revit, phases of work, manage stratigraphy

[preben]

In fact I considered the solid vacuum only as an "addition" to the opening.... like if you have to do the sguinci.... then I saw the casino to make them parametric and I decided that my houses are beautiful even without sguinci.:wink:
I'm sick now.
Thank you.

 

[manuel]

The opening has a single size and so you can't create the pencils.

 

[fabio.revit]

opening is easier to achieve but less versatile; will always be and only a hole in the shape of parallelepiped.
with the subtraction solid you decide the real form, but of course things get complicated especially if you have to parameterize this vacuum.

in my ifc export tests I noticed something: if a window is made with a "open" the software that matters correctly recognizes the family as a window, and replaces it with parametric elements of the right category, if it is a solid subtraction instead makes a simple hole in the non- Parametric wall.
It's a beautiful grain.

 

[preben]

ho risolto, But I don't like, allego foto: I have inserted 1 new window where I had previously demolished the same (you see the tampons in red) and so far everything ok or almost. then when I add a piece of coat indicated by the arrow happens the end. I deduce that first I have to do all the coat and then insert the windows but it doesn't seem to me that it is the ideal that the first modification is no longer recognized the holes. Is that normal?

 

[Tristan]

In theory, no, but I don't have such a "old" version to do evidence.

 

[manuel]

[MENTION=47696]Preben[/MENTION]: if I don't remember a thing like this happened to me when there were more than 2 gaps within the "window" family. I normally solved with moving the new window of a few mm, or eliminating the third vacuum.
could also be the fact of the "automatic joint" of the coat wall: try to select "prevent joint".
then hypotheses can be many others, but without the original file it is difficult to help
ps: but do you work with the black base?

 

[preben]

No. but it's not good. the window is simple with a hole and tested. by the way, look what happens by removing the window and putting a bigger one (see bathroom) and even removing it completely (local bed). there is something wrong (it gives me the idea that the problem here is in the stages). However I think that even this year the system phases with revit I do it next year.:smile:
base nera forever

 

[preben]

then hypotheses can be many others, but without the original file it is difficult to help

for me is not a problem turning the file, depends if you have time to lose

 

[manuel]

[MENTION=47696]Preben[/MENTION] I took a quick look at your file. as you wanted to prove one of your problems are the gaps in the families windows. as mentioned previously (I don't know why) but revit does not digest the union walls well if within the family there are more than 2 blanks (from 3 up). In your case of blanks you have about 5-6 and then it generates that error.
you will have to: revise the family by removing the voids (among other things the family should be composed of nested and not all a unique cog), recharge the correct family, join the demolition windows with the main wall, where instead you have a new window occupied by the moncone you will need to move the window slightly to the side and reposition it correctly.
It's track, but unfortunately the error is generated by the family window.
Also in the phase filter you do not have a "current" filter (or call it as you want) that only let you see what is existing in the displayed phase (so "per category" in new and existing and "not displayed" in demolished and temporary).
actually work with a somewhat obsolete version.
update me!

 

[preben]

as already said yesterday thank you for the support. point 1) Family window: in the compute of the voids that break the balls you then consider also those of accessories elements, such as in my case the grooves of the shields (see picture). I didn't even consider them. Anyway, the family cleans it up completely.point 2) the phases are set as by practice: for the common (from my parts) serves the current state with the yellows and the state of project with the reds, nothing more. If you have the file and there is still the table you see it well.

I have the version lt 2015 still packed, but working third-party accounts I have to use for force the version 2011 prehistoric:frown:

 

[manuel]

The voids are considered in the context of the window family and therefore... yes also those of the accessories elements. but (to avoid these problems and have more versatility) one should nest the families of the accessories elements within the family window. But as I said a few posts ago, I now became accustomed to disappearing the various elements of the window into multiple single families to be included within my project.
I have not understood how you manage the steps: you have a phase "actual state" a phase "project state" and an intermediate phase "state of work". from the boards it would seem that you use the "state of work" phase to view the comparison (red in your case) while using the "project state" phase to view your project without the reds (reconstructions). Is that right?

 

[preben]

finestor: the nesting of families is complicated in my case, as I work with third parties and I must maintain a level of the simple project. Among other things it is useful (for windows) when for each project they tell you to change the profile of the lock or the processing of marble or other. personally for my work variables are only the thickness of the outer frame marble and the obscuring system. therefore it is only for personal choice. keep in mind that the family was good; problems arise with the stages of work (c...zzo!!)
phase: I created the work phase where there are both the yellow and red (which can be seen separately or in comparison) to get closer to the practice of traditional technical design. inter alia if I do not remember badly, if you kept the yellows and reds (always intended as demolitions and constructions) in two different phases the revit does not divide them well (or as the practice wants) especially forometrics (I repeat this last concept I go a bit to memory).

 

[manuel]

in reference to the phases... You're doing a useless job. revit already has what is needed in a single phase, just manage filters correctly. as I predicted the "work phase" is an extra thing that does not need. creating the correct "current" filter as I indicated, you have all the elements on one stage. in the project table you can set the filters on yellow if you want to see demolitions, on red if you want to see the constructions and on current if you want to see the clean design of your project (the same thing for the phase "made state"). I have not understood the last concept well, but the speech of the phases is that you can compare it only between consecutive stages, that in your case you can only compare the "state of fact" with the "state of work" and then the "state of work" with the "state of project". you cannot compare the "state of fact" with the "state of project" because they are not, in fact, consecutive.
I have never had problems with the stages even on complex files or linked files between them. the only problem I had at the time just like you, that is the incorrect management of the empty/full windows because of the gaps inside the window family.

For the windows, how are you telling me, at this point, would it no longer be correct to separate the various elements in independent families from each other? You have to change the dark because the client isn't okay? perfect change only the dark and I don't rebuild the whole window! Do I have to change the windows because the customer prefers the half bull? I only change the window sill that makes sense to have the whole family to replace? how do you behave if under the window's internal window sill there is the classic vacuum with the radiator and in the project you want to close it because you removed the radiator? Do you make the whole window without the vacuum? or would it be easier to "demolite" the only vacuum under the window?

 

[preben]

my goal is to have the current state with all the yellows (even where I demolish to create the windows) and the state of design with all the reds and if I don't remember badly (repeat I go to memory) the revit did not distinguish well or as I wanted. In addition I must always have ready the comparison plant because in common always more often ask (it does not serve a c..zo but ask). If I have a recent print of this job I attach it.

 

[preben]

Maybe I remember badly or wrong, but the end is this:

 

[preben]

For the windows, how are you telling me, at this point, would it no longer be correct to separate the various elements in independent families from each other? You have to change the dark because the client isn't okay? perfect change only the dark and I don't rebuild the whole window! Do I have to change the windows because the customer prefers the half bull? I only change the window sill that makes sense to have the whole family to replace? how do you behave if under the window's internal window sill there is the classic vacuum with the radiator and in the project you want to close it because you removed the radiator? Do you make the whole window without the vacuum? or would it be easier to "demolite" the only vacuum under the window?[/QUOTE]No, you don't understand, I don't have any particular requirements on finishing. in the case windows: or I put the windows with the shutters (a family) or put those with the shields (another family) . the second variable is the frame (visible or not). If then someone asks me something specific then I take the family more similar and I change it for him. That's all.
for the internal part even less problems because of internal rendering I make 1 every perhaps 5/6 projects.
As for the phases I'm testing them now, because as a year ago, they don't convince me yet.

 

[manuel]

in post #29 you have the three "views" on the same stage (work status, as you can see from the properties of the view) with the current filter you have the view of the designed state; with the "red" filter you have the reconstruction; with the yellow filter you have demolition!
Isn't that the same thing you want to represent?
then at the municipal level everyone interprets the legislation at their own liking with the strangest demands... So best wishes!
Unfortunately (in fact fortunately!) the phases in revit are in my opinion indispensable! If you can understand how to manage them you will open a world! and not just about windows and doors, but for example the abachi so much to understand, where in four and foursome you find yourself to have the current state and design surfaces, or the premises, etc. then if you have to use the linked files then it is the only way to manage everything with simplicity.

 

[preben]

Oh, my God. strange demands..... is from a life that they ask so, and the problem is that municipal technicians never change:frown:

 

[preben]

make a test because I don't understand it +:
in the current state, put a wall with a window.
in the design state add the coat and move the window a couple of meters.

in the final table there must be:
Current status: yellow
project status: Red red

And then we see what happens.

I'm intrigued by the brain:

 

[MTR]

Good morning, everyone!
I also have to manage a similar situation and I have repeated this old post, although in the meantime different things have changed on revit (e.g. management of stratigraphy for phases) and... maybe someone has found a valid solution to the problem!
(I'm on version 2019)

my case: requalification project with coat insulation and replacement of the lock (with closing of the under window and adjustment of the compartment and the bin to the monoblock for the project tightening).
for the wall: I create the definitive wall and attribute to the coat the creation phase: project phase.
for the window (and mo so' [Bleep]): I created a family with subtraction solids (ahia) for bin, window compartment (to make the bat) and bin. the elements of the lock are nested and shared (extrusions of subtraction no).
When I demolish and filter the view, the blanks remain in their place, and are not compensated by any filling element.
I read the (interesting) strategies of manuel but I can not independently manage the stages of creation/demolition of the nested shared elements within the family window, so I would like to understand:
Should I use separate families and possibly group them within the project to better manage them in phases?
- to create a family of parameter subtraction solids use the generic template or one on host?
- Do you have any suggestions?

I attach the window
Thank you so much!