Revit Architecture Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Revit Architecture Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular Revit Architecture topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

A question of best practices in family creation

12 REPLIES 12
Reply
Message 1 of 13
bashworth
535 Views, 12 Replies

A question of best practices in family creation

So this is more of a way to gather opinion from the Revit community, than it is a question regarding a specific problem I'm having.

 

I'm working on creating content for an oven manufacturer.  Within each product line, there are roughly 6 model where the only difference is fuel type.

 

Currently, the family is created for the overall model, and then there are different family types used to modify the model #, BTU values, etc.

 

What I'd like an opinion on, is how do you handle when one option requires the moving, or elimination of a connector?

 

Specifically, the gas connector in the family.  One of the options requires no gas connection, and I'm unsure how best to handle this.  I can't turn on or off the connector, only adjust it's size.  I also am not a big fan of maintaining, or controlling distribution of, duplicate family files where the only difference is one has a connector, and one doesn't.  Is there an acceptable 'best practice" for handling this type of situation?

12 REPLIES 12
Message 2 of 13
scott_d_davis
in reply to: bashworth

You CAN turn on or off the connector.  If you select the geometry of the connector in the family editor, you have a choice for Visibilty, which can be set to On or off.  This value can be a parameter tied to the Type.  Make one Type, and have the connector set to On, and make another Type and set the visibilty to Off.  See the link below and read the Link below section 5, under "tips" for more info.

 

http://wikihelp.autodesk.com/Revit/enu/2013/Help/00007-Creating0/0027-Creating27/0034-Setting_34#GUI...



Scott D Davis
Sr AEC Technical Specialist
Message 3 of 13
bashworth
in reply to: scott_d_davis

Utility connectors have no visibility property.

 

Oh how I wish they did. Smiley Frustrated

Message 4 of 13
Alfredo_Medina
in reply to: bashworth

Connectors are very... unique elements in Revit... they...


  • ...don't have visibility parameters,
  • ...can't be part of a group,
  • ...can't be selected for an array,
  • ...don't have type properties,
  • ...can't be moved freely by themselves,
  • ...can't be aligned and locked in both directions to reference planes,
  • ...can't be assigned to a new host or workplane.
  • ...can't be nested.

Did I forget anything?  🙂

Alfredo Medina _________________________________________________________________ ______
Licensed Architect (Florida) | Freelance Instructor | Autodesk Expert Elite (on Revit) | Profile on Linkedin
Message 5 of 13
bashworth
in reply to: Alfredo_Medina

"unique"... that's about two letters longer than the rest of the vocabulary I use when working with them.

Message 6 of 13
Alfredo_Medina
in reply to: bashworth

... lol, yes, I was just being generous with connectors when I chose that word:  unique. 🙂


Alfredo Medina _________________________________________________________________ ______
Licensed Architect (Florida) | Freelance Instructor | Autodesk Expert Elite (on Revit) | Profile on Linkedin
Message 7 of 13
rosskirby
in reply to: Alfredo_Medina

Could you create a separate family that is just the connector, nest that in your oven model family (a non-connector family), and control the visibility/presence that way?  Don't have access to Revit at the moment, but it might work.

Ross Kirby
Principal
Dynamik Design
www.dynamikdesign.com
Message 8 of 13
Alfredo_Medina
in reply to: rosskirby

No. Even though it is possible to load a family that has just a connector, as you say, into a host family, once you load that family the connector disappears, and if you load the host family into a project, when you click on the family, that connector does not exist, making the familiy useless for MEP work. That is why I said that connectors cannot be nested.

 

In a workflow of nested families and connectors, the connectors must be created in the last host family, only. otherwise, they won't work in the project.


Alfredo Medina _________________________________________________________________ ______
Licensed Architect (Florida) | Freelance Instructor | Autodesk Expert Elite (on Revit) | Profile on Linkedin
Message 9 of 13
bashworth
in reply to: bashworth

The best I've been able to accomplish, is to follow the example I saw for a fan manufacturer, and to use parameters to change the connector size to 0, and any notations for it in the properties to 'Invalid'.

Message 10 of 13
Alfredo_Medina
in reply to: bashworth

Even if you make the size of the connector "0", when the family is loaded into a project, and a user clicks on the family, this connector will display its blue icon as a connector, and it will be listed on the list of connectors of the family when the user tries "connect into".

 

It would be a lot of help for us content creators if the programmers could address some of these issues about connectors, at least the "visible" parameter that most other objects in the family editor have.


Alfredo Medina _________________________________________________________________ ______
Licensed Architect (Florida) | Freelance Instructor | Autodesk Expert Elite (on Revit) | Profile on Linkedin
Message 11 of 13
bashworth
in reply to: Alfredo_Medina

It's definitely not the ideal solution to the problem, but the alternative is having a floater family out there that has the connector removed as it's only difference.

 

What would be the best way of passing a request of this type along? 

Message 12 of 13
Alfredo_Medina
in reply to: bashworth

I think it is this link:

 

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=1109794

 

But I am not sure about it. Perhaps somene from Autodesk can help us to know if that is the proper link for users to request new features.

 

Apart from that, if you are under subscription, once you log on, there should be a link to file a support request. However, I think that the visibility and nesting of connectors does not have a solution at this moment.


Alfredo Medina _________________________________________________________________ ______
Licensed Architect (Florida) | Freelance Instructor | Autodesk Expert Elite (on Revit) | Profile on Linkedin
Message 13 of 13
bashworth
in reply to: Alfredo_Medina

I'll do that.

 

This is a log in I've had for years, so it doens't have any work licenses connected to it.

 

I'll also reach out to my reseller here.

 

I'll leave this thread as unsolved, since the question about 'Since 'x' doesn't work, what's the accepted method around it?' hasn't really been answered, but based on the variety of solutions I've seen people come up with, there doesn't appear to be one.

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Rail Community


Autodesk Design & Make Report