copy reinforcement error

[Anonymous]

Hello,

1) I have create some foundation beams and I also create the reinforcement for these beams. When I copy these beams even the elements the reinforcement is changing automatic (some bars became shorter or longer then original). This is wrong because the beams are identically.

I hope is about some settings, because if is really that you can't copy an element with reinforcement in safe conditions (without the program change the length of bars) , the program isn't reliable. I have to mention that the reinforcement exceed the concrete. 

2) Also if I define an element with reinforcement and that reinforcement exceed the concrete (It will be anchored in other element), the program automatic change the host of stirrups that are outside the concrete. This isn’t what I want ( for example the reinforcement cage of columns –part anchored in  foundation must belongs to foundation not to columns)

Thanks

[ovidiu_paunescu]

Hello @RobohoboRabbit

I've analyzed your model and found that the bars that move (B40) have one segment constrained to the segment of a shape 29 bar (after copy/mirror).

This happens because the system tries to connect standard bars to stirrups.

One example of applying this logic is the reinforcement inside a beam, where the longitudinal bars connect to the corner of the stirrups.

This is something that we are working to fix.

In the meantime, I recommend the following:

• edit the family of the shape 29 bar
• change the style to Standard (instead of Stirrup/Tie)
• Reload into the project and Overwrite

After this B40 will not snap to that segment anymore.

Let me know if this works for you.

[RobohoboRabbit]

Thank you for the reply I understand what your saying, but I don't get why this type of error keeps happening its the same thing as the shape 41 and 51 not working together  .

Is there a way I can edit all the rebar shapes in Revit so these things don't happen, or can we turn off the constraints

would you say Revit can do complicated rebar design or is it more suited to basic rebar  like slabs and beams

[Anonymous]

Hi,

Regarding editing ABC... in schedule, it is not possible. I try this and the rebar number disappear. What can I do next?

Today I try to put the reinforcement in one beam with 2 spans and assign the perfect constraints. After that I change the cover and all the bars follow the new cover, so I think finally I define the constraints as the program want (this is a fundamental error because a program should be flexible and do what user want not vice versa. ) It was very complicated because for a group of 3 bars (top bars of a beam for example) you can define only one constraint for top. If you change the lateral cover of beam the rebar will not follow the stirrups and will be outside the stirrups. So I define lateral constraints for one bar and after that I change the number to 3, and in this way I can edit constraint for the 3rd rebar. After spending 6 hours in analyzing the unpredictable behavior of constraints, I try to copy rebars of the perfect fitted constraints and big big surprise - copping the rebar in another beam generate a complete mess. (the new beam has 3 span but i hope that all the time wasted with defining the constraints will be somehow rewarded and the constraints will behave good) Sorry to say this but even 100 years ago, for drawing a 2 span beam ( I only do the model not the drawings ) nobody need 6 hours. Why lateral constraints change? I'm in a big delay and I need solution ...

  Thanks

[ovidiu_paunescu]

Hello Cristian,

I noticed in the model you sent over that you are using Number with spacing as the layout of your sets.

This type of layout creates the exact number of bars you specify, at the exact spacing. This means that you can only constrain one of the ends.

If you use Fixed Number, you will place X bars at whatever distance is between the ends.

If you use Maximum spacing, you specify the max distance that is allowed between the bars and the number is derived

Similarly for Minimum clear spacing.

More info here

I've created a simple example to show how the bars can be placed and how they react to changes.

See attachment for video and project file.

The segment lengths can be edited in the schedule. The missing rebar numbers may be due to how you sorted and/or filtered the items in the schedule.

If you want you can send a sample or more details on what you are experiencing and i'll have a look.

[ovidiu_paunescu]

Unfortunately, you cannot disable the constraints using a native Revit command.

Groups disable that bar constraints (as we previously discussed), but when un-grouped the bars search for constraints again.

These issues that you have experienced are all related to the snapping between segments.

This is beneficial for many different cases, but may fail in others.

Also, when you copy rebar, you obviously create a new element, which will search for it's own constraints.

The snapping between segments works by comparing the Bar Segment Planes of the segments of the two bars.

If those planes are paralel, the system may decide that it can snap one to the other, even though they may not be in range.

We are currently working to address these issues.

I can definitely tell you that you can create complex reinforcement patterns using Revit.

Free Form Rebar is another tool in Revit for creating more complex 3D distributed rebar sets.

Currently Free Form bars don't react to other bars, just to the host faces (references) that were used to define the set.

Making changes to the set without the references (i.e. copying/moving the host with the bars) will make the bars loose their constraints and not react to further changes.

Free form bars can also be sketched as single bars by switching the Geometry parameter while in Edit Sketch to free form. A sketched free form bar doesn't react to any outside influence.

More info here

[GatisM]

Hello,

very interesting post. It reminds me my few years ago posted (lot of posts) texts what was the same as now posted  office.proiectca . After few years investigation there is no changes. Rebar CONSTRAINS are perfect to use while placing rebar in some individual elemnts, but when you must populate something, then it becomes ridicilius. It's fact. But all my advises on posts and in private e-mails are ignored. I understand that developers do they best, but one little thing what I asked POSSIBILITY TURN ON / OFF CONSTRAINS could be god plesure. It means not turn off unchecking checkbox for each individual face, and after copying rebar to another same elemnt, all we now what happens.

Working with gropus in revit you must know some tips to not get in trouble, but its the, in my opinion, the only way to work with rebars in revit, if we didn't get option turn off rebar constrains.

Advice, do not group each individual ore small groups like for one column and than copy it, make huge groups of rebars, for example one group for all columns (just work all the time in group edit mode), than seperate one group for all beams and so on. Than you will get possibility better manage rebars.

I hope developers will stop solving problems wich becomes from rebar constrains, but just give users (who are paying money for software) what we need. Not just workarounds.

[RobohoboRabbit]

Thank you for the Reply , we specialise in bespoke rebar fabrication across the uk and Europe , so my models are very large usually government projects and at the moment no one could convince me Revit is able to produce BIM model rebar to uk standard . without a lot of editing and extra work.

its nice to see its being looked into , but as costumers who have paid a lot of money for this software I think we are entitled to some sort of time frame for a fix , or simply a refund and we can get the software we need to complete rebar model's .

[RobohoboRabbit]

free form rebar is another minor issue for us , in the Uk free form rebar is known as a shape code 99 , but revit have replaced this with Rebar shape 1 etc... How do we change this in the BBS , costumers or the machines we use in the uk don't know what rebar shape 1 means and it cant be used.

Shape code 99 is a detailing standard here , when people see it they know its free form and the bending machine knows the code 99 as free form its a small detail but causes issues ,

[ovidiu_paunescu]

If the Workshop Instructions is set to Keep Straight, free form rebar will report the first straight shape in the project.

When the parameter is set to Keep Straight, the assumption is that the bar is delivered as a straight bar and bent place (e.g. placing longitudinal bars in a spiral ramp)

Since Revit 2019, free form rebar can be matched to Revit rebar shapes, by setting that option to Bend.

If the geometry of the bar can be matched to a Revit rebar shape, it will be matched and report all the segment lengths.

You can customize the parameters by editing the matched shape and changing the parameter assignments, for example.

More about shape matching here

[RobohoboRabbit]

thank you i think you miss understood , I  know about the shape and free form that is a nice thing to see in revit , but my issue is how you call off free form rebar - see pic attached .

we need to replace the text ''rebar shape 1'' there is no such thing is this industry .

also there seems to be an error with the coupleing of bars , if you take two bars shape 00 and join them with a coupler only one of the bars gets a new shape code the other is left as 00 , but 1 bar has thread and couple should = new code and one bar has a thread should = new code , but this dose not happen and its  missing the end treatment of threaded

[ovidiu_paunescu]

Rebar shape 1 is just the name of the shape family when it was first created.

This also happens if you sketch something that is different that the other shapes.

Try renaming it from the Project Browser and see if that works.

Unfortunately the names of the shape families must be unique, if the shapes are different (99-1, 99-2)

Regarding the effect of the coupler end treatment on the bar, you can go to reinforcement settings and enable "include end treatments in Rebar Shape definition".

This means, that the shape code (welded, threaded, etc) will be taken into account when defining the shape.

In the shape family, end treatment at start / end are the parameters that match the end treatment applied by each coupler per bar instance.

Please note that, similar to hook definitions, the option can be disabled / enabled only if no bars exist in the project.

[RobohoboRabbit]

that worked great thanks , been trying to rename that for ages.

[Anonymous]

Hello  ovidiu.paunescu 

Please see the attachment ...

[RobohoboRabbit]

The constraints and snaps are quite a big issue if the placement and positioning of rebar is important to the detailer.

I would simplify it with drawings for the  call off of rebar verse drawings for the factory fabrication .

You have seen my model and its not very complex but has a lot of bar placement and positioning (not just everything 150 c/c ect..) . A bigger issue going forward  is once the cage is complete the next cage to be drawn is the same but 200m wider .

ideally using Revit I increase the size of my host which drags the links to the cover and then I re-enter the Main steel . this would make the job move along fast using each model and editing .

But in reality in Revit once you touch the model the rebar will start looking for new constraints and snaps but not just to the cover to other types of rebar in the host , meaning starter rebar would always be an issue .

With the amount of errors / changes and editing to the models its actually fast to start from noting and do a new model  .

I think an option to turn constraint's  on or off would be best , ideally meaning if the detailing is standard they will help , but more complete bespoke rebar needs its own placement and should be free to move , id love to see this with a rebar clash detection as taking off constraints would leave you open to more clashes. my other options would be able to select rebar by bar mark in the host and locking the dimensions I key in , I think for other detailers having the rebar not change its dimensions s very important , as a steel supplier it worries me how all these little things changing messes with the weight of the steel every one reading here knows weight = money .  I know ill be paying more attention the bbs that come from revit.

[ovidiu_paunescu]

Hello @Anonymous

I tested the sample you sent and found that the left segment is constrained to the right face and has an offset of 253.7 mm. This distance is kept when changing the section - this works as expected.

This is shown below:

I copied the beam shown to the right and found that the constraints are kept, so changing the section works correctly. The behavior is the same if i copy the portal frame (other beam and columns)

How did you produce the beam in step 1?

I noticed that the segment on the left is the one that is selected when editing the bar constraints. Maybe you clicked the right face before selecting the handle you wanted to edit.

When a handle is selected, clicking an element face or cover changes that handle's constraint to that face or cover.

[umilan89]

Can anyone tell me why when I try to copy some reinforcement in one host, revit moves the host?

[ovidiu_paunescu]

Is the host a generic adaptive model element? 

There is a known issue in revit when copying rebar or dimensions to such elements, the host gets moved.

This will be addressed in a future version of revit.

As a workaround you can try to change the host to some other type of element before copying 

[umilan89]

Yes, it is generic. It is such an annoying thing. 2022 version not fixed that?

Thank you very much for replaying