Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
Submitted byAnonymouson01-16-201901:10 PM
Status:
Gathering Support
Rooms should have a demolish parameter
Rooms should have a demolish parameter. If you're working on a renovation project, you have to use some crazy workaround to tag existing rooms to be demolished on a Demolition Plan.
I would change your request to a visibility issue. I agree with the problem but don't agree with the proposed solution.
In reality, a room is a conceptual space. It is nothing but air that we assign a value based on the surrounding walls. You can't demolish air. Rooms are per phase, period. It's pretty straightforward, and that makes sense to me.
The issue is when you are in a New Construction phase, showing Previous + Demo, it makes sense to see the Previous rooms, not the New rooms. I think this can be accomplished with visibility.
If one is working on a project where walls of a room are being demolished and the "air" space is changing to a new configuration, you can't correctly put an existing room in that space., no matter the phase you are in. Revit will always use the walls built in the renovation to define the space, even if you are in the "existing" phase. I don't care how it's fixed, but one should be able to place existing rooms in the existing phase, so they can be tagged and the SF calculated. Otherwise, one has to make fake dumb room tags that will need to be manually changed, and can lead to errors. This program costs too much money for the number of workarounds one has to do for simple tasks.
@dplumb_BWBR That's the solution I could think of, but it is still a slight workaround. I was thinking it could be nice to have an additional column in VV/VG that you could override the phase of a single category (similar to the Detail Level column). Would be useful for this Room situation, and could potentially be useful for other stuff too.
This is still a workaround. I want this program to natively handle existing and new rooms correctly. Also, since rooms only exist in one phase, existing rooms don't exist across phases, even if they are untouched. Walls, floors, etc exist across phases, why wouldn't the rooms they create?
I'm working on a three phases renovation of a 150,000 SF building where some rooms are untouched and SHOULD continue to exist in later phases instead of having to create duplicate rooms and place two views on top of each other on a sheet.
I know Autodesk isn't going to work on this, but I'm quite tired of workarounds.
I initially disagreed with you, but then I realized that you're right. Rooms need to have the same phasing parameters as walls and doors. Consistency is important. Existing rooms should be demolished when they no longer exist, or even get demolished automatically once ANY of their surrounding "room bounding" walls is demoed. The rooms that remain, should carry over throughout the project to the end and be visible in "show complete" - I don't even understand why Revit was not set up like this to begin with.
