Analytical modelling of openings in Revit 2024

[SabinaK4RXQ]

Hello,

I have question regarding analytical modelling.

Namely, these are the steps I took to prepare satisfactory analytical model in Revit 2024:

1. Made structure physical 3D model – I tried 2 variations of making openings for doors (did 2 separate models): by editing wall profile and by using wall opening option
2. Created corresponding analytical model from physical one by using Analytical Automation tool
3. Applied filters for nodes and panels to be able to differ between connected and unconnected nodes and between walls and slabs
4. Manually adjusted unconnected nodes by editing wall’s and slab’s profiles

For the step 1., in both cases, Analytical Automation took the contuor of wall openings, but the nodes on the openings were all unconnected – why is that happening?

I had to manually adjust openings to have all nodes connected. I did this by adding analytical openings manually: at first I added analytical openings, then had to again edit wall profiles to indicate that those analytical openings are cutting analytical walls – for all walls, one by one, repeating the same process, even though “Create analytical openings for the selected floors and walls” option is True in Analytical Automation dialogue box. I also send the recording of actions I have previously recorded. Also, is this the right manner to get the correct model for Robot Structural Analysis Pro?

Thank you in advance!

[jay_colcombe]

I can only assume during the process of Analytical Automation the openings were not created correctly as they have not been formed as they need a closed loop and the Bottom Member is not present.  You may need to Review the Physical model and how they openings are working or presented to spot any anomalies which are being carried over into the automation process.

Obviously when manually creating the openings in the video the warning is not cutting the Wall hance the warnings could you simply sketch in the missing elements at the bottom of the Opening to create a Closed Loop which an opening requires?

[SabinaK4RXQ]

@jay_colcombe 

As it can be seen from the video, as I was manually adjusting the analytical model, I formed the closed loop. My question is, what to do to avoid having to adjust model manually? As I indicated in the 1. step, either I used function "Edit profile" or "Wall opening" when creating openings on physical model, the nodes did not connect when automating analytical model. I imagine having huge building and being forced to adjust nodes on every opening manually, when there is automation option - it would be painfully tedious. 

Is it possible that I am doing something wrong while making physical model, that results in incorrect analytical model when it comes to openings in walls? 

Thank you! 

[orenco14]

1. Analytical opening nodes are defined as "Connected", I guess because the node of the opening is connected to the node of the panel.
When an "opening" is modeled as the contour of the panel, then the node is Unconnected, exactly as it is in a slab edge (if it's not connected to any other element such as another panel or member... or opening).

2. I assume whether an opening or a contour is created (with the analytical automation tool) is dependent on the method of modeling the physical element (opening vs wall profile editing). Either way, the end result is the same so I would not overthink it. Having unconnected nodes is acceptable as long as the reason for them being unconnected is acceptable (panel edges, or other situations), which is for you as the modeler/designer to decide.

3. Analytical nodes can be buggy with view filters- connected nodes can appear as unconnected and vice-versa. zooming in/out or closing the view can help solve this.

4. I'm not sure what were you trying to accomplish by modeling an opening over the empty area of the panel. It will not work, as you saw.

[SabinaK4RXQ]

@orenco14 

1. I understand. 

2. I want to make physical model that is transferable to Robot Structural Analysis Pro, make some changes if necessary, and send it back to Revit. Is this issue about analytical openings going to affect the correctness of analysis results?

3. I agree, I've already experienced that.  

4. I believe you did not understand the point of my video. This is what happened: 

- I modelled physical wall opening (with the option wall opening), 

- I got the analytical model by Analytical Automation tool, 

- nodes of the opening were not connected and when I hovered over the place of the supposed analytical opening, that was in fact wall profile, no analytical opening could be highlighted, 

- because of that I thought maybe I need to add analytical opening manually (that is when I add analytical opening over the empty area)

- after that, when I realized that added analytical opening is not cutting wall because it was over the empty area, I edited wall profile to be without the empty areas. 

Please don't forget to answer my question in the point 2. 

This would be much easier if discussed by speaking, but I think I managed to explain my issue in detail. Thank you for your time! 

[orenco14 · Accepted solution]

If I understand correctly, while the physical wall was modeled with an opening, the analyticla wall was modeled as an open contour without an analytical opening (I assume this is the case becuase as you mentioned the analytical nodes were unconnected. If there was an analytical opening it would be impossible for the nodes to be unconnected).
Whether the analytical automation tool generates an open contour or an opening depends on the physical model, and also on how the analytical automation tool is configured (in Dynamo). Bottom line is I would not stress on this- whether there is an opening or an open contour (and whether those nodes are connected or unconnected), the analysis results should be the same.

Though your experience with sending the model back to Revit may vary- so it's best to experiment with it with different modeling techniques.

[SabinaK4RXQ]

Thank you very much for quick response! 

Best Regards!