Remapping Fabrication Parts CID For Use In Revit

[Nicholas-N]

Hello all and thank you for your time,

I have gone thru and created sleeves in Autocad with the end goal of being able to use the Trimble for laying out wall sleeves. I am using the pattern 910 as it will give me a point in the center of the duct or pipe that Trimble will reckonize. I just realized that CID#910 is not compatible with Revit. Is there any way I can do something in the database in order for Revit to recognize the part I want to use?

[wwessels]

I think you will need to go with pattern 149 for use in Revit.
If your sleeves are product listed you can copy over the the product lists to those.
We had to make that switch when we transitioned to Revit.
If the point exporter you use doesn't work with those let me know and I can post some Revit API code to that will allow you to get points for them

[Nicholas-N]

Thank you for your advice on this. I am not too familiar with product lists as my background is Mechanical Duct. My understanding is that there are too many variations in sizes with ductwork ( could be any even number from 4" to 240" for example in width or depth ) to efficiently use product lists but I am always looking for a better understanding if I am mistaken. Does CID 149 have the ability to be rectangular? If not that is my other obstacle. Worse case scenario I may have to take the duct out of Revit as a MAJ and then place the sleeves using Autocad. Will not be productive but in the end it will be faster than having the field team layout all the openings based on PDF's.

[wwessels]

I don't think 149 can be rectangular and I don't have a lot of experience with Duct work so I don't know of a pattern right off hand that is rectangular and has that form of connectivity where it attaches to the centerline with out cutting the duct. But there might be one. I have also not found a way for families to have that kind of connectivity either.

[Nicholas-N]

Late reply on my end,

I will keep looking into it.

Thank you very much for your insight and kindness.

[dopefish]

Try CID#1972

[Nicholas-N]

I tried CID#1972 and I was only able to get it to populate (4) Points on each corner. I need it to populate (1) point in the center only.

[DotNet]

It would be awkward to communicate orientation of a rectangular opening without at least two points. One point is fine if we can all assume width is horizontal and these are all wall openings, however this doesn't work for floor openings. Not sure one point is a practical solution. We would need to include rotational data somewhere.

[Nicholas-N]

I currently use (2) center points meaning (1) point on each side in regard to wall penetrating sleeves for Trimble layout. This helps them get the orientation of sleeves prior to the framers laying out the bottom track. I also pull parameters like size ( IE: 24"x12" ) as well as Bottom Of Opening so they have all the information they need on a handy layout sticker. Separate from the sticker process I do use (4) points on floor penetrating sleeves. I have sleeves created based on their intended purpose that work with the script I have associated to them for enlarging ( for duct insulation etc ). This entire process works great in Autocad but is not crossing over to Revit as the ITM part I use CID#910 is greyed out when I try to use it in Revit.

[DotNet]

I currently use (2) center points meaning (1) point on each side in regard to wall penetrating sleeves for Trimble layout. This helps them get the orientation of sleeves prior to the framers laying out the bottom track. I also pull parameters like size ( IE: 24"x12" ) as well as Bottom Of Opening so they have all the information they need on a handy layout sticker. Separate from the sticker process I do use (4) points on floor penetrating sleeves. I have sleeves created based on their intended purpose that work with the script I have associated to them for enlarging ( for duct insulation etc ). This entire process works great in Autocad but is not crossing over to Revit as the ITM part I use CID#910 is greyed out when I try to use it in Revit.

That certainly works if we can all assume width is horizontal and we're only talking about wall openings. Two end center points of course do not convey any opening orientation information, only location(ish)...

Which makes me wonder... Why does CADmep place points on the ends of sleeves? Wouldn't center of wall/floor be more accurate/simple? Can anyone chime in?

Good stuff Nicholas. Would need to convert your oversize script to dynamo or the API directly. VM does this via the API with service and shape level specifications. It can also use ray tracing to automatically place openings where straights or fire dampers intersect other model, or linked model elements. We went with family instead of ITM based openings however I would not mind providing an ITM option if it is practical to do so.

You mentioned bottom track which also makes me wonder... How many contractors out there have the time/talent to be focusing on sheet rock wall layout points? Genuinely curious. If you have a tool like eVolve or VM, the Revit portion can be mostly automated. Hundreds of sheet rock openings are certainly significant however... I can frame out an existing sheetrock wall in ten minutes if I didn't get my MEP installed first. It's the floor/roof/CMU/structural wall openings that can make or break the profitability of a large project.

[Nicholas-N]

When we have (2) points on the end of each sleeve @ the center of the sleeve that gives us the exact orientation and location of said sleeve.

In my experience the framed ductwork openings are laid out on the floor up against or inside the bottom track. When we layout ( framed ) wall openings and place stickers on the floor for the framers to use via Trimble, we are able to get on the floor as soon as the concrete is cured and that is a benefit in the following ways below.

1. We can layout all framed wall openings for duct & FSD's prior to any other trade congestion on the floor, even framers.
2. Trimble can layout more accurately in regard to elevation / size / location than the average Journeymen.
3. Trimble can layout faster than the best Journeymen.
4. Trimble will minimize openings that were missed and not laid out.
5. Trimble operators are cheaper than paying Journeymen to layout openings.
6. Our stickers stand out as a Brymax opening from a mile away.
7. Because our labels are all printed with large clear font specifying the opening number ( for our tracking and record
    purposes ), the size of the opening, the type of opening ( FSD framing for example ) and the finished floor or
    benchmark elevation this saves the framers loads of time in doing their job and in turn helps us out as we are
    expediting the schedule for the GC.
8. At the end of the day if someone goes thru and peels up the label in an attempt to say "you did not lay it out and
    now I have to back charge you", we not only have our Trimble record of it being laid out with the date but we also have
    pictures of the label on the floor ( clear as day ) and we can tell them " try again buddy".

[DotNet]

When we have (2) points on the end of each sleeve @ the center of the sleeve that gives us the exact orientation and location of said sleeve.

No, it doesn't. The orientation is assumed, which is fine however this doesn't work for floor sleeves, which is why you said you use four points for floor sleeves.

[Nicholas-N]

I believe we do not have the same understanding of what is taking place. I messaged you via email ( I believe ) outside of this thread so I can explain to you how this process works on my end without involving anyone else.

I believe when this platform sends you an email it includes my email so you can reply back if desired.

I look forward to collaborating with you.