Anyone know why the side view (Heavy Timber-Side.rfa) represents the thickness of the members rather than the face dimension? For example: A 2x10 (which isn't really heavy timber anyway) is shown 1-1/2" thick rather than 9-1/4" when the side view family is used to draw items.
Wish the family names had been a little more logical (i.e. Heavy Timber-Thickness.rfa and Heavy Timber-Face.rfa)
Seems like these families should at least coordinate with the section view so the top view was thin and the side view was wider.
Whoever made those detail component families decided to do it following that convention, that the beam was like "laying on the floor," so that the "depth" becomes the "top" view, and the "thickness" becomes the "side" view.
I agree. It would have been more "common sense" to consider the beam as "standing vertically" not horizontally. It is easy to "fix", though, by simply renaming the two families.
True. Locally that is what I will do, but I have 18 computers. Think of the hundreds of thousands of Revit users. All it takes is 1 minute by the Autodesk Revit designers to save hundreds of thousands of corrections to what seems like an error to me.
No need for further reply. I do hope the designers consider changing it for the next release.
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register
Start with some of our most frequented solutions to get help installing your software.