Showing posts with label Dept. of Subtle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dept. of Subtle. Show all posts

Friday, September 13, 2013

Filter Criteria Order Matters

Taylor wrote to me to say that he noticed a subtle quirk when he wanted to filter pipe in a schedule. He needed to focus on Mark values that contain M15 and M16 for example. He discovered that the filter would work if he put the criteria in that order but that if he happened to reverse them like this, M16 and M15, Revit no longer found the M15 pipes.

Definitely subtle.

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Mass Floor Area vs Volume

I managed to trick myself into believing that area and volume for a "floor" should be the same whether a mass has one or several mass floors. To help explain my delusion, I created a mass that is a 50x50x50 cube, with five levels.


If I remove two levels from the mix (levels 2 and 5) I get twice the volume for floors at Level 1 and 4


Looking at the 3D view it immediately made sense to me. Looking at the schedule I found myself thinking something was wrong. Why is there double the volume? Why would the floor think it is so much bigger? The real problem was my perception. I was thinking floor, the thing I walk on, instead of a "floor", where I am in the building.

If it isn't obvious, the Mass Floor area is the surface area of the mass floor element. The Mass Floor Volume is the volume between mass floors or the top and bottom of the mass if there are no other mass floors.

Btw, you can select and delete a mass floor, like in a 3D view for example, and that's the same as opening the Mass Floors dialog and un-checking a level.

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Linked Ceiling Hosted Light Fixtures and MEP

A ceiling hosted light fixture can cut the host ceiling. When an architect uses one of these fixtures the ceiling surface the Revit MEP user has to work with actually has a "hole" in it. This means that they can't put their own light fixture in the same spot because there is no ceiling there.


Technically that's an oversimplification. We CAN put a fixture in the same location but there isn't a face for Revit to detect easily. If you try to use the Downlight - Recessed Can family it's origin is too far from a ceiling's grid pattern to let us put it within a tile. We can put it in randomly and then move it to the correct location. We'll get yelled at though, the light isn't properly hosted now.


If we do the same sort of thing with the troffer family (2x4 fixture) it will be a bit more tolerant as well as not losing its face association.

This sort of discipline collaboration isn't tons of fun.

Monday, August 26, 2013

Drafting Views have an Origin

When we create a new drafting view we are presented with an empty view. We are free to begin our drafting exercise anywhere we see fit. It's not obvious but there IS an origin in the view. If we import a simple CAD file that has some lines that define where the 0,0,0 origin is we'll find out exactly where the origin is in the drafting view (use Auto-Origin to Origin).


What does it matter? It may not matter at all. I've often wondered about it since Revit cares about keeping us near the origin of the file for our model views and complains when we import external files that are very far from origin or very very large.

As such I can't help but wonder if we ought to be careful to keep our details near the origin of drafting views too. I have encountered drafting views that have their contents very very far from the origin. It's easy to do, just zoom out a bit and start detailing. It just seems inconsistent with the best practice expectations for model views.

I'm inclined to create a "template" drafting view in a project template to begin drafting views with (duplicate them) with the origin clearly marked, like shown above. I'd welcome someone from the factory chiming in to say this is a good idea or unnecessary.

Saturday, August 17, 2013

Linked Files and Visibility/Graphics

When you examine the Visibility/Graphics dialog you'll find each Revit file you've linked is shown in a list under the Revit Links tab. In this example I've linked Building A, B and C into a host model. The Project Browser shows three linked files and Visibility/Graphics shows the same three but also shows one child link beneath the top level row for each link.


The top level row for each link is the definition of the linked file while the child beneath it represents the actual instance that is placed in the model. The single child for each link provides a way to customize the appearance of the individual linked file apart from the parent definition. Ordinarily this would NOT be required. If overrides are necessary it is sufficient and appropriate to just alter the definition (top level) only.

However if for some reason you were to use two instances of Building A and Building C the Visibility/Graphics dialog would look more like this, while the Project Browser would remain unchanged.


The new child rows listed for Building A and C are the result of copying the originals for each to a new location. Each new row provides us with the ability to use Visibility/Graphic overrides for each child differently if necessary. For example, I could turn off the first instance of Building C without affecting the second instance.


As you can see, the upper Building C is off now. I could also use the button that appears in the Display Settings column to override individual instances of the linked files. If I want to alter both copies the same way I just need to change the top level definition. I start by checking the option "Override display settings for this instance", choosing Custom, activating the Model Categories tab and then changing the Model Categories drop down to Custom. Now I can override individual model categories in just one instance of the two copies of the linked file.


The link names you see are not default values, I changed them via the Name parameter in the Properties palette.


When worksets are involved the top level is assigned to the Type Parameter "Workset" and the child has its own instance parameter for "Workset" too. This means the definition can be assigned to a workset but each instance can be assigned to different worksets.

If you see more than one child instance of a linked file and there should only be one child that probably means someone has copied a link inadvertently. If you can't tell then it's likely they used Copy to Clipboard followed by Paste Aligned to Same Place and there are two instances on top of each other. Since it's been so easy to accidentally select a link I see this happen fairly often. It can create some confusion when people are trying to override graphics and their efforts don't seem to work. There may be another copy lurking underneath.

Friday, August 16, 2013

Dropping Files

My son is into "Dub Step" and he tells me "the drop" has special meaning but this post is about dragging and dropping files into Revit. You may be aware that, like other Windows applications and files, you can drag and drop a file from Windows Explorer into Revit and Revit will open the file.

As you have probably noticed I like subtle stuff. Brian Mackey mentioned in his adaptive point session at Central States Revit Workshop yesterday that where we drop the file affects how Revit will respond. If we drop a file on the ribbon Revit will open the file. If you drop the file into the canvas or drawing area, and a project or family is already open, it will likely load the family into the other open file instead. If you really want to open the file just be careful where you drop the file.

In Dub Step terms, "Where's the Drop dude?"

Thursday, August 15, 2013

Double Clicking Tags

In Revit 2013 we found a new feature to be quite annoying, double clicking on a room tag would put us in the family editor. That is particularly bewildering to new users. Usually we were more interested in typing in a room name or number. With 2014 we received new options to define how Revit should respond to double clicking on a family.

At the Central States Revit Workshop this morning, Brian Cowles with IMAGINIT mentioned a subtle change that is easily missed. If you leave the setting "Edit Family" as your preference it is almost the same as 2013 except that where you put your cursor is important before double clicking. If you double click on an editable label in the tag it will place you in edit mode for the parameter. If the Move symbol icon is displayed when you double click you'll edit the family. This means you can take advantage of double clicking AND avoid the downside.

Love subtle stuff!

Thursday, August 8, 2013

Silence the Warnings

If you do something Revit doesn't like it will generate a warning that appears in the bottom right of the Revit interface. Those are warnings you can choose to ignore but they are stored in the Review Warnings dialog to review later. It's a good idea to remember to resolve as many as you can.

If you also get a warning sound when these appear and you find it annoying, you can silence them if you click the sneaky little "speaker" icon that appears in the warning dialog.


My son showed me this meme as I was writing this post, sublime timing? I think so...


Tuesday, August 6, 2013

Two Lines in Schedules

You may be aware that we can force a schedule field to use a new line by pressing Shift + Enter. This permits you to enter new information on a second line but once you finish editing the cell Revit will only show the single row. When the schedule is placed on a sheet you'll see both lines or how ever many you force it to use.


If you do this and need to edit the information again you'll need to use the Left Arrow key to advance the cursor to the next line(s). It's a little quirky. With the lack of fidelity between sheet and schedule editing view you'll also have to experiment with the width of columns to get them look correct on sheets.

Hopefully its obvious but I'll mention it anyway, this Shift + Enter only works on fields that we type values into not those that are calculated or based on other value supplied by the elements themselves, like Family, Type, Height, Width etc. Technically you might be able to enter something but it will still have to provide an acceptable result to the family itself.

Friday, August 2, 2013

Loaded and Unloaded Link Icons

In the project browser we'll see either a blue arrow or red X next to a linked file.


You see the Blue Arrow when the link is loaded and the Red X when it is unloaded or not found. That's true until Worksets are used. If a link is assigned to a workset and that workset is closed the Red X will appear, which will indicate that the link is no longer "present or visible", not that it is unloaded but it's much the same, in a way.

If you open the workset again the X doesn't go away immediately. It will if you do a Reload Latest (assuming there are changes to load), SwC or reload the link itself.

Thursday, August 1, 2013

Reloading Links and Worksets

In past releases of Revit, prior to 2014, a linked file that is unloaded would get passed along to other users as they used SwC or Reload Latest, the file would be unloaded in their session too. It was a global effect, affecting everyone. In contrast using Reload on a linked file only affected the person doing the reload. Other users would not see the file as reloaded if they used Reload Latest or SwC. That meant Reloading a link was a local or personal change while Unloading a link was a Global change, affecting everyone.

As a result we started assigning individual linked files to their own worksets. This gave us discreet control over the unloading and loading of links through the workset dialog instead. Using Close and Open for a Workset is regarded as a local or personal change and doesn't spread out to other users on the team.

In 2014 I find that both Reloading and Unloading a link is now propagated to other users when using SwC or Reload Latest. They are now both global transactions.

This means it may not be necessary to bother with the Workset approach to manage the links now since it was originally put into practice as a workaround to avoid the reloading/unloading link "dance". By dance I mean, everyone gets a link unloaded and then we all end up trying to get the link reloaded each time we SwC or Reload Latest because someone else has unloaded it. This change doesn't eliminate the dance entirely. It just makes it easier to get the link re-established by one user so everyone else can see it again.

If you prefer to treat the unloading (and therefore the reloading) of a link as a personal or local change then the practice of one workset per link remains useful.

Monday, July 29, 2013

Overlay VS Attached

A question posted at AUGI started out simply by asking if this concept is the same at AutoCAD. I replied, "Exactly the same concepts". Then another member expanded on my reply and it seemed to muddy the water for the person who wrote the original post because when they replied it sounded like it was still unclear. I wrote this longer reply and decided to put the explanation here too.

Choosing between attached or overlay is to determine how Revit should regard a link when the host file is linked into yet another file. For example, if File 1 is linked into File A and set to "attached", when File A is linked into File B, File 1 will also also be loaded into File B. If File 1 is changed, when its host File A is reloaded in their host File B, File 1 changes will also be seen, if its own changes have been saved before Reload is used. Both files are read independently during a Reload. You will only find the host File A listed in File B's Manage Links dialog however. Written another way, when a link is reloaded, it's attached nested links will also be reloaded.

When Overlay is chosen instead File 1 does not get loaded into File B. No circumstance will cause it to appear nor will we be aware of changes within the link.

We should use the "Attached" setting when we link a file into another file AND expect its own linked files to show up as if they are native elements in the file too. Changes in either the parent or child will appear when the parent file is reloaded into its host or if the host file is opened after changes have occurred in either.

In practice, if we create an architectural model (parent) that uses linked files (children) for repeating units they will need to be set to Attached if we want the units to appear when the "parent" architectural model is linked into a structural model. When we pass along our model to the structural engineer we will need to send both the "parent" architectural model and the "child" repeating units. When we link in their structural model we should use "Overlay" so Revit does not try to load their structural model when the structural engineer links our architectural model into their own model.

Clear as mud?

Monday, July 22, 2013

Revit MEP - Options Affect Parameters

Daniel Stine sent me this subtle issue the other day, thanks! He wrote that it affects 2013 and 2014. If you are using Revit "one box" but customize your user settings so that the Systems tab for electrical is off it will affect your ability to access certain parameter types. Here's the check box I'm referring to.


There are normally 21 parameters associated with the Electrical Discipline. If the previous image option for Systems tab:electrical tools is unchecked as shown you'll only get 6 parameters offered instead, like below.


Definitely subtle and a bit quirky. I don't think Revit should restrict this list just because I've said I prefer to not see electrical ribbon features. If you are making Revit content don't restrict the tabs as it might impact what parameters are available to you.

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Copy Then Paste a Level

Ever have someone want to use Copy to Clipboard and then Paste Aligned to create a new level? I haven't but it is technically possible to create a new level by doing it.

Example 1:
Open an Elevation view
Select Level 2
Use Copy to Clipboard
Open the floor plane for Level 2
Use Paste Aligned > Aligned to Same Place
Result - A new level but on top of Level 2.


Example 2:
Open an Elevation view
Select Level 2
Use Copy to Clipboard
Open the floor plane for Level 2
Use Paste Aligned > > Aligned to Current View
Result - A new level but using the same elevation offset (distance) as Level 2


Example 3:
Start with a new template
Create a new level with the Level tool
Adjust all three levels so they are each 12'-0" apart
Open an Elevation view
Select Level 3
Use Copy to Clipboard
Open the floor plane for Level 3
Use Paste Aligned > > Aligned to Current View
Result - A new level but using the same elevation offset (distance) as Level 3


You can also place a new one with Paste Aligned > Aligned to Selected Levels, choose the appropriate level in the dialog that appears.

It isn't the first thing I'd think of to create a new level, but it IS possible.

Monday, July 15, 2013

Revit MEP - Free Size Parameter

If you use the Free Size parameter instead of Size you might notice a subtle anomaly.

In elevation views where we only see one dimension of a duct Free Size does not switch between WxH and HxW, the Size parameter does switch. In other views they both display width x height. In section or elevations that show the profile of a duct both dimensions are measurable and each parameter is consistent, they default to Width x Height.


It does seem like an oversight on their part, they ought to be consistent whether we use Size or Free Size.

Friday, July 5, 2013

Parts and Linked Files

When Parts as a feature appeared in 2012 it didn't support creating them from elements in a linked file. When 2013 came out it casually mentioned that it could do so in the last line of the "what's new..." text regarding Parts.

    Parts can now be made from loaded families (such as Columns, Structural Columns, Structural Framing, and Generic Model) and from originals in a Revit link. (my emphasis added)

Perhaps this willingness to work with link elements could be leveraged for some sort of coordination approach as compared with the Copy/Monitor tool?

As it happens, Desirée Mackey with Martin/Martin is presenting a class (lab format) at RTC next week called "The Prolific Potential of Parts". I'm looking forward to hearing what she has to say!

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Visibility Graphics Dialog and Using Current View Only

Revit 2014 introduces an enhancement regarding importing CAD data (I believe undocumented). During an Import of CAD, in the past when we used the option "Current View Only" Revit showed a reference to that link in the Visibility Graphics dialog (V/G) regardless of the view we were working in.


With Revit 2014 it now filters out the link in views that it was not imported into. Naturally if you use Copy to Clipboard and Paste Aligned to put a copy in another view Revit will start to include the link in the V/G dialog again. This is what you should see if you use Current View Only for the import.


Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Can't Select DWG

With Revit 2014 came new selection filtering for linked files and pinned elements.

If you find yourself scratching your head when you can't select a DWG file you just imported...remember that Revit will often pin the DWG. If you've turned off both selection options that'll make selecting the DWG doubly difficult! Been there done that!

Monday, June 24, 2013

Pipe Size Parameter Usage

This is pretty subtle, when you try to add a shared parameter directly to a dimension (even to the "radius" in a connector), ie select "add a parameter" instead of selecting from the list available, it will tell you it has to be a 'length' parameter.


If you load the parameter first using the Family Types dialog as a pipe size you can then select it from the list.

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Copy Monitor and Name Changing

I use the monitor part of Copy/Monitor to create a relationship between my existing levels and levels in a linked model. There is no need to use Copy because I've already got a couple levels to work with. In this scenario I'm using Revit MEP and linking an architectural model. I'd like my level name to match the architects. If you use Monitor first and then decide to make your level names match the linked levels you'll get a message like this.


Revit isn't really evaluating or comparing the names. If it was it would realize that I just changed it to match the monitored level. Instead it's just reacting to the fact that the name (my level's name in my file) is now different.

Moral of the story is, if you intend to use the same names it is best to change them before you start using monitoring. If you don't then you'll need to stop monitoring, change the name and then restore the monitoring.