How to optimize use of lookup table parameters in a dynamic block

[Anonymous]

Hello,

Its my first time posting here on the forum, but i spent quite a bit of time going through posts.

I've attached two files, examples of blocks I made, and I'd like to improve them. Hear me out.

First one is a dynamic block of a tee with groove couplings, it has total of 11 look up tables. My idea was to have all views of the tee and all of its nominal sizes in one block.

Basically there are two types of tables, one for that ties a view (front, back, top, side) with all nominal sizes and other type that ties one size with its 4 views. Then lookup grips are put one on top of each other made invisible/visible, so it seams as there are only 2 drop downs when used.

Id like to somehow reduce number of lookup tables but keep the same functionality.

Second block is similar however it has a lot more lookup tables, since it has 3 different outlet sizes for each nominal size. Example: 1. Nominal size - DN50; 2. Reduction DN50x25 (2" to 1" imperial). 3. View - Front; 

This one has 33 lookup tables. Its really not efficient. Some of the blocks i have plan to make would require even more lookup tables.

Id really like some help to figure this one out. 

Thanks

[Libbya · Accepted solution]

That's definitely MUCH more complicated than necessary.  You can use a Double-Lookup rather than all the single lookups.  I looked at your blocks and considered making a screencast to show how to set it up the easier way but decided it was a lot less work just to make an example block from scratch.  This shows how to set up the visibility state switching with an input point parameter, two single lookups, and one double lookup.  Let me know if you have questions on the method.  The same method could be applied to your blocks and eliminate all the repeated lookups.   

[Anonymous]

Thanks Libbya, your solution is amazing.

I've made the Tee without any problems using your method. Works perfectly.

I've run into some issues with outlet T however. I used two input points (one named input, other named input view), since it would require 3 lookups. When testing it it defaults to a "custom" state in one of the lookup drop-downs, only after i manually change the view it starts working normally.

"Custom" options would always show up in my previous blocks, I figure its when there are repeating values in lookups or something along those lines

Also side question, using your method what happens if input points happen to overlap? 

[ojuris · Accepted solution]

about Custom in Lookup

Value in table Lookup9 in 1st row for InputViewX must be the same as Point parameter X value (in table you have 11, point parameter have 10). Change Point parameter (Input View) X coordinate to 10 in Properties window.

[Libbya · Accepted solution]

Input points can overlap without issue.  I usually place all of them in a block at 1,1 as their starting position.  The input points are used as 'memory' only.  Then the double-lookup determines the row based on the locations of the points, then the other table switches the visibility state (or other parameters if desired) based on the row.  

Easy fix on the 'custom' issue.  In order to avoid that issue, the as-drawn positions of the point parameters must match the row that matches the default visibility state (topmost on the list in the visibility dialog).  Your 'Input View' point parameter's base location was 10,10.  The Input View X is used on the tables but only with values of 11, 12, and 13.  A value of 11 matched the default view.  I made that change in properties and Custom disappeared from the table.  

[Anonymous]

Fixed it, everything works perfectly now. Thank you @Libbya, @ojuris

@Libbya

Still amazed by your method, cant wait to find make more blocks and play with it.

In the screen-capture I saw you also have a triple lookup table, cant even imagine how those blocks look like. I still have a lot to learn.

Once again thanks!

[Libbya]

The double-lookups are very powerful and can be used in a large number of circumstances.  The triple lookup is only useful in a couple of additional circumstances that I have found.