Marina Dock Modeling & Slip Numbers

[jondan]

Is there a way to accurately model a marina dock within Revit such that I can set up slips as rooms/spaces and utilize the room/space tag for the slip numbers? In general I know that rooms require model elements for their creation, and marina slips are open ended (no model element present at the end). Can you not assign space names that utilize the tags to user created-boundaries independent (or semi-independent) of model elements (canopies/porches, outside playground areas, etc. I could see also possibly using the same user-created boundaries that aren't required to have model elements on all sides)?

[Anonymous · Accepted solution]

You can draw space separation lines in floor plans.  The command is right next to the space creation command on the analyze tab.  You might need to adjust your VG setting first to make sure they're visible.

[kadmonkee]

you can use either Room Separation lines or Space Separation Lines to create the Slips

if you use Room Separation Lines you will be able to identify them easier 

the image below shows ROOM vs SPACE

the room tag is associated to the Room ROOM 1

the Space tag is asociated to a room that doesnt exist, therefore is displays as unoccupied

you may need to modify your Space tag to be able to edit it freely.

[Anonymous]

Assuming this is an MEP model, using rooms over spaces isn't going to do any good.  The behavior you're documenting is just an artifact of how the default naming process works, the names/numbers will need to be edited manually regardless of whether they're spaces or rooms.  I'd use spaces just because that's what the rest of my live model already has, but in this unique case the two are functionally equal.

[kadmonkee]

Im not assuming anything.

the example was created in a MEP model in a Mechanical disciplined floor plan, both ROOM and SPACE separatin lines were used

whichever can be accomplished in the fewer steps works 

[jondan]

I've used the Space Separators and they work extremely well and easily. Initially, the only work I have to do is set a precedent of what the Space Name is (i.e. "Slip") and then a precedent for the Space Number (i.e. "M1"), and then I can start placing (and simultaneously tagging) the spaces to get quick and accurate slip labels.

This is a further benefit when I initially power the marina pedestals, as they use the Load Classification and Space/Room Name & Number to populate the circuit name. This means that, when the load classifications are set up properly as desired, I (mostly) don't have to worry about renaming the circuits.

Here's an example:

• If I powered two pedestals with a Load Classification of "Metered Shore Power" in a single space named "Slip M1", Revit would auto-populate the circuit name as being "Metered Shore Power Slip M1".
• If I powered two pedestals with the same Load Classification, but now one is in space "Slip M2" and the other "Slip M3", it auto-populates the circuit name to "Metered Shore Power Rooms M2, M3".

The biggest caveat to this working flawlessly is when multiple pedestals/slips (spaces) are powered by a single circuit. In these instances, as part of Revit's formula for "Load Name", it attempts to shorten the load name of the multiple spaces. It does so by retaining the Load Classification (assuming it's the same throughout) and the Space Numbers, but replacing the multiple (potentially) unique Space Names with a default "Rooms". For most projects, where you actually have "Rooms", this wouldn't be an issue, but for the instances where you're using the Space Separators for a unique, non wall-defined space (such as marina slips), it requires a manual edit of the circuit name.

Lastly, one other oddity with wanting to use this method for circuit naming purposes. Should there be multiple spaces powered by a single circuit, I've noticed that in some instances it doesn't arrange the Space Numbers in ascending order. I've not found a specific trigger for why it arranges them differently for some, but correctly for others.

[Anonymous]

in some instances it doesn't arrange the Space Numbers in ascending order.

I think it arranges them based on the order in which they were added to the circuit.  Never tested it though, because at the end of the day it's purely an aesthetic problem, the information is still there.

[jondan]

I could see that being a somewhat logical method by which to list the numbers, except for two things:

1. I selected all of the pedestals simultaneously and then powered them
2. Otherwise adding entities to circuits already powered doesn't affect the circuit name, as it's only "dynamic" upon first powering. Once the circuit is powered, it doesn't automatically change depending on what is later added to it.

Like you said, it's purely aesthetic, but our plans being our final product to our clients, coupled with my slight OCD tendencies, means that aesthetic inconsistencies matter. 

[Anonymous]

Yeah, I was thinking of the order you selected them in before creating the circuit. Could be the order they were created in, the Element IDs, or the Marks, or gremlins throwing dice.  I really haven't a clue, I was just guessing.

Stuff like that bothers me, too.  But if I had a client that noticed such things I'd lose my **** mind.  Most clients don't even know panel schedules exist, much less look at them.