting through one in plan. However when cutting a plan view through a top floor and no stair is being cut through, adding a cut line to a stair below adds a second cutting plane which I find confusing,(floating plan). 

[kgetev0711]

When you speak of transforming to geometries are you recommending to export as .sat file, and re-importing the stair back into the project, sir?

[hmunsell]

i use this to cover up the part of the stair i don't want to see.....

[Anonymous]

5 years and still can't be done in Revit 2018.  

[ToanDN]

It can be done in any version using overlaying views on the same sheet.

[minjing.tang]

"I do this by turning off all the (above) subcategories for stairs in Object Styles and then manually,"

In this case, can create a filter (either by "base level" or "select") to do " Override Graphics in View By Element". Hope can help a bit.

[serrano-piche]

Video link no longer active.

[mromagnoli]

Revit stairs have a lot to improve, support my idea so that these basic design problems are solved once and for all.

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/central-stringer-beam/idi-p/10962944

[cuen.saul]

2022. Same problem.

[MelonieB]

2023, still not resolved.

So, are we to manually click each dashed line with the linework tool, set to <invisible>?
Overlaying floor plans? Eeeeek!

This is really only a problem if you have different floor to floor heights and your treads are not perfectly aligned in plan (in other words, you have different intermediate landing depths or different tread depths). 

In the image below, the stairs from the level below have a different tread depth, which is why we see the "beyond" lines, based on the  view range disclaimer about stairs (found here). The same effect would  happen if the intermediate landing was a different size, "displacing" the tread alignment. Note that all of my <above> lines in my view template (or visibility graphic) are still checked, because I do still want to see the portion of stairs going down (without overlaying multiple plan views!). The dashed lines are for the treads as they continue up: 

I recommend you use the same tread depths (uhhh, check your building code!), then align the treads from floor to floor, unless for some reason you require a different landing size (in which case, you're doing the idiocy of using the linework tool set to <invisible> etc):

Hopefully this helps, or that there is some kind of useful information in this.

[Mike.FORM]

In the OP it looks like the issue for why the stairs going down are seen after they pass under the stairs going up is because floors are not visible and thus there is nothing in the view hiding anything below other than the portion of the stairs going up.

How I do it is for any area where there are both stairs going up and down and they overlap the VG settings for stairs above cut line all get turned off. There is quite honestly no reason to ever have this on in overall plans as scale is often too large to make the additional lines beneficial as it usually just adds clutter.

If your stair is complicated and you need to see the upper extents above the cut line you can show this in the enlarged stair plans and in sections and if really needed you can always do an isometric view showing the stair in full from a good angle.

This whole thread seems to be people trying to fit all the information into one plan even though you can express the same information in additional views that, in my opinion, would be created anyways. I have never modeled a set of stairs and not have it be accompanied by an enlarged plan and a section.

[MelonieB]

Apologies if I am misunderstanding your post, but then your main floor stairs do not show the dashed lines as they go up to the next level, and that's whether or not they are complicated stairs. That forces you to either have no view template at all (so that you can manipulate the stairs separately on each view), or you have 2 separate view templates, or you leave the main floor stairs showing only up to the cut line. The first two solutions defeat the purpose of having view templates that can be at risk of having other graphic settings manipulated differently on multiple floors. 

Better solution is to just model them correctly and keep the stairs in line with your building code and the geometry.

This: 

Is better than this:

But to each their own, I guess! I just know what would work on legal documents here, but I cannot speak for other regions (in regards to overall plans and enlarged plans).

[Mike.FORM]

@MelonieB I agree that showing the stairs dashed above the cut plane is beneficial, however I do not think it is always beneficial on overall plans in many cases as a lot of times riser and tread lines do not line up from floor to floor and thus you end up just having a bunch of lines closely spaced together that are almost not readable.

What I am saying is to simplify the drawing on overall plans and show the additional detail and clarify things in the enlarged plans and sections.

[rkelleyPKW7G]

This only works if all of your stairs are the same. In my case, we have different stairs an different floor-to-floor heights tht make this extremely confusing.