3D view: level is tied to SCOPE box and is far away from SECTION box

[HVAC-Novice]

I have my levels tied to a SCOPE box. And I have a 3D view with a SECTION box. The section box is smaller. So the levels show far out. But i want to show them clsoer to the actual scope box. imagind you have a huge building with levels as big, and you have a 3D view of a tiny closet. 

Here is what I have. i think you can see what the SCOPE box (levels, yellow), and the section box in blue. in this case i would like to bring the level closer to the section box. But i can imagine situations where i want to bring it further away. 

Maybe like a grid line that is 3D, but can be turned into 2D and then in each view we can control it. 

It seems there is an idea to implement that. So I assume it isn't a feature yet. But is there a workaround? 

any ideas? 

[RLY_15 · Accepted solution]

Workaround 1: Disassociate the Levels. Unassociated levels will graphically crop to section boxes.

Workaround 2: Nest in fake levels that are either unassociated or assigned to a scope box that matches your section box. Filter out the real levels from view.

Workaround 3: Some really heavy cheating involving getting the section box boundary in Dynamo/Python and using modelled element families to graphically recreate the look of levels. This creates modelled elements though so you now have to visibility control this in other locations and notify any other consultants so they can do the same.

Unless it breaks other workflows (there's surely a reason why they were bound to scope boxes to begin with), [1] is probably the best option.

[HVAC-Novice]

What exactly do you mean by dissociating the level? i like to keep it tied to the scope box. 

Keeping levels and grids tied to scope boxes helps me a lot staying organized and having a somewhat good presentation. 

[RLY_15 · Accepted solution]

Levels with no Scope Box assigned will graphically crop to Section Boxes. This behavior is overridden when associated to a Scope Box (such as Grids and Levels in the standard template).

Organization is a perfectly valid reason to not take this approach. Workaround 2 is probably less obtrusive then.

[mari.shimode]

Hi @HVAC-Novice , I believe you have found information provided by @RLY_15 useful as you liked the replies. If so, please use Accept Solution so that others may find this in the future.

If you would like to receive more comments or ideas from the community, please let us know so this topic keeps open.

[mari.shimode]

Hi @HVAC-Novice, since it seems you found @RLY_15's replies useful, I have marked them as an accepted solution so others who have the same question can refer to them.

If you have any other questions related to what you originally asked, please create a new topic with a link to this post included so the community can follow the conversation easily. Thank you.