Fabrication Parts: Where is the value here?

[Anonymous]

I will absolutely claim ignorance here. Fabrication parts are new to me and I am not immediately finding good information on how it is to be used.

From what I am seeing, for piped systems, after the system has been drawn in Revit for the sake of engineering, the idea of Fabrication Parts is that you can then convert the engineering model into something more installation friendly.

The problem I am coming across, and this could absolutely be my ignorance, is that this conversion seems to require some level of redraw as not everything seems to convert. Pipes have to be reconnected at every thread o let and so on. Also, it seems that couplings can only be cut the direction that the pipe was drawn and the only way to change that is to go back to the Revit family drawing, redraw the pipe going the other way, then reconvert.

It just seems like a LOT of work for something that 'could' be accomplished through families.

Can anyone here help fill in the gaps for me?

[rudi.roux]

Hi @Anonymous, 

Hope you are well! 

In my opinion Fabrication Parts is one those things which isn't going to go away, actually more and more efforts are being put into it due to all the benefits of it. Remember when you only worked on AutoCAD, then you had to shift to Revit, you could see the benefits and everything looked awesome but you did not fully realize the extent of the benefits. I almost went through the same emotions with Fabrication Parts, but I (at that point) already read up a lot about industry trends and "BIM movements" and how BIM & LOD 400 (Level of Development) is benefiting all parties involved in the AEC industry. 

There are still some limitations when converting parts: Read the full article HERE

"- The selected service must contain all sizes used by the selected design elements.
- Tags on design elements are removed when converted to MEP fabrication parts.
- For best results, make sure that the selected design network is well connected.
- The following parts are not supported for conversion, but remain connected to elements that are converted: Mechanical equipment, duct and pipe accessories, dampers, flex duct and pipe, air terminals, sprinklers, and plumbing fixtures
- The following features and part types are not supported: justification, electrical containment, back-to-back fittings, and analytical connections. Also note that sloped pipe and duct is not fully supported.
- The following may not convert correctly: Taps that are not center justified, eccentric transitions, fittings with open connectors, a run connected to equipment with a transition.
- Air terminals that are connected to the face of a duct will not stay connected.
- Content that is not provided by Autodesk may have a greater rate of failure when using this command."

Best Practices: Fabrication Detailing in Revit

Mapping Revit MEP Families to MEP Fabrication Parts

Basically, Fabrication Parts provides greater certainty for detailers in construction firms so the model will accurately reflect the intended installation. MEP contractors can now use LOD 400 from Autodesk Fabrication products like Autodesk CADmep, ESTmep, and CAMduct to create a more coordinated model.

Re-installation of services on-site due to clashes digs into profits for all parties in the AEC industry. Site waste can be reduced due to the accuracy of design intent, which obviously has a positive impact. Costing of parts and projects become more accurate. The list goes on...

I think this is the "Adjustment Period" for most users, similar to the adjustment from AutoCAD to Revit. In a year or three you might look back at this stage in your career and think, "Man... this has made my life easier"... Or not, haha, so don't quote me on it... 

Some of the issues regarding conversion to fabrication parts are "small" and everything is still being developed, so there is hope for some of the points/problems which you raised. 

I hope my babbling made some sense! 

[chris.kershaw]

the only positive i see in ITM's is you dont have to create your own rfa's that are correct but that is it. the negatives are huge

Simply rfa's can do everything ITM's do & much more. ITM's cant do everything an rfa can do.

The Fabrication Parts (ITM) are just a dumb object thats the correct size. they dont have keep any flow rates, pressure drops, system info & they have none of the intelligent connections when you model, which is a big part of Revit been more efficient when modeling.

BIM is about one model that flows with a single sauce of information but the second you put an ITM in your model that is broken as you lose all intelligence  & your as built model you handover to the client is a dumb model. You cant go back change something in the design at the end of the job (which happens in all buildings ive worked on in the last 18 years) so you would end up with 2 models one for design & coord & one for fabrication this is totaly against what BIM is trying to do & unnecessary as if you just use the intelligent rfa's you can do it all in one model without redrawing with ITM's 

This is the point when people start asking for proof well if you dont have development time/capability in your own company then just look at sysque they do all the manufacturing using rfa's. If you do have time & personally I think it works out cheaper (and what we have done) is to just modify the rfas that you have to be the correct size 

We create manufacturing drawings for prefabricated pipe/containment modules with cut lengths for the small crimped pipewok & spools for welded all the way up to prefabricated plantrooms & riser all in revit with a single model using RFA's so our as build model is not only fabrication level but has all the design details, systems, flows, pressure losses the kind of info you want in a BIM model 

[Anonymous]

Chris, that is exactly where I am. You end up maintaining two models and two different versions of things. I get that AutoDesk isn't going to just drop it but it does fell like the longest possible route between point A and point B.

If sprinkler designers had all the time in the world, I guess it wouldn't matter so much but the reality is, sprinkler design is notoriously high velocity and the time it takes for all that is a tragic challenge to productivity.

I have looked at SysQue, but it appeared that they were light on the sprinkler stuff. They had some general use valves and so on, but not so much FP specific stuff. It's been a couple of years so maybe that has changed. Who knows. ...or maybe that just wasn't shown to us. Which would be odd. ...because that is why were talking to them. haha.

But, yeah, I am 100% with you that getting the families right as RFA's is the best route to go. I mean, if the model needs to be tighter than 1/32"... well, it doesn't. Not in construction. If we were developing prototype items on a small scale, totally get that but that isn't at all what Revit is about. Once the pipe hits the field, you'll be lucky if the fitters keep it at 1/2" precision. REAL lucky. ...but more realistically it will be to a full inch.

[Jacob_United]

Hi Barry,

I've been using Fab Parts for nigh on two years, and as a HVAC contractor rely heavily on the capabilities to improve manufacturing and installation workflows and overall efficiency.

I feel many are confused by the introduction of Fab Parts into the Revit environment. They will not replace system/non-system families during the design process, and were never intended to be an upgrade over these features. Fab Parts are intended to be used by contractors such as myself to close the gap between documentation and manufacturing. Which they happen to do very well.

You cannot fully appreciate Fab Parts without utilizing other components of the Fabrication Suite, for us that's CAMduct. With these packages (and plenty of in-house programming) we've automated a great deal of processing and decision making during fabrication and installation. 

Despite what I've already written, I'm a firm believer that Fab Parts have an incredibly long way to go. And as someone else stated, they won't be going anywhere.

The short version is: Fab Parts are incredibly useful to HVAC contractors with in-house manufacturing, provided they have the time and know how to take advantage of and expand on the capabilities Fab Parts bring to the party.

[Anonymous]

Actually, I really want it to work.

Here's the issues I am running into. Some if not all, like said up top, is likely born of ignorance.

So far, the only way I have been able to find to map a fab part to a revit family is to use AutoCAD. Is that so?

Can't seem to find where to create fabrication parts. Again, is this in AutoCAD?

Can't seem to control which way couplings are cut on pipe outside of which way the pipe was drawn. Am I missing something?

Does the fabrication parts allow for listing where holes are cut into pipe for thread o lets?

[Hugh_Compton]

I think the Fabrication Parts and RFA's should be merged.  It would make MEP a whole lot simpler for the end user:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-ideas/fabrication-parts-to-use-flows-etc/idi-p/6331581 

[Anonymous]

From what I have seen, I am with you. If it is just to show how it would look installed, that can be accomplished with Families. Granted, you are able to "only" get down to 1/32" of any dimension, but for construction, that's pretty exacting. You'd have to zoom in unreasonably close to notice that lack of detail. Then, your engineering file can be your install file. 

If that allowed the BOM routines to pick up on where taps (outlets) are cut into pipe, then ok. But so far, I am not seeing that it does that.

[khansaifsaif_591]

Fabrication Parts in Revit are meant to convert engineering models into installation-friendly components for piped systems. While the conversion process may require some additional work, such as reconnecting pipes at fittings and adjusting couplings, it offers advantages in accuracy and coordination. Although it may seem labor-intensive, Fabrication Parts provide more detail and functionality compared to using families alone. Further exploration or consultation with experienced users can help streamline the workflow. steelofy.co.uk

[HVAC-Novice]

I'm equally as ignorant and only design. Construction will be done by a contractor (we bid this out). Wouldn't it have been easier to have a separate fabrication software that imports the Revit model and then the fabricator can edit that fabrication model? Like a software that connects to the duct bending machine that spits out actual sheetmetal fittings. 

I feel Revit was a design software. And now they added fabrication functions (probably at the cost of improving design features). But from what I read above, the fabrication part also isn't really mature. And it seems, once something is a fabrication part, it loses some smart features. Maybe squeezing fabrication into Revit would make more sense if you could do both use a pipe for design, and have a fabricator add their detail without losing the original smart function a pipe has. 

Is this done in Revit for design-build contractors where the designer and fabricator are the same company (maybe even same person)? Next time I talk to an engineer that work as designers for contractors i need to ask them more detailed questions about this. 

A designer needs to run a 20" duct 100 ft long and pretends it is one single piece. A fabricator needs to make 10' sections, re-enforcements, decides the actual gauge of the metal, adds hangers and so on. Those are distinctively different activities. 

Maybe I'm not understanding this correctly. but Autodesk gave us a half-finished design software to be used by a designer. but instead of improving the design features, they added a half-finished fabrication portion that isn't useful to most designers. Convince me to change my mind. 

[craigjonnson]

Its more than geometry. I can auto spool, report the weights, report the center of gravity for prefab skids, labour hours, installation hours, material pricing. All within minutes. I can status track fabrication, installation, or run value engineering with one design vs the other pulling out exact costs of both options. 
I can provide the structural team weight loads on demand.

The amount of waste used modelling in just rfa alone has dramatically dropped. ITM content vs rfa is approx 1/3rd the file size. So my models are running faster.

Dont get me wrong, its easier to model up any end of line or inline Revit family when required, which is why we use a hybrid of the 2. Both types have their strengths and weaknesses, but since moving to fabrication as a contractor within Revit. Its a lot quicker than modelling rfa content.

[RSomppi]

---

@HVAC-Novice wrote:

Maybe I'm not understanding this correctly. but Autodesk gave us a half-finished design software to be used by a designer. but instead of improving the design features, they added a half-finished fabrication portion that isn't useful to most designers. Convince me to change my mind. 

---

It's hard to change someone's mind if they already have such strong opinions based on minimal experience.

Half finished? The world's preeminent software for multiple industries that has continued to be developed and used for decades is only half baked? It's futile to try to argue with such opinions when they are based on a narrow point of view with little experience.