Reset Parts List rows to the same height - how?

[kstate92]

I've been messing around with getting the right number of rows and the correct column widths to fit my parts list onto a drawing and I now have varying row heights in my multiple columns. I cannot figure out how to set all the rows to be the exact same height. Is this not possible? I can drag the row heights of individual columns, but having to line up the rows of the multiple columns by eyeballing them seems crazy. I checked the Styles Editor and edited the Parts List with no luck; what am I missing?

AIS 11 SP3

[msklein]

ARE YOU USING THE PARTS LIST GENERATOR? OR DID YOU MAKE YOUR OWN DRIVEN PARTS LIST? HAVE NEVER SEEN THAT IN A GENERATED PARTS LIST. I just checked and row height moves all at once for me on 2008, i seem to remember that earlier versions worked the same. Table layout is the only place to make that setting and it's a single setting option only.
msk

[karin.pecovska]

In your picture is visible a wrapped parts list with the end of one section and the start of the second section. Rows are different heights since they probably have been dragged manually.
To get rid of it you can reapply the parts list style.
Select the parts list, go to "Select Style" drop down menu in INV standard toolbar, expand it and apply the parts list style you are using (see attached picture).
The parts list should reset rows heights depending on used text font size and row gap specified in the used parts list style.

Karin Pecovska (Autodesk)

[kstate92]

That worked - sort of. Picking the parts list then the style in the drop list did set most of the rows back to the same height. However, it didn't affect the entries that where already taller than the height dictated by the style. For the 'tall' entries, I had to drag them shorter than standard and reapply the standard. I must have missed some as a few entries are off by a tiny amount. As mentioned by the other poster, is there a specific line or grip that I can pick and resize the heights of all the rows at the same time?

Also, I think it would be helpful if this row height adjustment method where more explicitly described in the help files. The Row Gap setting is a little confusing without explaining somewhere that Row Height = Text Height + 2 * (Row Gap) - unless that assumption is wrong too (would be nice if one could use a measure tool on such symbols in a drawing).

[kstate92]

I'm not sure what you mean by a Driven Parts List; I just used the standard Inventor stuff. The larger row heights where caused by the descriptions of Content Center parts being far longer than my specified Description column width, so they wrapped.

Where and what do I grab in the Parts List to change all the row heights at the same time? I can only seem to alter one at a time, resulting in a total mess.

[msklein]

I MISSED that this was a wrapped parts list when i looked at. That's a complete different story.
msk

[karin.pecovska]

Are you using INV 11 SP3?

The reapply of parts list style doesn't work for all rows in the older release. So you will need to drag manually the line of row "1075181" (or the row left from it) to make all rows aligned or delete the existing parts list and create a new one from the same source assembly.
I can't reproduce the issue in INV 2008 SP2, after reapply of parts list style all rows (containing multilines of wrapped text too) in my testing parts list got aligned as expected, so moving to the newer release appears to be a good solution too 😉

Row height is related to following settings in parts list style: text style (font size), row gap and line spacing (applies when text in a cell is wrapped to multiple lines). You can modify the text height by changing some of them.

Karin

[kstate92]

Yup, adding a new Parts List fixed the row height - even after adding the wrap breaks I need.

Good to know about 2008. I have 2008 installed, but MIS can't get the AutoCAD companions to accept the license. MIS despises installing Autodesk stuff, claiming they are the worst systems they've ever encountered. That's a little worrisome, given they are at divisional HQ and the company also located at HQ went with SW instead.

Anyway, thanks for all the help.