If I am working on arch, nothing wrong with slab edges or wall foundations, we have no need to add reinforcement. If structural gets more control using beams etc, by all means, they should do that! Looks good!
Cool technique, if you modify the variable thickness properties or apply a slope arrow to the floor sketch, does the framing maintain its picked position or does it adapt to the shape edit? Appreciate this workflow, I've always loved modeling concrete for reasons you discuss regarding efficiencies of families!
In the full video he mentioned several times about a heirarchy of families and which takes precedance when cutting etc. where can I find a full list of this heirarchy?
Using Structural Framing in lieu of Slab Edges kind of defeats the purpose. A thickened perimeter edge is still a FLOOR, not a beam. In use there's really no savings I can see. To create the slab edge "beam" family you STILL need to define a profile AND have to tie all of the same parameters together, so you aren't saving any content creation time. Same rules apply for materials - a slab edge family needs its material to match the floor to make it continuous. The difference is the lineweight will be Thin in a slab edge because they are of the same category (Floors). And if I need to export just concrete slabs (something I would do in construction modeling all the time) it's an extra confusing step as you need some special "That's not really a beam" type filter.
I'd be curious to hear why you feel that way. By this reasoning, then, it is impossible to model a concrete curb because Revit does not have that category. Revit is just not 100% there yet (especially for the construction subs) and continues to be developed and improved. In the mean time, why should construction subs handicap themselves from a better workflow just to match arbitrary categories that Autodesk created with only Design teams in mind? I'll also point out that Revit itself does something similar. When you use the "Structural Foundation: Slab" tool, Revit behind the scene is just creating a Floor and slapping a "Structural Foundation" category on it.
@@bimdev Well it depends on what are your expected uses for the BIM model. If it's just for rendering and generating impressive images then sure categories wouldn't matter, but if you use it for other non graphical purposes (quantification, clashes, FM & so on) that could cause alot of problems for users trying to extract meaningful information from the model. In a professional design environment, some BIM managers wouldn't allow even using the (Generic model) family categories.
@@MR0MYSTERY87 I agree with you that some BIM managers wouldn't allow it, but they are exactly the ones who should see this and think of ways to make their team more efficient. If the models being built are for internal company use, then those standards can certainly be determined in-house. Even if that's not the case, it does no good to shut down the idea and completely close yourself off from imagining what's possible because a category happens to have the wrong label. Ideally, in this case, Autodesk would allow custom families to be assigned any category that the creator wants. But as it stands, Structural Framing (I think) is the only one that allows for the creation of custom families with line-based functionality.
Great Tips. This makes so much more sense than typical standard thickened slab edges.
If I am working on arch, nothing wrong with slab edges or wall foundations, we have no need to add reinforcement.
If structural gets more control using beams etc, by all means, they should do that! Looks good!
Yes, Kevin creates highly detailed models for concrete subcontractors. Still, some of the insights could probably apply to arch.
thnx sir 😊 we need more tips
Cool technique, if you modify the variable thickness properties or apply a slope arrow to the floor sketch, does the framing maintain its picked position or does it adapt to the shape edit? Appreciate this workflow, I've always loved modeling concrete for reasons you discuss regarding efficiencies of families!
If you watch the full live session replay, Kevin does showcase a floor with variable height and what happens to the beams.
In the full video he mentioned several times about a heirarchy of families and which takes precedance when cutting etc. where can I find a full list of this heirarchy?
In my experience the out of the box solution rarely works. Workarounds are needed in most cases.
epic win
Using Structural Framing in lieu of Slab Edges kind of defeats the purpose. A thickened perimeter edge is still a FLOOR, not a beam. In use there's really no savings I can see. To create the slab edge "beam" family you STILL need to define a profile AND have to tie all of the same parameters together, so you aren't saving any content creation time. Same rules apply for materials - a slab edge family needs its material to match the floor to make it continuous. The difference is the lineweight will be Thin in a slab edge because they are of the same category (Floors). And if I need to export just concrete slabs (something I would do in construction modeling all the time) it's an extra confusing step as you need some special "That's not really a beam" type filter.
Yeah I don't think that modelling elements using incorrect categories is acceptable in a professional workflow
I'd be curious to hear why you feel that way. By this reasoning, then, it is impossible to model a concrete curb because Revit does not have that category.
Revit is just not 100% there yet (especially for the construction subs) and continues to be developed and improved. In the mean time, why should construction subs handicap themselves from a better workflow just to match arbitrary categories that Autodesk created with only Design teams in mind?
I'll also point out that Revit itself does something similar. When you use the "Structural Foundation: Slab" tool, Revit behind the scene is just creating a Floor and slapping a "Structural Foundation" category on it.
@@bimdev Well it depends on what are your expected uses for the BIM model. If it's just for rendering and generating impressive images then sure categories wouldn't matter, but if you use it for other non graphical purposes (quantification, clashes, FM & so on) that could cause alot of problems for users trying to extract meaningful information from the model. In a professional design environment, some BIM managers wouldn't allow even using the (Generic model) family categories.
@@MR0MYSTERY87 I agree with you that some BIM managers wouldn't allow it, but they are exactly the ones who should see this and think of ways to make their team more efficient. If the models being built are for internal company use, then those standards can certainly be determined in-house. Even if that's not the case, it does no good to shut down the idea and completely close yourself off from imagining what's possible because a category happens to have the wrong label.
Ideally, in this case, Autodesk would allow custom families to be assigned any category that the creator wants. But as it stands, Structural Framing (I think) is the only one that allows for the creation of custom families with line-based functionality.