Yes, I understand you. Well, since Revit works with parameters, workplanes, constraints, etc., some tasks require a little more steps than in other programs where objects are not constrained by planes and parameters. But all that you have said is possible. If I can be of any further assistance please let me know.
Thanks everyone for your help and fast responses!
Ofangonline is exactly right. I actually invested 2.5 hours without success, even with the guidance of our BIM manager, to accomplish something that should take about 1.2 seconds.
This is actually a bigger issue of Revit inhibiting intuitive interactions with content. Rotating a family shouldn't require a backend logical infrastructure that requires multiple parameters, conditional filters, potentially multiple views, and a user interface that doesn't latch on to the simplicity of the task at hand.
The thread I was referred to by Alfred_Medina was helpful. But the question wasn't even answered there. It required a supplementary, third-party blog post that perfectly expresses the absurd level of complexity required to accomplish a fundamental task. Does an application at the level of Revit actually require a blog post by a third party of the user community to reveal how to execute a process that--for any 3D application--should be so utterly straight-forward?
Well, rotating an object in a project takes 2 seconds, but making a model family that rotates properly takes longer. Why? Because Revit has rules, and it has to maintain relationships between work-planes, dimensions, and parameters, and still keep the ability for the families to respond to changes in those parameters.
You said you could not make this in 2.5 hours, even with the help of your BIM manager; well, simply because there is no easy button to rotate model families, and it requires to know the process. I am sure that if you and your BIM manager study the blog article, you can set up an utility family as a template to rotate any object, and then, you will be able to rotate any other object in 2.5 seconds.
The blog article is showing the three possible rotations of an element, which are: rotation in azimuth, rotation in elevation, and rotation around the own axis, all at the same time. So if it looks too complex for you it is because it is showing all the three options together, by the use of nested families. If you need just 1 or 2 rotations, then use the information in the article up to that point. However, the exercise about the speakers, mentioned in this thread, requires you to know not only about rotations, but also about controlling radial arrays with parameters. In summary, the family editor takes time to learn; nothing do about that, but once you learn it, you can do all this, and more.
Why did the blog article come from a third party? Well, because it was considered useful, and somebody thought that it would be a good adition to the Wikihelp. But once it is part of Wikihelp, the procedence of the article should not matter. If it is out there, it belongs to you, to me, to your BIM manager, and to all the Revit users.
the easiest way i found is
group your family---Rotate it--- then ungroup it
Yes, but the discussion is not about making just one random rotation, but how to control that rotation with parameters, and how to rotate objects not only in the plan workplane, but also, a second rotation from the elevation workplane, and maybe a third rotation from the object's own axis. It's not as simple as making groups. Basically, there are 2 methods, for generic families: reference lines or arcs, and for adaptive families, points.
Actually, no it wasn't. The original discussion was about a guy having problems rotating a family instance. Sometimes it is inconvienient to have things workplane based, particularly with MEP where there is a ton of content between ceiling and slab. Sometimes the families need to twist or turn in a way that may seem unnatural to Revit, but is quite natural to an installer or designer. The real world happens, and if we as a group do not demand that Revit reflect the real world (intuitively and without the necessity or reading blogs/post/articles/books then practicing many times until we finally get it) then we are failing in our promotion of the tool itself. Revit is a good tool, but it could be better.
Very well said.
I have fallen back to using Autocad to create the speaker stacks I described much earlier and then using that block as an imported element in Revit. Kind of crazy having to use what really is a tool rooted in 2d work to create a 3d object for use in a 3d tool because the 3d tool doesn't have that level of utility.
I had to build a new family this morning for users to address this problem. It meant that an already bloated file got a little more bloated and their lives got a little more complicated because they have to change views to put in a piece of equipment. It is painful when time constraints are already strangling designers and they are faced with yet more picks and clicks to do their jobs.
Well, my comment to the previous comments in this thread is this: when you are faced with a problem that you cannot solve in Revit, you have 3 choices:
1) Complain about Revit.
2) Quit and do it in another application.
3) Figure out a solution in Revit.
Yes, maybe Revit should have a tool to make rotations in different planes in an easier way. But, since that tool is not there yet, I chose option # 3, and I have shared the solutions for both the generic and the adaptive environments. Some of you guys complain about having to "read blogs" to learn how to make rotations. That's option # 1: complain.