Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wall Types

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Wall Types

    Hey all, new revit user here.

    I have a question about wall types. I know this has been discussed a lot but I am having trouble finding sources for an exact answer.

    How do you guys organize your wall types? I definitely do not plan on using a single with all the layers in it, but how much do you separate your layers? Do you have the finish, substrate, and structure all separate? Or do you keep some wall types together, for example gyp-stud-gyp as one wall. I feel like I really enjoy keeping everything separate from each other but it requires a lot more joining. This does not feel like a big deal on smaller projects but I feel like it could become a lot of work on a very large job. I really like having the control of having everything separated, as I really like my plans to have a high level of detail and accuracy.

    I also like how this method keeps the amount of wall types low. When doing a house for example, I could design an entire house with just 6 wall types by keeping them all separate:

    2x6 stud
    2x4 stud
    1/2" gyp
    5/8" gyp
    7/16" OSB
    Some type of finish

    Additionally, I can hide the finishes so the floor plan will only show the framing, like a lot of stick framed/CFS buildings show.

    Is this a feasible choice? Will it end up creating too much work/trouble having everything separate? Is a hybrid version the way to go with a few layers per wall?

    Thanks, and sorry if this has been explained many times before.

    #2
    Doable. Some on the forum do it this way. Most don’t. Many do a version (separate walls for applied finishes like tile).

    Seems like a PITA for what you get but that’s just my opinion.
    Greg McDowell Jr
    about.me/GMcDowellJr

    Comment


      #3
      I agree with GMJ. That would be a bit overkill. I do (mostly) large houses 15,000-20,000 sf and I separate my stud walls from my finish walls, but I don't separate each sheathing layer. So, for example, I have a 2x6 stud with gyp on each side. Then I have a separate wall with an air gap and stone. I put both walls in plan, join them so that any openings show in both. Works perfect and gives me more control over my walls. Granted, I have to join all the finish walls with their stud counterpart, but that's pretty fast to do and the benefit greatly outweighs the effort in my opinion.

      When I do a wainscoting, I used to create a compound wall but different wainscot heights meant creating additional walls. Now I split those up as well. So I'll have a stone wall with a water table, and a siding wall. The water table goes from 0-3', the siding from 3' to whatever height. That way if the wainscot elevation changes, it's super easy to do.
      Dan

      Comment


        #4
        Our rule is the rated assembly is one wall type and anything which goes outboard of that (finishes) is a different wall type. There are some exceptions but they are rare. For us, this helps keep things manageable.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by kotichaz View Post
          Hey all, new revit user here.

          I have a question about wall types. I know this has been discussed a lot but I am having trouble finding sources for an exact answer.

          How do you guys organize your wall types? I definitely do not plan on using a single with all the layers in it, but how much do you separate your layers? Do you have the finish, substrate, and structure all separate? Or do you keep some wall types together, for example gyp-stud-gyp as one wall. I feel like I really enjoy keeping everything separate from each other but it requires a lot more joining. This does not feel like a big deal on smaller projects but I feel like it could become a lot of work on a very large job. I really like having the control of having everything separated, as I really like my plans to have a high level of detail and accuracy.

          I also like how this method keeps the amount of wall types low. When doing a house for example, I could design an entire house with just 6 wall types by keeping them all separate:

          2x6 stud
          2x4 stud
          1/2" gyp
          5/8" gyp
          7/16" OSB
          Some type of finish

          Additionally, I can hide the finishes so the floor plan will only show the framing, like a lot of stick framed/CFS buildings show.

          Is this a feasible choice? Will it end up creating too much work/trouble having everything separate? Is a hybrid version the way to go with a few layers per wall?

          Thanks, and sorry if this has been explained many times before.
          This setup will be absolutely awful, to work with.

          There is good reason to separate out Partitions vs Finishes (Where finishes is defined as things getting applied over the top of the substrates). Finish Heights, Finishes different on multiple sides of the walls, Partitions running longer (in plan) than rooms that have different finishes, inability to turn off finishes (Tile, Wainscot, etc) in Floor plans, etc, are all valid reasons for wanting to break them apart.

          Breaking up the Substrate in to individual "walls" as well, is going to create a ton of extra work, at little to no benefit:

          1. Even breaking up FINISHES (like tile) when you model them, you have to know the little tricks, like never clicking on an interior corner of partitions, or the finish auto joins (unless you ahve it set to not join at all). Having to do that for every stud Gyp Layer? That would absolutely suck.

          2. Join Geometry is used between partitions and finishes, to get things to cut properly. Currently (at most) its two joins per wall. If you have Finishes AND Substrates AND Studs all separated, its going to be anywhere from 2-5 joins, per wall. Thats a lot of joinery, which also leads me to:

          3. A lot of items in Architecture depending on knowing the thickness of the "wall." Doors, Windows, openings with trim, etc. Once they are separate wall elements, you need Dynamo or an app, to query the thickness of that wall. And its not a simple Dynamo task, either. Because other walls that are non parallel might be joined to it, as well. So you have to break each wall down in to a vector, compare their directions, compare their proximities, and tell it to compile the thicknesses. Thats s truckload of work.

          And after all of that... You wont have gained much. "Detail and accuracy" are more complicated than just breaking the walls up in to different layers. Sure, Revit Wall Joinery is terrible, and the wrapping doesnt EVER work correctly, in all locations of a job. But what you are gaining in "accuracy" isnt really a gain, when you trade off the time investment to make it happen: It can be *accurate* in the details, with Edit Cut Profile. And no one (read: NO ONE) is doing any kind of model takeoffs to such a specific amount, that gyp wrapping in to a window opening has to be quantified down to that level. (And if they are, i cant wait to see how they are handling substrate only getting quantified as a finished product, when it gets installed and cut differently).

          Besides all of that, Standardized Partition Types are a real thing. Or they should be. Even in residential design. It shouldnt just be that walls are modeled as whatever they are, and someone has to always rely on every partition being dimensioned down to every single layer. And if the phrase "UNO" or "UON" is on any of your walls, i automatically think the drawings are lesser than.

          I work on a lot of Single Family houses, these days. Mostly bigger and higher end, which sometimes seem more like office buildings than single family houses, but i digress: The amount of "screwed-up" that i see for wall types in Residential, is shocking. It really doesnt need to be that complicated.

          Now, my last POV is that i would always show the substrate layers in Plans. Yes, i know it *used to be a standard* to only show the stud layers, and im here to tell you: It was a stupid standard. It was absolutely dumb. BUT, lets assume you still want to adhere to that old standard: Revit has functionality called "Parts," which are intended to be used in Construction, mainly by General Contractors. I dont advocate using (abusing) them for MODIFYING wall Types, but there are things you can do with Parts if you want to simply SHOW the walls differently.

          Essentially, once a wall is Parted, you can decide to show the Parts or the Original Wall Element, or both. You can Part all of the walls, and then have a Filter on the Parts that eliminates all but the Framing Layers. We do something similar (but not eliminating) when we export to Navisworks. Its a longer story. But, all that to say, its *possible* to achieve that "standard," but i still think its 100% a terrible idea, and you should just get away from it.
          Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
          @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
            2. Join Geometry is used between partitions and finishes, to get things to cut properly. Currently (at most) its two joins per wall. If you have Finishes AND Substrates AND Studs all separated, its going to be anywhere from 2-5 joins, per wall. Thats a lot of joinery, which also leads me to:
            Ahh - I've always wondered why in some cases finishes join just fine, and in some they don't and the wall ends have to be manually coordinated. I couldn't figure out what the difference was, since it usually was the same types of walls being joined together!
            Julie Kidder
            Architect + BIM Director
            Hartman + Majewski Design Group

            Comment


              #7
              Oh, apologies: Thats not what i meant, at all. There isnt a limit on JG< as far as i know. I join 4 or 5 together without issue.

              All i was saying, is typically i only have to join (at most) three walls, for every "wall." Thats not a terrible amount of work, to do. Going from 2-3 to 5-6, is WAY more stuff to join and keep track of. Sounds like a boatload of extra work, for little to no benefit.

              I dont think there is any limitation Revit wise, but i know they have to be within 6" of each other for the join to work, and have objects cut.
              Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
              @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

              Comment


                #8
                Ah, I've had some finish walls (no gap between them) that will not join with their hosts, and can't figure out why they refuse to join - I've never been able to pinpoint a reason. It's not a huge problem to do manually (and strangely cutting the wall in the opening will then sometimes allow to join to occur) but I haven't focused on it.

                But I shouldn't derail the thread...
                Julie Kidder
                Architect + BIM Director
                Hartman + Majewski Design Group

                Comment


                  #9
                  Thanks for all the input guys. You have indeed confirmed my suspicions that having everything as separate walls will be too much work. So it sounds like the best practice is to keep the stud and substrate (sheathing/gyp) together as 1 wall and then have the finish (exterior or interior) as a separate wall.

                  That being said, how do you handle your sheathing on gable ends/platform framed multi-story buildings? With a sheathing/stud/gyp wall assembly, if I want to join the wall to the bottom of the roof, it will join the gyp and the stud to the bottom, which is not how it is actually constructed. I just want the sheathing to go all the way up to the underside of the roof and for the gyp and stud to stay at the ceiling height. Do you make a separate wall only with sheathing in it and join that to the underside of the roof?

                  For platform framed buildings, would you just unlock the sheathing layer and drag it to wherever it needs to go?

                  Thanks again.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    I don't ever (ever) unlock layers. I would look in to Edit Cut Profile and how it works, for cleaning up details. Once the wall is "at" the roof, it's kind of splitting hairs.

                    Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
                    Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
                    @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

                    Comment

                    Related Topics

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X