Over time I have seen two approaches to window and door frames.
One is the OOTB approach, in which a ref plane jig is built, and the frame is modeled as a single extrusion. The result looks most appropriate for a Hollow Metal Frame, as there are no joints in the frame. Model Line joints can be added if needed to show a Storefront based system.
The other approach is to use nested "Frame" pieces, which are just non hosted or 2 pick generic models converted to Window or Door families, with a simple extrusion on the Frame/Mullion subcategory. The result looks more correct for a storefront framed door or window/relite, as there are joints.
I am curious what others are doing here? And what drove the decision to use that approach?
Also, do most people model the frame in the "final" door or window? Or do you do a nested Frame Type? Part of me thinks going the nested & shared route could be useful, because then I can have a Door that actually contains a Door (Leaf) Type and a Frame Type, so the Revit content matches real world construction better. But then I want nested and shared Hardware Groups too, and I find that graphic control of a face based object goes to pot once that item is shared. For now Door and Frame types are just data from a Key Schedule, and only the user can ensure that everything is correct. Call it BiM.
Gordon
One is the OOTB approach, in which a ref plane jig is built, and the frame is modeled as a single extrusion. The result looks most appropriate for a Hollow Metal Frame, as there are no joints in the frame. Model Line joints can be added if needed to show a Storefront based system.
The other approach is to use nested "Frame" pieces, which are just non hosted or 2 pick generic models converted to Window or Door families, with a simple extrusion on the Frame/Mullion subcategory. The result looks more correct for a storefront framed door or window/relite, as there are joints.
I am curious what others are doing here? And what drove the decision to use that approach?
Also, do most people model the frame in the "final" door or window? Or do you do a nested Frame Type? Part of me thinks going the nested & shared route could be useful, because then I can have a Door that actually contains a Door (Leaf) Type and a Frame Type, so the Revit content matches real world construction better. But then I want nested and shared Hardware Groups too, and I find that graphic control of a face based object goes to pot once that item is shared. For now Door and Frame types are just data from a Key Schedule, and only the user can ensure that everything is correct. Call it BiM.

Gordon
Comment