I've created a family for an exterior canopy system that has many variations (see attachment). It works for all options except the final request from the intended users. When the canopy is very short, the interior outriggers do not need cable tiebacks to the exterior wall.
Currently, the outrigger family, which is nested and arrayed in the host family, is composed of multiple objects, four of which comprise the cable support that needs to be able to be turned off, and one that is the outrigger that is always visible. I've tried several ways of getting the cable assembly to turn off while leaving the outrigger visible, but all without success. I've tried editing the array and mapping the cable assembly components' visibility parameter to a Cable Option Yes/No parameter. I've tried making the cable assembly its own family and nesting that first in the outrigger family and then mapping its arrayed instance to a Cable Option parameter. I've tried various combinations of Instance versus type parameters in both the Outrigger and host Canopy families, all to no avail.
Given the way the family is now designed, can this be done or must the cable assembly be its own family and arrayed separately? Note that there are parameters to control the cable assembly size.
Solved! Go to Solution.
Does the attached work for what you need it to do?
I renamed your family to Canopy2.rfa
I did this in 2012 Revit.
Thanks for the help, but unfortunately your version doesn't do what I'm looking for in tha it turns off the horizontal support element along with the cable pieces (though is has taught me another formula possibility). The attached image show in red what I'm trying to control the visibility of. I'm starting to think I need to make these a separate family.
Well that is what I was curious about. The only way I can think of in this condition is to have the horizontal support as another nested family tied to the same array you have for the cables. Then instead of having the OR statement to control the display on or off have it the same way your original canopy family.
I hope that makes sense.
I don't have the time right now to pull your family apart to try that approach.
Well, Curiosity got the best of me. Take a look at Canopy3.rfa attached.
Does this do what you want?
We're thinking alike. It does indeed seem the best way to do this is to have separate families for the outrigger and the tieback. I'll have to make a few tweaks to yours but I'm now heading in the right direction. Thanks!
I started a new topic based on this family but with a different issue.
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.