Anuncios
Welcome to the Revit Ideas Board! Before posting, please read the helpful tips here. Thank you for your Ideas!
cancelar
Mostrando los resultados de 
Mostrar  solo  | Buscar en lugar de 
Quiere decir: 

UK Rebar Shape Codes

UK Rebar Shape Codes

If Revit wants to be taken seriously as a rebar detailing solution then the UK Rebar shape codes need to checked and corrected so that they function in accordance with the British Standard.

 

So far I have found that 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 32, 34, 35 and 46 are all wrong. The UK does not have standard hooks, we need to be able to specify the leg length(s).

 

Also a number of shape codes report values for dimensions that should not be in the schedule but appear to be required to manipulate the bar.

 

It would appear that the old content generator was able to create correct UK shape codes, so why aren't the ones included in 2017 and 2018 correct?

6 Comentarios
Anonymous
No aplicable

 

The reinforcement tools are improving year on year in Revit and with the extension tools from 3rd party developers are making it better. 

 

I would add that it would be nice to have a default template for all the UK standards/requirements for RC detailing. 

Dandman01
Participant

The rebar tools are definitely improving, but they're still a long way short, it would be great if Autodesk could include the shapes to the UK code, especially with Allplan tripping over themselves to try to sell us there software. There's only so long we can make the excuse that Autodesk is responsive enough to stick with Revit.

El estado se ha cambiado a: Accepted

Congrats! We think this is a great idea, so we've decided to add it to our roadmap. Thanks for the suggestion!

 

The Factory

El estado se ha cambiado a: Implemented

We are pleased to say that this has been implemented in Revit 2023! Thank you for your contribution to improving Revit!

 

-The Factory

Lor_UK_IT
Participant

Shape 23 is wrong, it's drawn with hooks, this is not coherent with the British Standard.

peticid
Autodesk

Hi Lorenzo,

Your observation is correct. Thank you for raising this issue. The reason we decided some time ago to define the A and C segments as hooks is because of how we anticipated they should behave in most cases, which is closer to hooks behavior, rather than actual segments.

This means that segments A and C would remain unchanged in length, should the concrete host geometry adjust, or if the position of the bar changes. If we define A and C as segments, they would follow the logic of the constraints.

 

I am very interested to learn from you and the other experts following this thread what you think of this current approach.

 

Kind regards,

Dan Peticila, M.Sc. Str. Eng.

peticid_0-1731336918783.png

Product Manager | Autodesk Revit

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Enviar idea  

Autodesk Design & Make Report