MVParts as pipe fittings

[nestly]

So apparently, it's darn near impossible to create parametric pipe fittings that are representitive of their real world form. So making them as block based MVParts seems to be the only other option. However, unless I'm missing something, there is nothing even close to a "fitting" type for MVParts. Anyone have any experience or suggestions for classifying/organizing pipe fittings as MVParts?

 

[tzframpton]

No there's not (that I know of). You can do this in a number of ways. You can add to the default Autodesk content library, or you can create your own library and organize however you want. I always had a company-specific catalog that I ran with in parallel to the OOTB Autodesk one. Go to Options > MEP Catalogs and expand Multi-view Part. From here you can add your own Catalog. I named it "Venture Mechanical Catalog" when I worked in contracting. Once this is all set up, anytime you add parts, it's shown in the Add MvPart selector dialog as a separate catalog for you to choose. From there it's self explanatory, such as putting a folder in there labeled "Fittings" but they're actually MvParts that break into the pipe. Best thing about this route is you don't muddle up the Autodesk content. I always liked to keep that content separate and clean, for personal OCD reasons.

 

Make sense? Lol, sorry it's kind of a bland response I know. I'm sure you get the gist but if not, holler back at me.

[nestly]

Thanks Tannar, your answers are always fantastic.

 

Yep, you had previously helped me set up and organize a company specific catalog(s), and that's been working well. I was just hoping I wouldn't have to toss all block based MVParts that aren't already defined (ie pipe fittings) into "Custom" Seems like a pretty big oversite that they omitted "fittings" from MVPart types lol

 

 

The upside is that I've figured out how to make the flanges and forged elbows shown in the animation as parametric MVParts using Revolve and Boolean, so as of now, it's only the "smoothed" reducers that I have to worry about. It's still sucks that you can't auto-route MVParts though.

 

Does Revit have the ability for custom parts (like a smooth Eccentric weld reducer) to be auto-routed?

[tzframpton]

Does Revit have the ability for custom parts (like a smooth Eccentric weld reducer) to be auto-routed?

Maybe... but if so then you'd have to be a mathematical genius to get it all figured out. Revit absolutely sucks at mechanical fittings. It's so bad people have just given up on creating them. It's almost a travesty but Revit is promising awesome parametric fittings in the near future, so the entire Revit MEP community is holding their breath but you might see people falling over dead soon.

 

[nestly]

Parametrics in AMEP Content Builder isn't exactly for mathematical lightweights either. I'd love to see an Content Builder overhaul... it's reasonably functional, but not at all intuitive, IMO

 

As much as I love Autodesk, expedience addressing bugs and wishes isn't one of their strong points.

[tzframpton]

I'll admit, the parametric content editor is archaic looking in AMEP. Revit's content editor is soooooo nice, I mean it's downright sleek and intuitive from all angles. Pipe fittings and elbows simply are hard to do tho. Everything else is greatness.

[hertz hound]

I really did not want learning another program on my list of things to do, but buying a book on Inventor and learning the basics would go a long way in understanding AMEP's parametric part builder, as well as Revit's family editor. I have read that you can use the content built with Inventor (with connectors) in AMEP and Revit. Sometimes they were positive posts, sometimes negative, on bringing the parts into these programs.

 

From reading books and doing online classes no one mentioned the importance of starting your own catalog for parts. I think this is a must. Later when you move on to a newer version you have all your custom stuff in a few catalogs ready to go. I store the file in a folder that syncs with my online storage. Now if I build something at the office I can use it at home (O.T.) or vice versa. It is the same idea I borrowed from reading about storing the files on an office network.

[tzframpton]

In your field, Revit would be the preferred program. Here's a tip... if you don't have access to Revit, download the free trial. After the 30 day trial period ends, you still have full access to Revit, you just can't save or print anything. So you can still use it to learn, and since AMEP mimic's Revit you'll already have a grasp on it.

 

Just thought I'd throw this out there in case you see this as something to look into at a later time.