Stairs, Sketch Based, Relative Base height Constraint

[BobJayson2618]

Hello,  I am new to creating Sketch Based stairs and I keep getting a "Relative Base Height" (RBH) constraint.   How I am getting this.  If I work on a virgin project, it will behave and the RBH will be zero  ... for "One Stair".  No problem running "Component Based Stairs".  The level constraints behaves.  When I create a few stairs and then go back to a sketch based stair it is automatically assigning a RBH Elevation (Ex. 5' ) vs. starting with a "O" offset.

It appears to be trying to stack the next stair design on the last Riser elevation from the previous stair.   How do i clear this back to zero. 

The warning that I am getting is;  "Top elevation of run should not be less than the value of "Extend Below Base" (EBB).  It doesn't make any sense to me.  The EBB is showing zero.  When I try to overwrite the RBH and reset it to zero, the warning pops up.  However, I never assigned an elevation offset in the first place.

I was making stairs that were within the same level and didn't top out.  Revit doesn't seem to like this.   Please help.

[BobJayson2618]

I resolved it.  Revit won't let me put in a Zero for the Relative Base Height.  However if, I put in 1" it will default back to Zero without getting the Wacko Warning message and I can go on my merry way. 

Perhaps this is a bug with the new release?

[BobJayson2618]

Correction:  I never upgraded to the 2020.2 Release  (Nov./Dec. 2019).  However, I do think it's a bug that needs to be addressed.

[barthbradley]

A "bug"??? Don't know about that, but it's odd behavior for sure. Can you reproduce in new Projects?  You're welcome to post it for us to test.  

[BobJayson2618 · Accepted solution]

Thank you for reading the post.  I am closing the post out, but I had only mixed results solving it.  The problem did come back and I had to trick the system to move along.

I have a 2004 laptop with a graphic card is undersized.  Also, the project is linked to 15 other building and covers 550,000 SF.  This is an as-built and space planning project that covers a span of over 5 years.

Since no one else seems to have the problem, I am assuming it is hardware related.  I will close it out, but if anyone else runs into the same hiccup, please reach out to me.

Again, Thank you

[ArdillasNuh]

I got same problem with you, attached the RBH, which is persistent as you said. Please help us. FYI i am using revit 2020.2.1

[BobJayson2618]

I had to trick it an put the Relative Base Height to -0.50".   I also may have tricked the Extend below Riser Base  (EBRB).  I still think its a bug.  My guess is that since this is an old (2014) project the newer released software just isn't playing well with the older/converted versions.  Just a "wild ass guess". 

I don't believe its relative to virgin installs or projects that haven't been overwritten with newer releases.  That might be why 97% of the other users are not experiencing it.  How old is the original project?

Good Luck with it.  It drove me bonkers.

[ArdillasNuh]

Ok that's makes sense. I started the project with 2020.1 version. But the template was upgraded from 2014, should i delete the stair family and start the stair family from scratch? Yeah it drives me mad 😅. Finally gave up using stair tool by sketch.

[BobJayson2618]

I never tried a virgin project template. I was so happy to just trick it and move on. In my case, I felt my project was too large to start a rebuild. Best of luck. You’ll figure it out based on your project conditions.

[andy.kilby]

Hello, I am experiencing the same problem mentioned above and setting the "EBRB" to 1" or any other value doesn't seem to work. The workaround I've used is to adjust the tread count in plan and align back and fourth. 

[aruaTELJR]

Getting the same error still in revit 2024.... when trying to place a component stair, it behaves and starts at base level, once trying to do a sketch based stair, it automatically RBH aaaaaand RTH to match "desired height" and I cannot change it... none of the tricks worked on it.... did anyone find a solution?