Pipefitting, connector size not changeble by grips in project

[ReneBogersREBO]

Hi all,

I have built some pipefittings, but can't get them ajusted with the blue texts in project.

When selecting the fitting, and change size in pulldown list, that works ok.

But when wanna change the blue texts apearing when selecting family, it tells me its -609.6 mm.

Any ideas?

[Anonymous]

Use look up table to make the connector size changes automatically with the pipe size

[ReneBogersREBO]

I am using LookupTables and that works perfect.

BUT I also want it possible to ajust the fitting size, when not connected to a pipe

[Secttor]

@ReneBogersREBO  you want to be able to manually edit the blue text with the diameter instead of changing the value from drop-down list?

[ReneBogersREBO]

Correct!

It's not particular my wish, but a wish from some Revit users.

Not particular for knee and bends, but especially also for transitions (which have 2 different size connectors).

Those transitions cant change by drop-down list, cause they have 2 different sizes.

[ryan.lenihan]

the -609.6 looks like it's your elevation. you can't have a -609.6 fitting size.

if this is in regards to transitions, check my reply to your other post but basically this is not how transitions work. you need to tell your users to change the pipe size and the transition will change with it.

most revit pipework and fittings works this way (change the pipe size, not the fitting)

[ReneBogersREBO]

It isn't the elevation.

We are not modeling standard water or heating pipes. We are modeling systems for swimmingpools using high pressure PVC.

Here a picture top make it more clear:

The left Tee is standard.... there is 1 tee with 3 pipes in it.

The right Tee is different, there is 1 tee, with 2 pipes and 1 union/transition, this un/trans has 1 pipe and 1 Tee

Hope I made myself clear.

If I change to UNION instead of Transition, then problem is solved, maybe I go to that direction.

[ryan.lenihan]

from what i gather, the reasoning behind what you're trying to do is because your revit users want to use the following workflow

1. draw pipe
2. manually place tee fitting
3. manually place union/transition piece
4. manually place pipework branch

if that is the intention, it will be very slow to model this way. yes the union solution would work, but it's not the optimal workflow for modelling piping.

i absolutely understand what you're trying to achieve, it's just not a "problem with revit" as the transitions are designed to work a certain way and the workflow your users are following is well.. not the intended workflow.

[ReneBogersREBO]

Last thing, then it's all clear to me, how to tackle this the best way.

I have a Tee piece (ø200), with exists in 3 different types of brances (other types don't exist).

200-200, 200-160 and 200-110.

When the Tee-piece exists then it will be automatically been modelled.

Main-pipe is ø200

Brance is ø200, ø160 or ø110

But what about this situation:

Mainpipe is ø200

Brance is ø125

What I really would like to have, that it is drawn like this:

a Tee-piece (200-200 or 200-160)

a Reducing bush (transition/union) (200-125 or 160-125)

(Q: then I need to declare my fitting as transition instead of union I guess?)

And this situation:

Mainpipe is ø200

Brance is ø32

What I really would like to have, that it is drawn like this:

a Tee-piece (200-110)

a Reducing bush (transition/union) (110 -50)

a Reducing bush (transition/union) (50-32)

(Q: I don't think this is possible?)

[fabiosato]

Hello,

Usually I leave a very short segment of pipe, like 1 or 2 mm, so it can drive the pipe size, otherwise these complex combinations are not possible.