Community
16594 Views, 37 Replies
Hi Everyone,
We're currently using AutoCAD to model and document large scaffolding systems - we have dynamic blocks of all the different system components which contain node snapping points. This method is extremely easy to model large systems quickly, we basically turn off all snaps except for node, and then copy/array everything we need into position. The downfall is that when it comes to documentation, we're finding AutoCAD is too cumbersome and does not give the flexibility we need to create our drawings as quickly as is possible in Revit. (think section boxes, scope boxes, sections, callouts, etc. etc.)
So my question is, to emulate the behavior of our dynamic blocks in Revit, should we be looking at adaptive components with embedded point elements, so that we can snap everything together quickly in the project environment, or would the better workflow be to use column and beam families?
Here's a screenshot of our AutoCAD blocks, I've pulled them apart - you can just see the node next to the bottom right member.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts.
Hi Everyone,
We're currently using AutoCAD to model and document large scaffolding systems - we have dynamic blocks of all the different system components which contain node snapping points. This method is extremely easy to model large systems quickly, we basically turn off all snaps except for node, and then copy/array everything we need into position. The downfall is that when it comes to documentation, we're finding AutoCAD is too cumbersome and does not give the flexibility we need to create our drawings as quickly as is possible in Revit. (think section boxes, scope boxes, sections, callouts, etc. etc.)
So my question is, to emulate the behavior of our dynamic blocks in Revit, should we be looking at adaptive components with embedded point elements, so that we can snap everything together quickly in the project environment, or would the better workflow be to use column and beam families?
Here's a screenshot of our AutoCAD blocks, I've pulled them apart - you can just see the node next to the bottom right member.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts.
HI Markwhat,
Thanks for the reply, looks like you and I are the only two looking at this kind of thing!
I like the approach you've taken with building the family, you've certainly put a lot of effort into some of those formulas. I think this method is a great way to populate all your "main" scaffold, I'm guessing you're planning on just manually dropping in the components when you get to corners or unusual parts of the scaffold? How are you going to "snap" all those parts together? This is one of the big hurdles we're finding with ours - we too have found snapping all the parts together way to cumbersome.
We ended up taking the adaptive component route for our families, and using Dynamo for placement. So far I've only built families for a standard and a rosette, and the Dynamo script is correctly placing the standards based on the face of a selected wall in Revit. We're still going to have the same problem when we get to the corners and any unusual parts, these will have to be modeled piece-by piece, unless we have a family/dynamo that is extremely well put together which has the flexibility to do it. So far using the Revit families, we've done a 100,000 instance test and although it is moderately slow, it's still workable. 5,000 blocks in AutoCAD on the same PC is almost completely unusable (10 minute regen times etc.).
Of course, the huge advantage of even bothering with any of this in Revit (when we already have well developed 3D dynamic blocks of all our scaffold components in AutoCAD) is that we can get live schedules for gear lists and weights off the models - something that at requires a fiddly data extraction and import/cleanup in excel at the moment. We also get far more flexibility when creating views for documentation in Revit as well.
I really think the only realistic way forward with this is adaptive components + Revit + Dynamo, with the flexibility to model piece-by-piece as required. It's going to take a huge amount of development time to get it all working though.
HI Markwhat,
Thanks for the reply, looks like you and I are the only two looking at this kind of thing!
I like the approach you've taken with building the family, you've certainly put a lot of effort into some of those formulas. I think this method is a great way to populate all your "main" scaffold, I'm guessing you're planning on just manually dropping in the components when you get to corners or unusual parts of the scaffold? How are you going to "snap" all those parts together? This is one of the big hurdles we're finding with ours - we too have found snapping all the parts together way to cumbersome.
We ended up taking the adaptive component route for our families, and using Dynamo for placement. So far I've only built families for a standard and a rosette, and the Dynamo script is correctly placing the standards based on the face of a selected wall in Revit. We're still going to have the same problem when we get to the corners and any unusual parts, these will have to be modeled piece-by piece, unless we have a family/dynamo that is extremely well put together which has the flexibility to do it. So far using the Revit families, we've done a 100,000 instance test and although it is moderately slow, it's still workable. 5,000 blocks in AutoCAD on the same PC is almost completely unusable (10 minute regen times etc.).
Of course, the huge advantage of even bothering with any of this in Revit (when we already have well developed 3D dynamic blocks of all our scaffold components in AutoCAD) is that we can get live schedules for gear lists and weights off the models - something that at requires a fiddly data extraction and import/cleanup in excel at the moment. We also get far more flexibility when creating views for documentation in Revit as well.
I really think the only realistic way forward with this is adaptive components + Revit + Dynamo, with the flexibility to model piece-by-piece as required. It's going to take a huge amount of development time to get it all working though.
Hi I would like to obtain blocks like this.
Where can I find them. Currently I design in Peri Blocks
I would like pinlock blocks or layher blocks.
I would appreciate it
@Anonymous wrote:Hi Everyone,
We're currently using AutoCAD to model and document large scaffolding systems - we have dynamic blocks of all the different system components which contain node snapping points. This method is extremely easy to model large systems quickly, we basically turn off all snaps except for node, and then copy/array everything we need into position. The downfall is that when it comes to documentation, we're finding AutoCAD is too cumbersome and does not give the flexibility we need to create our drawings as quickly as is possible in Revit. (think section boxes, scope boxes, sections, callouts, etc. etc.)
So my question is, to emulate the behavior of our dynamic blocks in Revit, should we be looking at adaptive components with embedded point elements, so that we can snap everything together quickly in the project environment, or would the better workflow be to use column and beam families?
@Anonymous wrote:Hi Everyone,
We're currently using AutoCAD to model and document large scaffolding systems - we have dynamic blocks of all the different system components which contain node snapping points. This method is extremely easy to model large systems quickly, we basically turn off all snaps except for node, and then copy/array everything we need into position. The downfall is that when it comes to documentation, we're finding AutoCAD is too cumbersome and does not give the flexibility we need to create our drawings as quickly as is possible in Revit. (think section boxes, scope boxes, sections, callouts, etc. etc.)
So my question is, to emulate the behavior of our dynamic blocks in Revit, should we be looking at adaptive components with embedded point elements, so that we can snap everything together quickly in the project environment, or would the better workflow be to use column and beam families?
Here's a screenshot of our AutoCAD blocks, I've pulled them apart - you can just see the node next to the bottom right member.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts.
Here's a screenshot of our AutoCAD blocks, I've pulled them apart - you can just see the node next to the bottom right member.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts.
Hi I would like to obtain blocks like this.
Where can I find them. Currently I design in Peri Blocks
I would like pinlock blocks or layher blocks.
I would appreciate it
@Anonymous wrote:Hi Everyone,
We're currently using AutoCAD to model and document large scaffolding systems - we have dynamic blocks of all the different system components which contain node snapping points. This method is extremely easy to model large systems quickly, we basically turn off all snaps except for node, and then copy/array everything we need into position. The downfall is that when it comes to documentation, we're finding AutoCAD is too cumbersome and does not give the flexibility we need to create our drawings as quickly as is possible in Revit. (think section boxes, scope boxes, sections, callouts, etc. etc.)
So my question is, to emulate the behavior of our dynamic blocks in Revit, should we be looking at adaptive components with embedded point elements, so that we can snap everything together quickly in the project environment, or would the better workflow be to use column and beam families?
@Anonymous wrote:Hi Everyone,
We're currently using AutoCAD to model and document large scaffolding systems - we have dynamic blocks of all the different system components which contain node snapping points. This method is extremely easy to model large systems quickly, we basically turn off all snaps except for node, and then copy/array everything we need into position. The downfall is that when it comes to documentation, we're finding AutoCAD is too cumbersome and does not give the flexibility we need to create our drawings as quickly as is possible in Revit. (think section boxes, scope boxes, sections, callouts, etc. etc.)
So my question is, to emulate the behavior of our dynamic blocks in Revit, should we be looking at adaptive components with embedded point elements, so that we can snap everything together quickly in the project environment, or would the better workflow be to use column and beam families?
Here's a screenshot of our AutoCAD blocks, I've pulled them apart - you can just see the node next to the bottom right member.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts.
Here's a screenshot of our AutoCAD blocks, I've pulled them apart - you can just see the node next to the bottom right member.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts.
Hi,
I've created some scaffolding families from layher 3d blocks. I would say there is advantages and disadvantages by using Revit to design scaffolding compared to AutoCAD.
-Disadvantages:
The design process is slower than AutoCAD, because its need to provide more information to do it.
Modelling every single family and its information, such as weight, model and code.
There is no fast way of calculating the seft weight, unless if you create a script in Dynamo.
-Advantages:
Easey to detail the project, especially if it needs to provide lot of sections.
Everything in the drawings can be automatically gear listed , such as timber, plywood, mesh protection,etc.
The drawings doesn't get as slow as AutoCAD even though the files are bigger.
Much easier to design a scaffold in a dense area, once you have all the revit drawings compiled such architectural and structural, etc. So it doesn't need to recreate a 3D drawing to fit a scaffold.
The drawings don't clash as often as AutoCAD.
Hi,
I've created some scaffolding families from layher 3d blocks. I would say there is advantages and disadvantages by using Revit to design scaffolding compared to AutoCAD.
-Disadvantages:
The design process is slower than AutoCAD, because its need to provide more information to do it.
Modelling every single family and its information, such as weight, model and code.
There is no fast way of calculating the seft weight, unless if you create a script in Dynamo.
-Advantages:
Easey to detail the project, especially if it needs to provide lot of sections.
Everything in the drawings can be automatically gear listed , such as timber, plywood, mesh protection,etc.
The drawings doesn't get as slow as AutoCAD even though the files are bigger.
Much easier to design a scaffold in a dense area, once you have all the revit drawings compiled such architectural and structural, etc. So it doesn't need to recreate a 3D drawing to fit a scaffold.
The drawings don't clash as often as AutoCAD.
Olá @coralouisevdw e @titomoura
Bem vindos a Autodesk Community, vocês sabiam que temos foruns em português vejam neste link. Temos vários Expert Elites e usuários discutindo vários temas. Fique a vontade para nos visitar lá.
😉
https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/portugues/ct-p/156
Você achou uma postagem útil? Então fique à vontade para curtir essas postagens!
Sua pergunta obteve uma resposta que resolveu a duvida? Então clique no botão 'Aceitar Solução ' . 
Claudia Campos
Comunidade de Usuários Autodesk Português - Coordenadora
Olá @coralouisevdw e @titomoura
Bem vindos a Autodesk Community, vocês sabiam que temos foruns em português vejam neste link. Temos vários Expert Elites e usuários discutindo vários temas. Fique a vontade para nos visitar lá.
😉
https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/portugues/ct-p/156
Você achou uma postagem útil? Então fique à vontade para curtir essas postagens!
Sua pergunta obteve uma resposta que resolveu a duvida? Então clique no botão 'Aceitar Solução ' .
Claudia Campos
Comunidade de Usuários Autodesk Português - Coordenadora
Forums Links
Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.
Post to forums
