Real Finish Materials on Rooms Schedules

[samuelsanf]

In rooms schedules you can specify parameters for Base Finish, Ceiling Finish, Wall Finish and Floor Finish; But this don't affect the model, only schedules and tags. Thats's not so BIM.

I would like to see, in the forthcoming versions of Revit, an Instance Parameter on Walls, Floors, Bases and Ceiling that control therir Finishes, a Parameter that can be controlled through the Rooms Schedules.

Walls should have a parameter of these on each exterior and interior faces, at least; but better if the wall faces splits on every room and take a finish "defined by room" or their default finish if the room do not have one. This would save a lot of time of spliting surfaces, and gift you a more real and quantifiable model.

It's OK to have, for example, different Types of walls, even if you only change the finish materials; the paint in one face or the wallpaper textura or the color of the carpet in a floor... at the end you can have a Quantity Takeoff to sumarize the materials in a precise way. But in Wall or Floor Schedules you will have separate types that are practically the same type; in tables that you only want to show structure materials or dimensions, you like to have to types of and element classify only for de paint color.

[arek_keshishian]

It's pretty common process in the AEC industry to schedule materials, may it be paint or not, by room. To mention which room has which materials and for example how much (area) of each. Ideally, would be great to automate the floor/wall/ceiling finishes and mention areas of each, considering we don't always use box shaped rooms. Would be great if floors/walls/finishes/faces(paints)/ceilings/roofs could know in which rooms they have surfaces and what does surfaces use as materials, so we could have that in our material take-offs and room schedules automatically, avoiding hacks and tedious workflows.

While you're at it, please make the paints on the faces in the openings and inserts(walls and doors) thickness parts of the walls show up in schedules as well. This is very critical. I know a lot of people who avoid using Revit for inaccurate representation of materials, or impossible workflows. Thank you!

[Anonymous]

Is there is a way to create a schedule of rooms that senses the wall, floor, ceiling, skirting finishes as modeled. I have tried Roombook but it does not work for our needs.
I know that I can add parameters to the rooms to define the finishes but whatever i did, i cannot find a way to automatically create a room schedule that reads the wall finish material as modeled, the floor finish material as modeled, the ceiling finish material as modeled, etc.

Dont agree that this is an area in Revit that needs some development?

Regards

[arek_keshishian]

This is completely on point and 100% valid, second this idea all the way.

[artakimov1054]

You would think that this is something that would have been integrated into revit already, I mean with an update every year and this still not being part of the main software it has to be a bit embarrassing for the autodesk...

[andresmontemayor]

I know that Ideas for this have been posted before but I don't understand how Autodesk isn't giving this more importance.

Be able to create a Finish Schedule from what I have modeled.

I know I can input information to a Room, and create new parameters for each wall but at the end of the day, if I change the material and finish from a wall or a floor, I have to manually change it in the Room, which makes it VERY prone to error (and why so many people have moved away from AutoCAD),.

[pieter4]

This is a duplicate post to: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/room-schedules-and-element-finish/idi-p/6328043 , which is in itself a duplicate to this post: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/schedule-materials-by-room/idi-p/6326741

[Anonymous]

Amen. Why is this still not possible? 

I've wished for finishes and physical model components to be better integrated since I started using Revit...back in 2008. Sigh.

[pbdbdq]

Agreed. All finishes need to be physically apparent and to appear and be controllable through the magic of schedules.

[aaronrumple]

Change the built-in parameters from text fields to material fields. This would be a button that popped up the material list. However, this would just be a key. In the room finish schedule, you could add any (or all) field(s) from the Identity of the material into the room schedule.

As a schedule example...

           Floor Finish

Mark | Keynote | Manufacture

[Christiaan_de_Wit]

Currently, the Wall Finish and Floor Finish parameters of Rooms are just text. That’s not very smart, is it? It facilitates discrepancies, e.g. the Room parameter for Floor Finish states the text value “Wooden floor”, while the modelled Floor Element contains a Carpet Material.

This really should be smarter. In order to get there, I’ve been thinking a lot about the solution explained below:

New Category and a new type of System Family for Finishes

I would love to see a new Category, called 'Finishes'. This category enables a new type of System Family which can be edited like you edit Walls and Floors (including integrated Sweeps, for example for a plinth), but you cannot place them individually. Instead, there is a strong connection between these Finishes and Rooms. In Rooms you can choose a Finishes Type as the default Finish under the current Wall Finish and Floor Finish parameters. So these parameters will no longer be just text. You can choose a Finishes Type from a drop down menu, or you click the dots next to the field to get to the Finishes panel. There you can edit and duplicate Finishes Types, like you edit Wall Types in the Walls panel. Just to be clear: Finishes Types will have thickness, but I don’t think they should be Room Bounding. However, if you don’t agree, I can live with the Room Bounding behavior to be optional 😉

Let's dive a bit deeper into the Finishes for Walls (and Columns):

In order to keep it as simple as possible, the Finishes for Walls will be generated on the inside of the Room Boundaries. However, they will have to be joined automatically with the Room Bounding elements in order to be cut at Wall Openings, Doors and Windows. This might result in lower model performance, so you should be able to switch off all Finishes calculations, just like you can with Room and Area calculations.

Once you've set the default Finishes, you can switch on the Finishes calculations. On all Room Boundary segments, the Finishes are generated. The finishes will be pinned by default, just as we know from Curtain Wall Panels. To make exceptions (like accent walls), you simply unpin this Finishes instance. When unpinned, you can either choose a different Finishes Type, use the Split Element function or divide the surface using Split Face. All segments can have there own Finishes Type. Off course, you can also use Match Properties to match the Finishes Type. In the Finishes tool bar on the ribbon, you will have a toggle to temporarily unpin all Finishes, so you can quickly edit them. When you're done editing, simply click the toggle again to pin all unchanged Finishes again.

Now about the Finishes for Floors:

Just like the Finishes for Walls, you can define the Finishes for Floors by Room at the Floor Finish parameter. These will be generated on top of the base level of the Room. Again, once generated the Finish is pinned. After unpinning it, you can edit the Type, or use the Split Face command to get the result you want.

For quick editing, you may want to have the possibility to show a panel with all Finishes Types, where – after choosing Match Properties – you can select the Type you want and then click all Finishes you want to be of the same Type.

[samuelsanf]

There are related ideas as:
https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/real-finish-materials-on-rooms-schedules/idi-p/6725433

And also the roadmap have a item about wall layers:
https://trello.com/c/ujPuLQDD

[Christiaan_de_Wit]

Hi @samuelsanf,

Thanks for your comment! I agree, the idea you posted years ago is related. It is good to see that there are more users who don't get why there's no smarter way of defining finishes within a Revit model. When I started thinking about a solution (also years ago), my first idea was similar to yours. However, I discovered that some technical difficulties will probably stop Autodesk to implement it, so I kept looking for an alternative. As a result I came up with a different approach, keeping away from linking Room Parameters to Wall Layers. I'll explain why I think this approach is more likely to be implemented.

1. To link the Room's Finish parameters to Wall Layers seems logical. The thing is, Room Boundaries aren't always defined by Walls. Sometimes it's Columns, sometimes it's a Curtain Wall, sometimes it's a slanted Roof or Ceiling. I can imagine that most of them - like a Curtain Wall - do not need to be fitted with the finishes, but Concrete Columns often will. But some users use (abuse) Curtain Walls for situations that do need finishing. If the solution for Room Finishes is linked to Wall Layers, it is evident that it is limited to Walls only, sidelining all other Room Bounding Elements.
2. Splitting Walls at all intersections might be doable, splitting Columns, however, is complicated. Splitting Floors at all Room Boundaries, both above and below the floor, is virtually impossible and, moreover, undesirable.
3. In many cases, the Room Bounding Elements are incorporated in Linked Models. It is impossible to add Room Finish properties to these linked Elements.
4. Revit already comes with an engine that determines the circumference of Rooms. This engine could be used for the generation of the finishes too (Wall, Floor as well as Ceiling Finishes).
5. This approach has been proven to work by using Dynamo. In fact, that's the solution we implemented in our company. However, that's a one time only process. Once the script has run, the generated finishes have no connection to the Room's parameters at all. And when the Room Bounding Walls Move, you have to think about moving the Finishing Walls too (which aren't visible in all views, so that's easily forgotten).
6. A native implementation opens the possibility to also implement easier ways to assign exceptions (including pinning/unpinning finishes and the panel for Match Properties I described at the bottom of my idea).

Please comment if you think I'm overlooking something (or if you agree). I'm open for feedback and additional arguments to strengthen our position as power users in our attempt to get Autodesk moving in the right direction.

[Christiaan_de_Wit]

The lack of smartness in the Room Finishes definition has blown our minds for years. The approach as described in this Idea does have some technical issues, which is why I thought of a different one. I've posted it as a new Idea, but I must give credit to @samuelsanf for shaking the Autodesk tree years ago!

For my alternative approach, please read the idea here:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/smarter-use-of-the-rooms-parameters-wall-finish-and-floor... 

[pbdbdq]

There is definitely still room for improvement in parametric finsihes and this is a creative solution that I would like to see implemented.

[samuelsanf]

The way I wish it works is assigning one or more material layer <<by room>> to wall/column/beam(not structural layer), floor, ceiling and stairs (run, riser and underneath), with also the thickness by room. In order to the same type of element get different layers of finished by room without needing to have different types for those materials or one element above for the finish alone.

For portions or entire elements that not need to have finish by room we can use paint tool, split face or stacked walls if needed.

This will be more accurate por computations and easy to edit, but also perfect for visualization and documentation.

I think is fine if the decide to implement sooner, only for schedule parameters and computations. But this maybe means that it will take a lot more time go back on this development and change completely in a way that work also for visualization (3D, plans, section, elevations).

[clebson_arquiteto]

@Christiaan_de_Wit obrigado pelo seu envio isso ajudará na otimização das soluções no software

Translated by Google

@Christiaan_de_Wit  thanks for your submission this will help in optimizing the solutions in the software




Traduzido por [@clacampos] através do Google Tradutor

[ks2_wmb]

The following are built-in parameters assigned to Rooms:

Base Finish

Ceiling Finish

Wall Finish

Floor Finish

Please move these built-in parameters within the properties palette from the "Identity Data" category to the "Materials and Finishes" category.

[mhiserZFHXS]

Better yet, allow us to move built-in parameters or just delete them all together. Better better yet, allow us to make our own parameter categories.

[kh_jea]

Given that this data isn't really material, just text, I'd rather not have it under "Materials and Finishes". You can't even quantify it, just make assumptions based on room dimensions.

[admaecc211151]

I want a built-in method to calculate room paint face, too.

And I want Autodesk to remake the room model by:

1. Room perimeter should only calculate only by the sides connecting with wall or column.

I don't think there is any Architect would paint on the air.

2. The built-in method to calculate side faces should have an option to auto minus doors and windows face area.

3. Room upper don't stop by Ceiling. Ceiling finish and upper finish is different, both of them should exist as a built-in parameter. Sometimes we paint on the upper concretes first and make ceiling after.

4. Get the concrete beams correctly, or at least see them as floors in upper or lower boundary.

5. I'd like to set room finish by the "Materials and Finishes" category even if they are not really shown on the 3D model. A new category "Not really Materials" looks more weird for me.