Combine Structural Column and Reinforcing Schedules

[cory_byrnesW86EQ]

Hello,

Does anyone know how to combine schedules of two different categories into one schedule?  I attempted a "multi-category" schedule, but it only lets me schedule shared parameters.

I am attempting to create a column and reinforcing schedule in one schedule.

Please feel free to see my very basic seed file attached.

Thank you in advance

[jay_colcombe · Accepted solution]

Unfortunately this cannot be achieved  directly as you have found with the Multi- Category Schedule.

What are you trying to achieve outside what the Revit Reinforcement Schedule could achieve as this is usually capable of code standard output?  Do you have an example?

You could create 2 separate schedules for each element and use a common shared Parameter which is available to both Schedules and sort them as required so the rows match and place them next to each other on a sheet so they look like a single entity.

You could also investigate specialist Rebar addins such as CADSRC 3D/RebarCAD, Graitec Advanced Tools or Sofistic.  The applications work within Revit but offer greater functionality for reporting and grouping rebar and concrete elements.

[cory_byrnesW86EQ]

I feared such a response may be forthcoming.

Regarding what I was hoping to achieve: I was hopeful that I would, ultimately, be able to create a "master schedule" (so-to-speak), that listed all my foundation types (or maybe even instances), the associated rebar (including quantities and weights), and the associated anchor bolts (including quantities and weights).  As you noted, this could, theoretically, be mimicked via multiple schedule, sorted and formatted similarly, side by side.  However, that really doesn't have the functional capacity I'm looking for.

It seems for now, I may just have to settle for having separate schedules as I do not think expanding to additional software is an option, given required investment.

On that note, a few questions:

1) In the Structural Column Schedule, there is a schedulable parameter labeled "Estimated Reinforcement Volume".  Do you happen to know how this is calculated?  It seems as though it is dependent upon rebar that is hosted to the column element.  However, I am not finding that this volume accurately matches the total volume shown, per foundation instance, in the rebar schedule.  I am not certain what is causing this discrepancy between matching elements/rebar arrangements (I copy and pasted the original instance and this issue appeared)

2) Other than using the instance based "Mark" property of the structural columns, is there a way to identify the host element, or other host properties, in the rebar schedule?  Maybe this is where shared parameters come into play?

Thanks in advance for any help.

[jay_colcombe]

From what I understand the "Estimated Reinforcement Volume" shown is the total volume of reinforcement bars being hosted on that particular structural element. It is being called "Estimated" due to the fact that some rebars may overlap in between elements so Revit maybe saying something like "This is the rebar volume being hosted here but there are overlaps, so you know maybe this is only good as an estimation. You may have to calculate and check the rebar volume yourself if you want to budget this."

You are pretty much answering your own questions.  As regards the Column Reference it is simply the Host Mark.  Don’t overlook Partions as they can be used to group and Filter and user driven within reinforcement settings.  Schedule Mark no longer gets used for Rebar and is again user defined.  You could add shared parameters or utilise comments or spare parameters that are unused and use these base parameters for your needs.

[cory_byrnesW86EQ]

Thank you for the response.  Can you elaborate a little on the your note: "Don’t overlook Partions as they can be used to group and Filter and user driven within reinforcement settings".

Furthermore, can you provide a little clarity on how a shared parameter might be added and utilized for this?

Thank you

[cory_byrnesW86EQ]

Thank you for the response.  Can you elaborate a little on the your note: "Don’t overlook Partions as they can be used to group and Filter and user driven within reinforcement settings".

Furthermore, can you provide a little clarity on how a shared parameter might be added and utilized for this?

Thank you

[jay_colcombe]

Hi the comments were really intended on if you have 2 sperate schedules show would you use a common denominator between them to allow accurate sorting so they could align seamlessly

By utilising a spare Parameter or creating a new one which related to both Structural Columns and Rebar you could ensure they both match but would be a lot of manual work and i also think this is unnecessary as you should be able to use the Column reference and host references 

I mentioned Partitions as it gives another level of Filtering and Sorting functionality and allow you to group elements together and may help with this process and could be helpful?

Help | About Reinforcement Partitioning | Autodesk

[cory_byrnesW86EQ]

Thank you very much for your help on this.  While I'm not able to get what I was seeking in this case, you were still very helpful in confirming that it can't, organically, be accomplished and provided some alternatives.  I was also not aware of the partitions, these seem like they could be very helpful!

Thank you

[francisco_conde9FLX9]

This answer is not correct. The estimated reinforcement volume does not always provide the total volume of reinforcement bars being hosted on that particular element. It has errors with completely arbitrary percentages, that noone can and will ever explain.

Same elements, with same size, same rebar and same overlaps, might provide different estimated reinforcement volumes. If you want prints, models or a live show, I can provide.

[jay_colcombe]

I’m pretty sure that’s what I said!

[francisco_conde9FLX9]

I might be reading wrong but " It is being called "Estimated" due to the fact that some rebars may overlap in between elements (...)".

What I'm saying is that is doesn't matter the rebar overlaps, if you have the same rebar on 2 elements, with the same overlaps you still might get different values for estimated reinforcement volume. It's the revit structure roulette.

[jay_colcombe]

You are reading it wrong, the original post was not on this topic I just provided a simple explanation of why it is estimated and may give different values!

Revit and rebar volumes has been a long ongoing topic and conversation and probably still will be and as suggested estimated values should be viewed only as an estimate and I would suggest it is more of a legacy value/parameter, I do not know anyone who still uses them when creating more accurate volumes has become easier.

[francisco_conde9FLX9]

@jay_colcombe agreed. Where can we complain or ask to review this issue?