Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gooseneck railing at main landings in Revit 2015

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
    #1

    Gooseneck railing at main landings in Revit 2015

    I have an issue where our railing doesn't work correctly at the main floor landings but it does work correctly at the mid-landings. This is a multi-run stair condition. At the main landings the railing goes one tread too far so the handrail height end up being one tread too high (right side of section/isometric images). It needs to be the same "gooseneck" type condition that occurs at the mid landing (left side of section/isometric images).

    see images attached.

    Click image for larger version Name: Capture1.JPG Views: 1 Size: 192.6 KB ID: 418706Click image for larger version Name: Capture2.JPG Views: 1 Size: 139.3 KB ID: 418707Click image for larger version Name: Capture3.JPG Views: 1 Size: 146.8 KB ID: 418708

    Thanks,
    Travis
    Travis Vaughan, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP
    LinkedIn Profile | Twitter: @TravisUsesRevit
    Tags: 2015, gooseneck, railings
    #2
    Hey there Travis-

    Can you actually sketch by hand or draw in CAD, what you expect the landing to do there? The reason i ask is: I think Revit is doing exactly what it should, there. At the BOTTOM of a stair run, the railing HAS to go one Tread deeper than the stair itself, to be at the correct height. Thats why- at intermediate landings- i advise architectural staff (design wise, not revit wise) to always offset the runs so one of them is one trade "farther in" than the other, like this (attached).

    But if you leave it where you have it, and drop it to 36", it wont be parallel with the stairs (it will be changing height) since the railing "isnt as long" as the staircase.

    Does that make sense?
    Attached Files
    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

      #3
      See section sketch attached of handrail below. The stair treads are staggered like you showed in your plan sketch.
      Click image for larger version Name: Capture4.JPG Views: 1 Size: 99.3 KB ID: 395875
      Travis Vaughan, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP
      LinkedIn Profile | Twitter: @TravisUsesRevit

      Comment

        #4
        I think you got the stagger incorrect.
        Attached Files
        Chris Heinaranta | Architectural Technologist

        Comment

          #5
          floor plan attached below.
          Click image for larger version Name: Capture5.JPG Views: 1 Size: 190.1 KB ID: 395877
          Travis Vaughan, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP
          LinkedIn Profile | Twitter: @TravisUsesRevit

          Comment

            #6
            I agree with Chris. I think you need to stagger them the other way, and then it will work out perfectly.
            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

              #7
              Okay, I'll try that.

              Thanks, guys!
              Travis Vaughan, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP
              LinkedIn Profile | Twitter: @TravisUsesRevit

              Comment

              Previous template Next

              Related Topics

              Collapse
              Working...
              X