If you have an instance parameter in a family (shared or family parameter type) and, after starting the "add process" by either using a ribbon tool or by dragging a type from the Project Browser, you then change the value of that instance parameter BEFORE placing the instance, you will find that the value you entered becomes the new default value for subsequent placements of that family. (For shared parameters, it will be the default for the subsequent placement of any family of that same category using that same shared parameter.)
That can be handy if you are placing a number of objects where you want the same instance value, but there may be times when you would like to have the initial value reset back to the default value specified in the family. Here is a tip I picked up in a post by CADastrophe in the AUGI Revit Architecture - General Forum.
You can reset the instance parameter back to the default value by starting the add process and, before placing an instance, using the Type Selector at the top of the Properties palette to choose a different type. It is not necessary to actually place an instance - you can escape out of the add process and the value will be reset to the default. If you do want to place an instance, you can change back to the originally selected type (assuming that you started with the desired type).
Changing the value of an instance parameter AFTER placement (and ending the add process) does not change the default value for the next placement. If, however, you select an object and use the Create Similar tool from the Modify|Object Type ribbon tab on the Create panel or from the right-click context menu, that will set the future default value for any instance parameters to the values of the selected object. These can be reset to the defaults using the technique noted above.
Showing posts with label Revit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Revit. Show all posts
November 09, 2012
Revit: "Blank" Dimension
July 22, 2012
Revit Architecture 2013 Update Release 1
Update Release 1 for Autodesk® Revit® Architecture 2013 is now available. As noted in the Enhancements Documentation, the following improvements have been made to Revit Architecture 2013:
- Improves stability when closing a sketch editor, such as slab, site, etc., which create a large number of points.
- Improves creation of U-shaped winder stairs.
- Improves stability when editing winder stairs.
- Improves performance when many railings exist within a project.
- Improves stability when support type is not defined for stair.
- Improves railing representation in coarse view.
- Improves stability when opening projects from previous versions of Revit.
- Improves stability during Copy/Paste operations.
- Corrects display of solid filled regions with transparent backgrounds.
- Allows exporting of materials painted on elements to ODBC.
- Improves performance of opening and closing sketch mode in projects with many families.
- Improves stability when setting a Design Option as the Primary.
- Improves stability when Fixed Distance option for a divided path.
- Improves stability while browsing to Revit Server when there is no network connectivity.
- Improves export consistency of Space and Zone elements when multiple elements have the same name and number.
- Allows Raytrace mode to work with DirectX 9.
- Improves stability when using Raytrace mode with Hardware Acceleration disabled.
- Improves Raytrace mode rendering output.
- Improves Surface Transparency override by element for multiple selection.
- Improves printing consistency when tone mapping is enabled.
- Disables Sun and SunPath from being rendered in Raytrace mode.
- Improves stability when using manual exposure in Raytrace mode.
- Improves stability when rendering views.
- Improves stability and performance when using visualization features like Sky, Exposure, and Anti-Aliasing.
- Improves stability when importing IFC data which contains special characters.
- Improves the setting of custom parameter values during import of IFC data.
- Improves stability when importing IFC data which contains an invalid line pattern.
- Allows Markups from DWF to be exported to DWF.
- Improves stability when drag and drop a DWG file into a Revit project.
- Improves stability when importing DXF data.
- Improves dimension fidelity when exporting to DWG with export units set to Meter.
- Improves alignment of hatch and fill patterns when exporting to DWG.
- Improves stability when selecting a new host for an element within an In-place Wall.
- Improves section creation within a project with linked model.
- Improves stability when working with Materials.
- Improves the displayed Pattern Type assigned to an element with the Material Editor.
- Corrects the display of the materials category within the Paint interface.
- Corrects the printed display of fill patterns within perspective views.
- Improves stability of Type editing when multiple element types are in the selection set.
April 28, 2012
Revit: Creating a New Tick Mark Size
The project on which I was working (in Revit® Architecture 2012) only offered two tick sizes for dimension strings: 1/8", which was way too large, and 3/64", which I thought was bordering on too small. (I am not sure if those are out-of-the-box offerings or just what was in my firm's template at the time this project was started.)
I figured there had to be a way to set up a tick mark with a width somewhere in between those two sizes, and opened up the "WikiHelp" to find out how. After searching for "Tick Mark", I found a promising search result, Changing the Dimension Line Tick Mark.
That article, as it turns out, covers how to change the Tick Mark assigned to a dimension style, not how to create a new tick mark. Unfortunately, there is no link in that article to the section on how to create an Arrowhead Type, which is under an entirely different main heading in the Revit User's Guide section of the WikiHelp. (Revit User's Guide > Document and Present the Project > Annotating > Dimensions > Modifying Dimensions > Changing the Dimension Line Tick Mark is the article to which I first went. The article on how to create an Arrowhead Type is in Revit User's Guide > Customize Revit > Project Settings > Annotation Styles > Specifying Arrowhead Styles.) I have no problem with having the information related to getting a Dimension Style to look a specific way in two places, but it seems to me that an article about changing the tick mark in a Dimension Style, after explaining which property in a Dimension Style should be changed to change the tick mark (something so obvious even I figured that much out without even looking in the Help), should anticipate the possibility that the desired tick mark does not already exist and provide a link to the article that explains where and how that is done. Is not the beauty of an electronic reference its ability to provide direct links between related items, even when the overall organization dictates that those items are not located under the same heading?
I was about to go back to the search results, when I noticed a comment posted under this article, asking a similar question to the one I was trying to answer. Linette Pouwels had a problem with the 3 mm tick mark (the metric equivalent of the imperial 1/8" tick mark) and was looking for a way to make a 1.5 mm tick mark. My hopes were raised for a moment when I saw that someone from the Autodesk Revit User Experience Team had replied, but then dashed when the reply stated that the tick mark could not be edited, only selected from those on the list. A URL was provided for requesting an additional tick mark option. I could not believe that the only way to get a tick mark of a different length would be to submit Product Feedback on the Autodesk website, and then hope that some future release would include an additional tick mark size. With a deadline looming, I terminated my search and settled on the 5/64" tick marks for the project at hand.
While reading the AUGI Revit Architecture forum today, I came across a post that stated that the writer knew how to create a new tick mark type. While the post did not say how to do so, I took that as a sign that the reply I had read in the WikiHelp was incorrect, and after poking around I discovered the way to do so. (I only found the other WikiHelp topic noted above after discovering the method on my own, and using "Arrowhead" rather than "Tick Mark" when searching the WikiHelp.) Here is how to create your own tick mark or other Arrowhead Type:
The choices for the Arrowhead Style property are limited to what is provided out-of-the-box, but you can customize each of those Arrowhead Styles by creating a new Type and changing the active parameter values for that Type. (Only parameters that apply to a given Arrowhead Style are active when selecting that Style; the Tick Size property applies to all of them.)
Postscript: I submitted a change to the Revit English 2012 WikiHelp Changing the Dimension Line Tick Mark page that adds a link to the Specifying Arrowhead Styles page. Perhaps it will be approved and published. Post-postscript: It was approved.
That article, as it turns out, covers how to change the Tick Mark assigned to a dimension style, not how to create a new tick mark. Unfortunately, there is no link in that article to the section on how to create an Arrowhead Type, which is under an entirely different main heading in the Revit User's Guide section of the WikiHelp. (Revit User's Guide > Document and Present the Project > Annotating > Dimensions > Modifying Dimensions > Changing the Dimension Line Tick Mark is the article to which I first went. The article on how to create an Arrowhead Type is in Revit User's Guide > Customize Revit > Project Settings > Annotation Styles > Specifying Arrowhead Styles.) I have no problem with having the information related to getting a Dimension Style to look a specific way in two places, but it seems to me that an article about changing the tick mark in a Dimension Style, after explaining which property in a Dimension Style should be changed to change the tick mark (something so obvious even I figured that much out without even looking in the Help), should anticipate the possibility that the desired tick mark does not already exist and provide a link to the article that explains where and how that is done. Is not the beauty of an electronic reference its ability to provide direct links between related items, even when the overall organization dictates that those items are not located under the same heading?
I was about to go back to the search results, when I noticed a comment posted under this article, asking a similar question to the one I was trying to answer. Linette Pouwels had a problem with the 3 mm tick mark (the metric equivalent of the imperial 1/8" tick mark) and was looking for a way to make a 1.5 mm tick mark. My hopes were raised for a moment when I saw that someone from the Autodesk Revit User Experience Team had replied, but then dashed when the reply stated that the tick mark could not be edited, only selected from those on the list. A URL was provided for requesting an additional tick mark option. I could not believe that the only way to get a tick mark of a different length would be to submit Product Feedback on the Autodesk website, and then hope that some future release would include an additional tick mark size. With a deadline looming, I terminated my search and settled on the 5/64" tick marks for the project at hand.
While reading the AUGI Revit Architecture forum today, I came across a post that stated that the writer knew how to create a new tick mark type. While the post did not say how to do so, I took that as a sign that the reply I had read in the WikiHelp was incorrect, and after poking around I discovered the way to do so. (I only found the other WikiHelp topic noted above after discovering the method on my own, and using "Arrowhead" rather than "Tick Mark" when searching the WikiHelp.) Here is how to create your own tick mark or other Arrowhead Type:
- On the Manage ribbon tab, select the Additional Settings tool.
- Choose the Arrowheads option on the flyout.
- In the Type Properties dialog, select a type that is similar to what you want.
- Choose the Duplicate Button, and provide a name for the duplicated type.
- Edit the new type's parameters as needed. For my new Diagonal Arrowhead Type, all I needed to change was the Tick Size, to 1/16".
- Click OK to dismiss the dialog. The new Arrowhead Type is now available for use in a Dimension Style.
Postscript: I submitted a change to the Revit English 2012 WikiHelp Changing the Dimension Line Tick Mark page that adds a link to the Specifying Arrowhead Styles page. Perhaps it will be approved and published. Post-postscript: It was approved.
March 25, 2012
Revit - Wall Type Edit Tip
This may be old news to more experienced Revit hands, but I discovered this today and thought I would document it for future reference. When editing a Wall Type in the Type Properties dialog, if you make changes to either or both of the "Coarse Scale" parameters under the Graphics category...
...and then decide you want to review the Wall's Structure by clicking on the Construction > Structure parameter's Edit button, be aware that if you click on the OK button in the Edit Assembly dialog (whether or not you make any changes)...
...your "Coarse Scale" parameter edits may get lost.
I say "may", because I found at least one circumstance under which it did not result in a deletion: if I click the Edit button and then choose the Cancel button to exit the Edit Assembly dialog, I can then click the Edit button again and if I choose the OK, the "Coarse Scale" parameter edits will be preserved. There may be other sequences that do not result in the loss of the "Coarse Scale" parameter edits. Edits to items under Identity Data do not seem to get lost like the "Coarse Scale" parameter edits do.
If you are certain you want to keep your "Coarse Scale" parameter edits, then the safe thing to do before pressing the Structure parameter Edit button is to use the Apply button in the Type Properties dialog. Doing so registers all edits up to that point in the Revit model and "Coarse Scale" parameter edits will not get lost when editing the Structure and choosing OK to dismiss the Edit Assembly dialog. Of course, if you do select the Apply button, you will not be able to discard any previous edits by choosing Cancel to exit the Type Properties dialog. So make certain you really want to keep all of the edits made before selecting the Apply button.
I say "may", because I found at least one circumstance under which it did not result in a deletion: if I click the Edit button and then choose the Cancel button to exit the Edit Assembly dialog, I can then click the Edit button again and if I choose the OK, the "Coarse Scale" parameter edits will be preserved. There may be other sequences that do not result in the loss of the "Coarse Scale" parameter edits. Edits to items under Identity Data do not seem to get lost like the "Coarse Scale" parameter edits do.
If you are certain you want to keep your "Coarse Scale" parameter edits, then the safe thing to do before pressing the Structure parameter Edit button is to use the Apply button in the Type Properties dialog. Doing so registers all edits up to that point in the Revit model and "Coarse Scale" parameter edits will not get lost when editing the Structure and choosing OK to dismiss the Edit Assembly dialog. Of course, if you do select the Apply button, you will not be able to discard any previous edits by choosing Cancel to exit the Type Properties dialog. So make certain you really want to keep all of the edits made before selecting the Apply button.
March 17, 2012
Revit Family Editor - Lock Column
February 20, 2012
Deleting Views in Revit
A reminder to myself (and a tip to anyone else who has not run into this yet): A View that has a revision cloud for a revision sequence that has been marked as "issued" cannot be deleted, as that would change the revision. Assuming that the revision clouds are "incidental", you have to temporarily uncheck the box in the Issued column of the Sheet Issues/Revisions dialog for the revision sequence(s) associated with revision clouds in that View.
In my case, a view for exporting a plan view to CAD was created as a duplicate with detailing, from a view which already had revisions clouds from issued revisions. Duplicate with detailing was chosen because we wanted to include the room tags, and the revision clouds were never removed from the duplicated view. I now want to delete the view completely. It is not necessary to clear the check mark in the Issued column, turn on the display of clouds and tags and delete the revision clouds; simply making the relevant revision sequences unissued is enough to be able to delete the view. Be sure to change the revisions back to "issued" when you are done.
In my case, a view for exporting a plan view to CAD was created as a duplicate with detailing, from a view which already had revisions clouds from issued revisions. Duplicate with detailing was chosen because we wanted to include the room tags, and the revision clouds were never removed from the duplicated view. I now want to delete the view completely. It is not necessary to clear the check mark in the Issued column, turn on the display of clouds and tags and delete the revision clouds; simply making the relevant revision sequences unissued is enough to be able to delete the view. Be sure to change the revisions back to "issued" when you are done.
December 12, 2011
Multi-Sheet Plans and Revisions in Revit
Many projects have floor plans that end up being too large to fit on one Sheet. Revit makes splitting a single Level onto two or more Sheets fairly easy by setting up a Dependent View for each sector of the overall floor plan. Revit even includes a Matchline tool to make it easy to designate the extents that each Dependent View documents. Each Dependent View is then placed on its own Sheet.
When choosing where to break up your plan, and how far beyond the matchline each Dependent View should depict (model and annotation), keep in mind that Revit will automagically add a revision to the Sheet if a View on that Sheet contains the full extents of a revision cloud in that View. If you only place revision clouds on the Sheet itself, you have no worries. But for plan revisions, I prefer to place the revision clouds in the View, so there is no need to worry that the View will move on the Sheet without the revision cloud also moving.
If you show large areas of the model beyond the matchline or if the annotation crop extends well beyond the matchline, you are increasing the odds that a small cloud drawn on the View of one Sheet, but near the shared matchline, will also fall completely within the adjacent View's annotation area. If you are issuing both Sheets, that is not a big deal. But if you are only issuing the Sheet that actually has the revision, you would not want the revision to show up on the adjacent Sheet. Keeping things as tight to the matchline as possible will minimize the chance that this will occur.
Sometimes the way the project is laid out makes it difficult to establish a clean matchline to which you can closely crop the Dependent Views. Other times, a revision is relatively small and right next to the matchline. Here are a couple of ways to avoid having the revision show up on the adjacent Sheet.
When choosing where to break up your plan, and how far beyond the matchline each Dependent View should depict (model and annotation), keep in mind that Revit will automagically add a revision to the Sheet if a View on that Sheet contains the full extents of a revision cloud in that View. If you only place revision clouds on the Sheet itself, you have no worries. But for plan revisions, I prefer to place the revision clouds in the View, so there is no need to worry that the View will move on the Sheet without the revision cloud also moving.
If you show large areas of the model beyond the matchline or if the annotation crop extends well beyond the matchline, you are increasing the odds that a small cloud drawn on the View of one Sheet, but near the shared matchline, will also fall completely within the adjacent View's annotation area. If you are issuing both Sheets, that is not a big deal. But if you are only issuing the Sheet that actually has the revision, you would not want the revision to show up on the adjacent Sheet. Keeping things as tight to the matchline as possible will minimize the chance that this will occur.
Sometimes the way the project is laid out makes it difficult to establish a clean matchline to which you can closely crop the Dependent Views. Other times, a revision is relatively small and right next to the matchline. Here are a couple of ways to avoid having the revision show up on the adjacent Sheet.
- If you have additional revisions in the same View, you can combine the cloud of the revision near the matchline with one that is farther away, and beyond the annotation area of the adjacent Sheet's View.A revision cloud does not have to consist of a single, closed loop of revision arcs. It can be open, and can also have multiple, unconnected runs of arcs. If any part of the graphics of a revision cloud is beyond the annotation area of a View, it will not show in that View, and will not result in a revision line on the Sheet on which that View is placed.
- If you do not have additional revisions, you can edit the revision cloud to include a very small arc that does not fall in the annotation area of the adjacent View, in a discreet location in the View with the revision. If the graphics this generates disturbs you just as much as having a revision line on a Sheet that was not issued, and you turn off the display of revision clouds from previous revisions when making the next revision, you can wait until after you have printed the drawings to be issued, and then go back and add the small segment just before marking the revision as issued and turning off the display of the revision clouds for that revision.
October 19, 2011
Revit Key Plans - More Detail
It has come to my attention that my Revit Key Plans article can be hard to follow, particularly if you are not familiar with some of the concepts or procedures used. It was not intended to be a step-by-step tutorial, so I am providing this post to fill in some of the gaps and make it easier to follow along. This tutorial was prepared using Revit Architecture 2011; interface elements in other versions or releases may vary.
- Start a new Generic Annotation Family. From the Application Menu - Big "R" in the upper left corner - choose New > Family. In the New Family - Select Template File dialog, navigate to the folder where you or your firm have placed the Annotation Family Templates, and choose Generic Annotation.rft.
- Determine how your Key Plan needs to function. I do not want to have to place the Key Plan family separately on each Sheet; I want it to be part of the title block family so that it need only be placed once, and will always be in the exact same position on each Sheet. I also do not want to set up a title block family type for each Key Plan option. I do not want to show a Key Plan on every sheet in the set, so I will need a Key Plan type that shows nothing at all. There will be plans that show the overall building, as well as larger scale plans showing only one of the two wings. I want a solid fill to show in the Key Plan indicating the area that is being shown on that drawing. I also want to be able to show the Key Plan outline graphics with no fill.
- Create the graphics for your Key Plan. You are going to have to figure this one out on your own. There does not appear to be a way to make use of any sort of graphics in a project file and transfer them to a family file. You can scale graphics inside the family, so you could draw the building outline in the family to scale and then scale it down to fit the area available in your title block for your Key Plan. As shown below, I created scaled-down outlines of the two wings of my building and then added text to identify the wings, filled regions with solid black fill for each wing, and the north arrow graphics. Keep in mind that the intersection of the two reference planes will be the initial insertion point for your Key Plan family and position your graphics accordingly.
- In order to be able to control the display of the various graphic components, I created three type-based Yes/No parameters in the Family Types dialog. The first is for the outline, text and north arrow graphics that will be on whenever a Key Plan is to be displayed, but off when no Key Plan is to be shown. I called this parameter Outline.
- On the Modify ribbon tab, on the Properties panel, select the Family Types tool.
- In the Family Types dialog, click on the Add button in the Parameters area at the lower right side.
- In the Parameter Properties dialog, in the Parameter Data area, enter the name for the parameter, change the Type of Parameter to Yes/No, select a parameter category under which to group the parameter - I used Graphics and select the Type toggle. Click OK to add the parameter and dismiss the Parameter Properties dialog.
- In the Family Types dialog, I cleared the check mark in the value column, so that the current condition will be to not display the graphics.
Repeat the previous sub-steps to add the remaining two parameters, SectorA and SectorB, for the filled regions associated with each building section. Other than the Name, the parameter attributes are the same as those for the Outline parameter. Uncheck the toggle in the value column for these as well.
- On the Modify ribbon tab, on the Properties panel, select the Family Types tool.
- With the Family Types dialog still open, create a family type for each display condition you want for your Key Plan, and turn on the appropriate visibility parameters for each type. In the example, I created five: No Key Plan (all parameters unchecked), Outline Only (only Outline parameter checked), Sector A (only Outline and SectorA checked), Sector B (only Outline and SectorB checked) and Sectors A-B (all three checked).
- In the Family Types dialog, select the New button in the Family Types area at the upper right.
- In the Name dialog, enter the name for the Family Type in the Name edit box and click OK to register the entry and dismiss the dialog.
- In the Family Types dialog, set the appropriate value (checked or unchecked) for the visibility parameters for this type. (For the No Key Plan type, leaving all unchecked is correct.)
- Repeat the preceding sub-steps to add the remaining Family Types needed for your Key Plan, setting the appropriate values for each type.
- In the Family Types dialog, select the New button in the Family Types area at the upper right.
- Select all of the graphic elements in your Key Plan that are to be associated with one of the parameters (in my example, I started with the Outline parameter, to which everything but the filled regions will be assigned). On the Properties palette, look for the Visible parameter, under the Graphics parameter group. If you do not see it, you likely selected an object, such as a Reference Plane or a Group, which does not have this parameter. Deselect these items. Select the button at the right side of the Visible parameter line. (In versions prior to 2011, do this from the Instance Properties dialog for the selected items.)
- In the Associate Family Parameter dialog, choose the appropriate Yes/No parameter (Outline, for the graphics selected on the first pass) and then click OK.
- Notice on the Properties palette, the Visible parameter and its value are now grayed out and the button at the right side displays an equals sign ("="). This indicates that the Visible parameter has been linked to another parameter, and cannot be edited directly. You can click on the button to verify (or edit) the chosen parameter.
- Repeat the previous three steps to assign the SectorA and SectorB Yes/No parameters to the visibility of the associated graphics (in my example, the filled regions). Note: If you have any Detail Groups within your Key Plan Graphics, as I did to collect the various parts of the north arrow graphics, you will need to edit the group to be able to assign the appropriate visibility parameters to the nested graphics within the Detail Group.
- At this point, your Key Plan family is complete. Save the family.
- Open the Title Block family into which you will place the Key Plan. Load your Key Plan family into the title block family. (One way, with the Key Plan family open and current, on any of the standard ribbon tabs, on the Family Editor panel, choose the Load into Project tool. If you have multiple potential target files, choose only your Title Block family in the dialog presented.)
- Your Title Block family should be set current and you should be prompted to insert an instance of the Key Plan family. If you are not seeing any "ghost" graphics of your Key Plan family near your cursor, check the Properties palette to see what the default family type is. Mine was set to No Key Plan, which has no visible graphics, so I got no ghost graphics to aid in initial placement. I changed it to Sectors A-B so that I could see all of the graphics.
- Adjust the location of your Key Plan family in your title block, if necessary.
- Select the placed instance of the Key Plan.
- On the Options Bar, click on the down arrow at the right of the Label drop-down and choose <Add parameter...> from the list.
- In the Parameter Properties dialog, in the Parameter Data area, give the new parameter a name; I used Key Plan. Choose a Group for the parameter; I used Graphics once again. Make this parameter an Instance type. This is crucial, as doing so will allow each instance of your title block to have a different family type displayed, which is what you want.
- On the Home ribbon tab, on the Properties panel, click the Family Types tool.
- You should see the Key Plan (or whatever your called yours) Label listed as a parameter under the Graphics group (or whatever group you chose). Set the value for the Label to your desired default Key Plan family type. This is the value that newly created (or newly updated) title block instances will use. I chose to set mine to No Key Plan. (If your Title Block family has several family types, you will want to do this for each Family Type. This only sets the default value; each instance can be changed to show a different Key Plan type because we made the Label an instance parameter. This avoids the need to create a separate Title Block family type for each Key Plan type.)
- Save your Title Block family file.
- Load or reload your Title Block family into a project. On a Sheet that has an instance of this Title Block family, select the instance.
- On the Properties palette, notice that, under the Graphics parameter group (or whatever parameter group you assigned to the Label applied to the Key Plan instance in your Title Block family), there is now a parameter called Key Plan, the value of which is a drop-down list of the family types you created in your Key Plan family. Choose the type you want to see for that particular Sheet.
June 06, 2011
Revit Tip - Unwanted Linework Revisited
Thanks to a comment posted by Andrew to my Revit Tip - Masking Regions post, I am a step further along on my Revit journey. He correctly pointed out that the Linework tool would be a better choice for getting rid of the unwanted line.
On the Modify ribbon tab, on the View panel, click on the Linework tool, shown below in Revit Architecture 2011.
(As always, click on any reduced-size image to see the image full size. Use the Back button on your browser to return here.)
On the Modify|Linework ribbon tab, on the Line Style Panel, set the Line Style to <Invisible lines> in the Line Style drop down list.
Now you can select the unwanted linework in the View in which you do not want to see it, and make it invisible with a single click. That is far more efficient than using a Masking Region to hide a single line.
If you change your mind later, you can restore the linework you made invisible by using the same Linework tool and setting the Line Style to <By Category> (or any other visible Line Style, if you do not want to use its default appearance).
On the Modify ribbon tab, on the View panel, click on the Linework tool, shown below in Revit Architecture 2011.
(As always, click on any reduced-size image to see the image full size. Use the Back button on your browser to return here.)On the Modify|Linework ribbon tab, on the Line Style Panel, set the Line Style to <Invisible lines> in the Line Style drop down list.
Now you can select the unwanted linework in the View in which you do not want to see it, and make it invisible with a single click. That is far more efficient than using a Masking Region to hide a single line.If you change your mind later, you can restore the linework you made invisible by using the same Linework tool and setting the Line Style to <By Category> (or any other visible Line Style, if you do not want to use its default appearance).
May 06, 2011
Revit Tip - Masking Regions
This may be old news to more experienced Revit users, but this was not covered in the "basics" training and was not discovered by anyone on my project team during the design and documentation phases. When generating elevations and sections from the Revit model, there will often be "artifacts" in the view that you would not want to see in the final elevation or section. Or there will be items that do not appear as you would like, but the effort to edit the model to get them to show properly in elevation or section is simply not worth it or the overhead of modeling the necessary detail slows the model excessively.
Masking Regions to the rescue! The problem we had with the Masking Regions was that the items to be masked almost always intersected or abutted linework that we wanted to keep. The boundary lines for Masking Regions default to invisible lines, which makes sense, but, unfortunately, if you place the boundary at the linework you want to keep, the mask extends to the midpoint of that linework. This is particularly noticeable on linework with a heavy lineweight, but is true for all linework.
The initial solution was to grip edit the Masking Region and pull it back slightly, to avoid losing desired graphics. This was tedious, and, when done poorly, either left a (smaller) divot in the linework to remain, or left a small part of the line to be masked protruding. While my efforts during construction documents were mostly focused in other areas, I have had to make revisions during construction, and found this process to be very unsatisfactory, until I realized that the boundary lines do not have to be invisible, nor do they all have to be the same.
By matching the Line Style of the boundary lines to that of the linework for segments that align with linework to remain, the Masking Region fully hides the unwanted linework without removing a piece of the linework that is to remain.
Masking Regions to the rescue! The problem we had with the Masking Regions was that the items to be masked almost always intersected or abutted linework that we wanted to keep. The boundary lines for Masking Regions default to invisible lines, which makes sense, but, unfortunately, if you place the boundary at the linework you want to keep, the mask extends to the midpoint of that linework. This is particularly noticeable on linework with a heavy lineweight, but is true for all linework.
The initial solution was to grip edit the Masking Region and pull it back slightly, to avoid losing desired graphics. This was tedious, and, when done poorly, either left a (smaller) divot in the linework to remain, or left a small part of the line to be masked protruding. While my efforts during construction documents were mostly focused in other areas, I have had to make revisions during construction, and found this process to be very unsatisfactory, until I realized that the boundary lines do not have to be invisible, nor do they all have to be the same.
By matching the Line Style of the boundary lines to that of the linework for segments that align with linework to remain, the Masking Region fully hides the unwanted linework without removing a piece of the linework that is to remain.
April 28, 2011
Revit - Rectangle Tool in Families
Here is a tip that I picked up watching one of The Revit Kid's videos a while back, and it has proved to be sufficiently useful that I thought I would make note of it here. When drawing linework that you intend to constrain to Reference Planes in a Revit Family, if you are drawing a rectangle, use the Rectangle tool.
Not only does it allow you to draw four lines with two clicks, but it also allows you to draw those lines in place and then activate the constraints. No need to use the Align tool after drawing the linework.
(As always, you can click on a reduced-to-fit image to see it full size. Use the Back button in your browser to return to the blog article.)
Not only does it allow you to draw four lines with two clicks, but it also allows you to draw those lines in place and then activate the constraints. No need to use the Align tool after drawing the linework.
(As always, you can click on a reduced-to-fit image to see it full size. Use the Back button in your browser to return to the blog article.)
January 05, 2011
Revisions and Dependent Views in Revit
I came across an issue related to my previous post on Revision Clouds and Dependent Views in Revit® Architecture. The floors on my project are shown in three sectors on three separate sheets at 1/4" = 1'-0", and I had a relatively small change to make within a single room in the middle or "B" sector that happened to be right next to the match line separating it from Sector "C" on my project. Due to the floor geometry, the match line is neither straight nor parallel to the dependent view cropping boundary, and at the revised area, a good deal of the room in which the change was made appears on the Sector "C" sheet as well.
I had made the change, clouded it and reissued the Sector "B" sheet without giving any thought to the Sector "C" sheet. Some time later, I opened the Sector "C" sheet and was checking to see if the revisions on it agreed with the plot in my half-size set and was surprised to find that an additional revision was listed. I quickly determined that the revision was for the change that I had documented in Sector "B" and that the reason it showed up was because the revision cloud, as I had drawn it, ended up being entirely within the annotation crop boundary for the dependent view shown on the Sector "C" sheet. That annotation crop boundary was a substantial distance beyond the model crop boundary, at what I believe was the initial default location.
Since the revision was generated by the revision cloud, there was no way to manually remove it from the list of revisions on the Sector "C" sheet. In order to remove the revision from the Sector "C" sheet, I edited the annotation crop boundary, dragging it as tight to the model crop boundary as possible, and then modified the revision cloud so that part of it extended beyond the annotation crop boundary. As noted in the previous post, once the revision cloud was not entirely within the Sector "C" annotation crop boundary, it no longer showed up in the Sector "C" dependent view and the revision no longer showed on the Sector "C" sheet, and I was good to go.
Modifying the annotation crop boundary caused a few annotation objects that had previously showed on the Sector "C" sheet to disappear, but these were all beyond the match line and still show on the Sector "B" sheet. I will need to remember to edit the annotation crop boundaries that are beyond a match line from the default location on future projects, and to keep in mind where those annotation crop boundaries are when placing future revision clouds in the vicinity of match lines.
I had made the change, clouded it and reissued the Sector "B" sheet without giving any thought to the Sector "C" sheet. Some time later, I opened the Sector "C" sheet and was checking to see if the revisions on it agreed with the plot in my half-size set and was surprised to find that an additional revision was listed. I quickly determined that the revision was for the change that I had documented in Sector "B" and that the reason it showed up was because the revision cloud, as I had drawn it, ended up being entirely within the annotation crop boundary for the dependent view shown on the Sector "C" sheet. That annotation crop boundary was a substantial distance beyond the model crop boundary, at what I believe was the initial default location.
Since the revision was generated by the revision cloud, there was no way to manually remove it from the list of revisions on the Sector "C" sheet. In order to remove the revision from the Sector "C" sheet, I edited the annotation crop boundary, dragging it as tight to the model crop boundary as possible, and then modified the revision cloud so that part of it extended beyond the annotation crop boundary. As noted in the previous post, once the revision cloud was not entirely within the Sector "C" annotation crop boundary, it no longer showed up in the Sector "C" dependent view and the revision no longer showed on the Sector "C" sheet, and I was good to go.
Modifying the annotation crop boundary caused a few annotation objects that had previously showed on the Sector "C" sheet to disappear, but these were all beyond the match line and still show on the Sector "B" sheet. I will need to remember to edit the annotation crop boundaries that are beyond a match line from the default location on future projects, and to keep in mind where those annotation crop boundaries are when placing future revision clouds in the vicinity of match lines.
October 02, 2010
The Aubin Academy Series Books
Those of you who have enjoyed Paul Aubin's books may be glad to know that the first of his books for the 2011 releases, The Aubin Academy Master Series: Revit® Architecture 2011, is now out. The AutoCAD® Architecture 2011 book, with which I assisted, is due out October 27, as is the AutoCAD® MEP book. The Revit® MEP 2011 book is expected in December. You can read more about this year's books and the rebranding in Paul's blog.
September 11, 2010
Revit® Architecture Dependent Views and Revision Clouds
Another interesting Revit® Architecture discovery I made the other day while scrambling to get some revised drawings plotted in time to reissue them yesterday. The floor plans and reflected ceiling plans of this project are shown at 1/4" = 1'-0", and three separate drawing sheets are required to do so. (See this article for the key plan from that project.)
One of the long sides of the building has an array of typical patient rooms, and there was a change to the location of the light fixtures at the patient room entrance alcoves along that entire side, due to a conflict with ductwork. We have a ceiling plan view of the entire floor, and that view has three dependent views, each cropped to one of the three sectors. Annotation placed in the dependent view shows in the parent view, and vice versa, so I often work in the parent view, since that gives access to the entire floor.
I thought I would be "efficient" to put all of the revision clouds for the revised entrance alcove lighting in one revision cloud object. You can draw multiple, separate revision clouds in sketch mode in a single revision cloud object. So I drew them all in one object on one floor, added revision tags to each sub-cloud (you have to reclick the tag tool in the ribbon for each additional tag to be added to the same object) and then clipboard copied the object and tags and pasted it aligned to the other floor. I was so proud of how efficient I had been, until I checked one of the sheets and found that the revision clouds did not show up! Then I opened each of the dependent views and saw that the revision clouds were not visible there, either.
I double-checked to see that other revision clouds I had done as individual clouds did in fact show in both the parent and dependent views (they did) and was on the verge of getting disfunctionally frustrated when it occurred to me that perhaps the reason why the clouds were not showing in the dependent views was because one cloud object had graphics that were beyond the clip boundary of each dependent view. I made two additional copies of the cloud object on one of the floors - so that I would have one for each depenent view. Then I edited each of the copies, deleting all of the clouds that were not in the dependent view to be served by that copy. Once that was done, the clouds showed up in the dependent views and I was back in business, after adding tags to the two copies and then deleting the mega-cloud on the other floor and copying the three new clouds and tags to the other floor.
In hindsight, it makes sense that an annotation object that falls outside of the annotation crop boundary would not show up in a particular dependent view, but that did not occur to me when I started the clouding task. I will have to keep that in mind in the future.
One of the long sides of the building has an array of typical patient rooms, and there was a change to the location of the light fixtures at the patient room entrance alcoves along that entire side, due to a conflict with ductwork. We have a ceiling plan view of the entire floor, and that view has three dependent views, each cropped to one of the three sectors. Annotation placed in the dependent view shows in the parent view, and vice versa, so I often work in the parent view, since that gives access to the entire floor.
I thought I would be "efficient" to put all of the revision clouds for the revised entrance alcove lighting in one revision cloud object. You can draw multiple, separate revision clouds in sketch mode in a single revision cloud object. So I drew them all in one object on one floor, added revision tags to each sub-cloud (you have to reclick the tag tool in the ribbon for each additional tag to be added to the same object) and then clipboard copied the object and tags and pasted it aligned to the other floor. I was so proud of how efficient I had been, until I checked one of the sheets and found that the revision clouds did not show up! Then I opened each of the dependent views and saw that the revision clouds were not visible there, either.
I double-checked to see that other revision clouds I had done as individual clouds did in fact show in both the parent and dependent views (they did) and was on the verge of getting disfunctionally frustrated when it occurred to me that perhaps the reason why the clouds were not showing in the dependent views was because one cloud object had graphics that were beyond the clip boundary of each dependent view. I made two additional copies of the cloud object on one of the floors - so that I would have one for each depenent view. Then I edited each of the copies, deleting all of the clouds that were not in the dependent view to be served by that copy. Once that was done, the clouds showed up in the dependent views and I was back in business, after adding tags to the two copies and then deleting the mega-cloud on the other floor and copying the three new clouds and tags to the other floor.
In hindsight, it makes sense that an annotation object that falls outside of the annotation crop boundary would not show up in a particular dependent view, but that did not occur to me when I started the clouding task. I will have to keep that in mind in the future.
August 18, 2010
Revit - Wall Openings and Room Separation Lines
Interesting Observations to Keep in Mind in the Future [based on the Wall having a Base Offset of 0 (zero)]:
So, in order to edit the width of a Wall Opening that has a Room Separation Line with an endpoint on the Wall Opening edge you wish to move, you either need to stretch the Room Separation Line to get the endpoint off of the Wall Opening Edge -OR- you need to select the Wall, "disallow join" at that edge using the "Disallow Join" grip. If you can easily stretch the Wall Separation Line to get its endpoint at the desired new location of the Wall Opening edge, then doing that and then editing the Wall Opening would be the least tedious way to proceed. If not, either method should work; use the one you prefer.
- A Wall Opening with a Base Offset of 0 or less (extends to the Wall's bottom or below) renders that Wall incapable of acting as a Room separator. In other words, the Room will extend through the Opening in search of bounding elements beyond (left opening in the images below).
- A Wall Opening with a non-zero, positive Base Offset will act a Room separator, even if the top of the Wall Opening is at or above the top of the Wall or if the Room's Base Offset puts the bottom of the Room above the bottom of the Wall Opening (right opening in the images below).
So, it would appear that the condition at the associated Level is what determines whether or not a Wall Opening will allow a Room to pass through or not. - Adding a Room Separation Line to close the breach and having the endpoints of the Room Separation line at an edge of the Wall Opening disables the stretch grip at that edge and also prevents that edge from working with the Align tool. (If both ends of the Room Separation Line are at the edge of the Wall Opening, then neither stretch grip is available and neither edge can be Aligned.
- Stretching the Room Separation Line beyond the extents of the Wall Opening allows the Wall Opening end to be grip edited or Aligned, but will result in warnings about the overlapping Wall and Room Separation Line. If those warnings do not bother you, you can leave the Wall Separation Line beyond the Wall Opening until you are satisfied with the location of the Wall Opening.
- Selecting the Wall will display a "Disallow Join" grip at each edge of the Wall Opening. Clicking on one of those grips will reactivate the stretch grip and the ability to Align that edge. Doing so, and enlarging the Wall Opening will allow Rooms to flow through, so you will also need to extend the Room Separation Line if you want to prevent the Room(s) from passing through.
So, in order to edit the width of a Wall Opening that has a Room Separation Line with an endpoint on the Wall Opening edge you wish to move, you either need to stretch the Room Separation Line to get the endpoint off of the Wall Opening Edge -OR- you need to select the Wall, "disallow join" at that edge using the "Disallow Join" grip. If you can easily stretch the Wall Separation Line to get its endpoint at the desired new location of the Wall Opening edge, then doing that and then editing the Wall Opening would be the least tedious way to proceed. If not, either method should work; use the one you prefer.
December 04, 2009
Revit Key Plans
Thanks to a little help from the AUGI Revit® Architecture Forum, I was able to add a key plan to the title block family in my current Revit project and, with the setting of one instance-based parameter for the title block on each sheet, display the appropriate key plan, or none at all. There are a number of suggestions and examples in that thread; here is what I did today.
I happened to have an AutoCAD® file that had the structural grid accurately drawn, so I made use of a copy of that, in AutoCAD® Architecture, to quickly draw the building outline and the match lines, determine the amount I needed to scale the outline down to fit in my key plan area and finally paste the scaled-down graphics into a new file created from scratch.
I started a new Generic Annotation family in Revit Architecture 2010, and imported my scaled-down drawing file, matching origin to origin. I traced over the graphics with Revit linework, added text and filled regions for each of the three sectors into which the plans are broken and popped in a north arrow. I then deleted the imported AutoCAD file from the family.
To be able to control the visibility of the graphics, I created four Yes/No parameters in the Family Types dialog: Outline, SectorA, SectorB and SectorC.
I then created six family types: No Key Plan (all parameters unchecked), Outline Only (Outline parameter checked, others unchecked), Sector A (only Outline and SectorA checked), Sector B (only Outline and SectorB checked), Sector C (only Outline and SectorC checked) and Sectors A-B-C (all parameters checked).
In the Instance Properties dialog for all of the graphics in the family, I set the Visible parameter to be equal to one of the Yes/No parameters. All of the graphics except for the filled regions were set to the Outline parameter and the filled regions were set to the appropriate "Sector" parameter.
After saving the family file, I loaded it into my title block family and placed an instance in the Key Plan area. I gave that instance a Label tied to an instance-based parameter called Key Plan that I placed under the Graphics category. I set the default value to No Key Plan, saved the title block family and reloaded it into my project.
Now, by simply setting the Key Plan parameter in the Instance Properties of each sheet's title block file, I can make the appropriate key plan display, and that key plan will be in the same location on each sheet.
The Sector A key plan is shown above; the other options (other than No Key Plan, which is blank) are shown below and are a parameter setting away.
Pretty slick, if I do say so myself. ;-) [As always, reduced images can be viewed full-size by clicking on them; use the Back button on your Browser to return to the article.]
October 19, 2011 Update: A more detailed explanation of how to embed key plan graphics in a title block family, with instance-based control over what, if any, graphics display at each title block, can be found in this blog article.
I happened to have an AutoCAD® file that had the structural grid accurately drawn, so I made use of a copy of that, in AutoCAD® Architecture, to quickly draw the building outline and the match lines, determine the amount I needed to scale the outline down to fit in my key plan area and finally paste the scaled-down graphics into a new file created from scratch.
I started a new Generic Annotation family in Revit Architecture 2010, and imported my scaled-down drawing file, matching origin to origin. I traced over the graphics with Revit linework, added text and filled regions for each of the three sectors into which the plans are broken and popped in a north arrow. I then deleted the imported AutoCAD file from the family.
To be able to control the visibility of the graphics, I created four Yes/No parameters in the Family Types dialog: Outline, SectorA, SectorB and SectorC.
I then created six family types: No Key Plan (all parameters unchecked), Outline Only (Outline parameter checked, others unchecked), Sector A (only Outline and SectorA checked), Sector B (only Outline and SectorB checked), Sector C (only Outline and SectorC checked) and Sectors A-B-C (all parameters checked).
In the Instance Properties dialog for all of the graphics in the family, I set the Visible parameter to be equal to one of the Yes/No parameters. All of the graphics except for the filled regions were set to the Outline parameter and the filled regions were set to the appropriate "Sector" parameter.
After saving the family file, I loaded it into my title block family and placed an instance in the Key Plan area. I gave that instance a Label tied to an instance-based parameter called Key Plan that I placed under the Graphics category. I set the default value to No Key Plan, saved the title block family and reloaded it into my project.
Now, by simply setting the Key Plan parameter in the Instance Properties of each sheet's title block file, I can make the appropriate key plan display, and that key plan will be in the same location on each sheet.
The Sector A key plan is shown above; the other options (other than No Key Plan, which is blank) are shown below and are a parameter setting away.
Pretty slick, if I do say so myself. ;-) [As always, reduced images can be viewed full-size by clicking on them; use the Back button on your Browser to return to the article.] October 19, 2011 Update: A more detailed explanation of how to embed key plan graphics in a title block family, with instance-based control over what, if any, graphics display at each title block, can be found in this blog article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)