An attached Structural Foundation will be moved to the bottom of the Column.

[chitru_adesk]

I am trying to place a Structural Steel Column in a deck But after placed, the structural foundation ( Pile with end cap) is automatically moved the bottom of the column. 

Please assist me to resolve this issue I have been struck for a long time because of this issue.

[Anonymous · Accepted solution]

Try to use Height when placing structural columns.

[weehur]

Dear, I encounter the same problem, but can't be resolved by the method introduced by  your good self, is there any other solution? thanks.  

[thillYSMCS]

Found myself with the same issue the above solution was not compatible - easy fix for me was cutting a section and locking the top of my pilecap in place. Hope this helps. 

[Anonymous]

It did not work for me. Revit keeps moving the footing. THE BEST SOLUTION WOULD BE THAT AUTODESK GUYS ALLOW US, THE USERS, TO SELECT IF WE WANT TO ATTACH THE FOOTING TO THE BOTTOM OF THE COLUMN, PERIOD. THE SAME GOES FOR THE "ALLOW JOIN" IN STRUCTURAL FRAMING.

AUTODESK: PLEASE, LISTEN TO THE ACTUAL USERS

[tarmo.lahdesmaki]

I've also tried to come up with some way to avoid this "functionality". It's very dangerous that the elevation of footings can move like this and there is no way to prevent it.

The best solution I've come up with is to use generic model category for foundations. The downside of this is that your Structural Foundation schedules can't be used.

I'm with Nelson here. I don't see any benefits to this functionality. It should either be removed or at least made optional.

[Anonymous]

You can add a 'Post_Embedment' parameter in the family and manually offset from the base of the post.

[mariamolobo49]

It worked for me, thanks

[matt.lucas.]

I did this with a reference plane that I pinned in place and locked the pad to it. Worked like a charm...thanks for the tip @thillYSMCS .

This issue is why I stopped using foundation families but they might well be back.

[troy_troy]

@Anonymous  Thank you for a very nice solution.

[Albert.Maduro]

Your proposed solution is working

Shukran

[LeandroConradt]

I have been looking for solutions for some time and finding the difference between some foundations allowing the column to be covered and others not.
Finally 🙌 I found this combination of Reference Plane types, Defines Origin marked to the base Reference Plane (Ref. Level) with a reference type "TOP", as well as the top of the foundation block as "NOT A REFERENCE"

Precast Cup Structural Foundation - Reference Plane types adjustmentsPrecast Cup Structural Foundation - Reference Planes types adjustments - Attached to column

[bushra_shahin2]

I tried many ways but I recommend to model it in place.

[bushra_shahin2]

this didn't work out

[m.i.m.o]

Thx. Worked.

And shame on Autodesk for another workaround.

[jason.macgregor]

3.5 years later and autodesk are still taking your money and not listening.

[luquef]

I have been struggling with same issue for a while a this works perfectly fine, THANK YOU mate!

[Gustavo_Bernardi]

I was here reading for solving the issue, when I decided to try cutting the geometry and worked fine.

[jeremy]

2025 and this isn't an option is why I hate autodesk so much.  You already mess up my workflow by the popup I have to close telling me its moving it, just make it an optional instance property to attach to the column.  And while you are at it,  get rid of that awful unnecessary popup telling me I cant make an automatic beam system on a reference plane.  It was helpful the first 10 times, here I am 15 years into this hellscape called revit and you still cost me 3 seconds dozens of times per day. 

@jeremy - this post has been edited due to Community Rules & Etiquette violation

[BlueLineVDC]

Autodesk is too lazy to fix anything