Revit-Robot Section Mapping

[Anonymous]

Hi All,

I'm still struggling to properly understand the workflow for mapping my family-library Columns and Beams with the appropriate sections from Robot and vice versa. I know that it's a bit ticky and that I have to edit some xml-files. Is there any tutorial, best practises-guide or further documentation around regarding this issue?

Any help is much appreciated!

Klaus

[Rafal.Gaweda · Accepted solution]

Matching is made by section and family names

Exaxmples:

http://screencast.com/t/0cm6eQ00JKaN

http://screencast.com/t/oHbPbw5Vs

[Anonymous]

Hi Rafal, thanks for the quick response and sorry for not getting back to this earlier as I don't think that it is solve yet.

I'm aware of how the automatic mapping works, there are several posts in this forum regarding this issue. I was rather looking for a more "sophisticated" solution described in the following PDF on page 7:

http://thebuildingcoder.typepad.com/files/localise_content_se3904_handout.pdf

Currently all elements from custimised families with set parameters get replaced by the Content-Generator-Content when I update my Revit-Model (Please correct me if I'm wrong). It is a real pain to swap these elements over manually to company-standard-families, especially if additional instance-parameters need to be readjusted. In this case it is quicker to do the changes manually by first updating the model, noting all ID's of members that would have changed, then undoing the update and swap members manually.

My desire is not to use the Content-Generator-Content at all and manually define which Family and Type the link uses for mapping. The above mentioned document describes this process but I find it far too complicated.

An improvement would be if we could define the mapping manually via a simple txt-file (is there any analysis software other than Robot that does not offer this option?). Even better, give us the option to select Family and Type via a mapping dialogue allowing to access not yet loaded Families.

I very much appreciate your comments...

Cheers,

Klaus

[Rafal.Gaweda]

 

Currently all elements from custimised families with set parameters get replaced by the Content-Generator-Content when I update my Revit-Model (Please correct me if I'm wrong). 

PLease send me example (1-2-3 bars with such sections - original revit sections)

What are the section names in your revit model, examples please

[Rafal.Gaweda]

I can see only on possibility for "overwriting" section in revit by Content Generator - standard section of given name exists as a family in Revit but it is not used  (yet) in revit model so CG generates section of such name

[Anonymous]

Hi Rafal,

I have to resurrect this thread as I have just started transferring some steel models from Revit to Robot again and I'm still not happy how the mapping is done.

Transferring the models from Revit to Advance Steel is excellent, in particular the section mapping. By default, the mapping is done by using a specific built-in parameter introduced in 2016R2 for some country content allowing to have custom type names in Revit. This is really fuss-free for over 90% of the section we use and in case someone is using custom sections etc. the mapping dialogue is helping to get the other 10% across the line reliably. On top of this the manual mapping information is stored in an Access database so a once mapped sections doesn't need to be mapped manually again. On top of all this comfort, the Access database with mapping information can be "easily" configured to accommodate other mapping preferences if necessary.

Good old Robot still seems to do the auto mapping via the Revit Type Name which for various reasons can't always be identical to the Robot ones so the manual mapping is taking quite some time that I'd rather spend in a more pleasing manner.

Do you recon the Revit - Robot mapping is going to be improved sometime soon? Otherwise I may need to reconsider renaming all our steel family types...

Your response is much appreciated!

Cheers,

Klaus

[Rafal.Gaweda]

Hi Klaus

 Otherwise I may need to reconsider renaming all our steel family types...

You'd better rename them

[klaus]

Thanks!!