Wall based family does not insert at origin

[MVE1112]

Hello,

I created a family that cuts holes in walls for wall flances.
Ive run into this weird issue where the insertion point does not lie on the cross section of the origin reference planes:

I mean the horizontal plane, vertical is slightly offset in this image because of grid binding..

I have tried everything but i cant find the problem in my family.
In the family editor you can see that the yellow highlighted planes define the origin:

Does anyone have an idea?

[MVE1112]

So, i found out that another reference line is causing this behaviour but i dont know why.

It's not defined as origin so it shouldnt be right?

The weird thing is that the other reference lines arent causing this behaviour either, i would expect it do distort the horizontal insertion point as well..

[hmunsell]

can you upload the family for us to look at?

[MVE1112]

Uploaded it 🙂

[hmunsell]

just curious... did you make this family or was it downloaded from a manufacturer/vender or other site?

I think I know what's going on, just not sure the best way to correct it. The issue seems to be with the Symbolic Lines in the model. I don't remember seeing something like this happen before with symbolic lines though. gonna need to poke at it some more to get to the bottom of it. maybe someone else will chime in too with there observation in the mean time. 

[barthbradley]

There is an issue in the family with a parameter.

[MVE1112]

Hmm, thats interesting..

I made the family myself and havent encountered something like this ever before myself 🙂

As to @barthbradley I havent seen that error, ill try to check tomorrow and update! Thanks.

[barthbradley]

FWIW: I would make it a Face Hosted Family myself.  

[barthbradley]

See attached Face-based version and see if it behaves better for you.  

[ToanDN]

Do you see the guideline when you placing the family?  That indicates where the origin is, the cursor does not.

[MVE1112]

Thank you, this works! 

In the family you posted the cursor is dead on in the center of the opening, in my family it isnt.

This would work although theres a slight issue when using a face based family, the void  should be in the center of the wall. Is that something thats doable with a face based family?
If i recall correctly its not possible to use the 'thickness' paremeter right? I'd have to manually set the thickness of the wall for the family? 

The family you made is actually pretty handy, since we sometimes have to use it on floors as well! So thanks for that! Just need a way to automatically set the wall thickness for the family some way

[barthbradley]

---

@MVE1112 wrote:

This would work although theres a slight issue when using a face based family, the void  should be in the center of the wall. Is that something thats doable with a face based family?

---

Is it doable???  You tell me if it's doable.  It's YOUR design.  I have no idea how - in the real world - a person would make the larger void cavity INSIDE of a solid wall or floor (or anything else for matter).  And, not only make it INSIDE a wall/floor, but make it precisely at the midpoint of the overall thickness of the wall/floor.  If you can explain that, then I can explain how to build a Revit Family to do the same thing.  

[barthbradley]

This is how I imagine it would be constructed in the real world...

[barthbradley]

so, in Revit, the larger void would be recessed into the SURFACE of the two walls. Then when the two walls are joined, that larger void cavity would be at the center of the entire assembly.  Get it?  

To able to cut both walls in Revit with the same Void Family, you would need to check "Cuts with Void when Loaded" in the Void Family, and then use Cut Geometry tool in the Project to cut both Walls with the Void Family.   

[ToanDN]

If you prefer to use Face based then you need to set up a parameter to control the wall thickness then enter it based on each condition in the project to match the wall.

Still, I don't see anything wrong with using a wall based family. Your cursor is not at the placement point cut there is a guideline to give you the exact location. And you can  set the depth of the family automatically based on the actual wall thickness via a reporting parameter in the family.

[barthbradley]

Out of curiosity, are you doing this for a retrofit or for new construction?  Tilt-up construction?   

[MVE1112]

Ehh, I'm sorry?

I meant 'is it doable to get a face based family to center in a wall, since there is no thickness parameter to read from.

The family you see is a void family to allow a wallflanche to pass through the in situ concrete wall:

Rebar gets added around these things as a regular wall opening for concrete walls. So the void is just a result of the pipe being cast in the concrete wall.

The family is just there for the contractors to see where the pipes will pass through the walls to adjust the formwork and rebar on site. Also so i dont see hundreds of pipes in my navisworks clash control.

[MVE1112]

Since i don't want to type in the wall thickness everytime i'd rather make it wall based and just create a second family that is floor based.

But this still leaves me with the issue of the family not centering on my cursor, which is annoying. In my models I want to be able to drag the family in the project and be able to click the centre of the pipe, which places the family dead in the center of the pipe. For the amount of pipings and holes i have to create, being able to place it in the center of the pipe will save me an astronomical amount of time.

[barthbradley]

---

@MVE1112 wrote:

The family you see is a void family to allow a wallflanche to pass through the in situ concrete wall:

---

You missed my point entirely.  How the heck would that be "passed through".  Sounds to me like these are strategically placed (prior to the cement being poured) to create chases in the situ concrete wall.  Are you planning the location of these chases?  If so, why would the middle flange even be needed?  You asked me how to get the middle flange precisely at the midpoint of the overall thickness of the wall that it is in.  Seems like a totally unnecessary LOD.  Besides, you're not even modeling what you show above.  You are modeling the Void that will be created by it.      

[MVE1112]

I think you're the one who's missing the point entirely. 

As per my last comment,  I stated that "Rebar gets added around these things as a regular wall opening for concrete walls. So the void is just a result of the pipe being cast in the concrete wall." An in situ concrete wall, is a reinforced concrete wall poured on site. Rebar is also constructed on site, this allows the workers to add certain piping in a wall before it's been poured, as I said in my former comment. 

The piping is added while the rebar workers are constructing the inner rebar structure, this way the formwork of the concrete has to be adjusted in such a manner that there is a near watertight seal around the pipe to prevent blowout during pouring. Which I said in the comment above: "Rebar gets added around these things as a regular wall opening for concrete walls. So the void is just a result of the pipe being cast in the concrete wall.". Smaller hairpins need to be added around the middle flanches that have a specific shape.

You state it's an unnecessary LOD but as I stated it is to prevent clash controls from showing up in Navisworks and to see where rebar gets very crowded when multiple larger wallflanches are in close proximity of each other. These voids need to be drawn anyway because they have to be placed with not more than a mm of error, drawing the middle flanche would just be a one time step by changing the family.

When modelling concrete form and rebar, you don't model the piping, you model the form. Therefor, I am simply removing the concrete from the wall which wouldn't be there in reality. Same goes for windows, on structural drawings its not usual to draw entire window frames in view or detail, only the hole in the wall. 

The hole for the pipe is needed for the contractors to be able to adjust the formwork on site, which i also said in my previous comment: "The family is just there for the contractors to see where the pipes will pass through the walls to adjust the formwork and rebar on site. Also so I don't see hundreds of pipes in my Navisworks clash control."

If you'd like to know, the center flanche is needed to create a longer 'water runway' to ensure these concrete walls are watertight. Even when pouring in situ you must add these flanches or your wall will leak. 

I'm unsure why you're striking this tone with me in your last two comments since all I came here to do was discuss why my family isn't inserting at the point I want it to insert. I need the center of the void to be dead on my mouse cursor. 

My question about getting the middle flanche in the center of the wall was purely about getting the family to be placed in the center of the wall (symmetrical when viewed in cross-section) , even when its face based. I was in no way trying to discuss the feasibility for contractors. 

I just want to know why the face based family you posted places the center of the void on my cursor and why my wall based family doesn't. You're tone is incredibly off-putting for this forum.