Family Creation- Parallel Rotation

[ssw9UZNL]

Hi All,

I am trying to create a family which is set based on a series of angles. 

With reference to the image, when I change the 'Glazing_Angleø' rotation, the intersection point between the long and short green lines (shown red) changes and in turn changes the angle y. 

What I am having trouble with is, I want the yellow line to be locked to the setout shown but be parallel to the short line mentioned above, so the two have the same angle y's as shown.

I have also attached the family. 

Sam

[Alfredo_Medina]

You need to constrain those two reference lines on the left, with the same "Y" angle parameter.

See message # 7 in this other thread: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/revit-architecture-forum/constraining-parallel-angled-lines/m-p/99427...

Then, in the Family Types window, set a formula for "Y" to change if the other angle parameter, Glazing Angle Rotation, changes.

[ssw9UZNL]

Hi @Alfredo_Medina 

I agree that that is the best way, its just that I dont really know what the mathamatics behind it would be to get angle y.

For example it is the Glazing_Angle that I want to be able to change, then the y would change with it.

Its like I want to be able to report what the resultant angle at the red is, once glazing_angle changes... but I cant do that as a reporting paramter...

Would you use a series of trigonometry equations to work it out? Or let the geometry report for you?

[Alfredo_Medina]

Well, you need to know what "Y" would be when the other angle (let's call it "X") changes.

Then, in the Formula column of "Y", you write X ...[ the formula, addition, subtraction, trigonometry, etc]

For a list of formulas, search Formulas in the Help function of Revit.

For a more advanced list of formulas, search on the internet for "Revit Formulas for Every Day Usage" (Revitforum.org).

[barthbradley]

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to do, but here a Adaptive Point Family that drives all the other Points which, in turn, drive the Reference Lines connected to the Points.  

All the Reference Planes show in Plan View are only there as a reference for you. They don't drive the Points and Ref. Lines.  The Points and Ref. Lines are entirely driven by Parameters: A (your Glazing Angle), MW (your Mullion Width), MID (your Mullion Inner Depth) and w (representing the overall width, which I gather would be your Panel Width).  Parameter OSD is your Overall_SetoutDepth, and it is calculated automatically based the user-entered values in A, MW and MID (all grouped under Construction). 

Examine the file and see if it makes sense and works for you. If you what it to behave a little differently, let me know what you want it to do. Like I said, I'm not totally sure this is what are after.  Seems like it might be though. At least close.  

NOTE: moving the Adaptive Point moves the whole assembly.  Like I said, the Ref. Planes do nothing.  

[barthbradley]

---

@ssw9UZNL wrote:

Hi @Alfredo_Medina 

I agree that that is the best way, its just that I dont really know what the mathamatics behind it would be to get angle y.

For example it is the Glazing_Angle that I want to be able to change, then the y would change with it.

Its like I want to be able to report what the resultant angle at the red is, once glazing_angle changes... but I cant do that as a reporting paramter...

Would you use a series of trigonometry equations to work it out? Or let the geometry report for you?

---

For future reference, keep this handy. It's an excellent resource.

Revit Formulas for "everyday" usage (revitforum.org)

[ssw9UZNL]

Hi Guys,.

I have worked it out using the trig forumulas.

That said, I am a bit stuck as to how I would get the length shown yellow forumula wise as I dont have a right angle.

[Alfredo_Medina]

What is the final purpose? You might be over thinking this. But if we don't know what the end goal is, it's difficult to give you alternatives.

[ssw9UZNL]

The end goal is to find the yellow length.

Sam

[ssw9UZNL]

So all I need to find is a mathematical way of finding the length of the line I have shown dimensioned yellow.

As you can see I have all the three angles that make up this non right angled triangle aswell as one dimension (1400)

[ssw9UZNL · Accepted solution]

I have solved it with the following forumula:

(Width - 2 * Mullion_Width) * sin(Inner_Angle_A) / sin(Inner_Angle_B)

[Alfredo_Medina]

That is a simple problem of trigonometry. You have known distances and angles, and you need to find one that is unknown. Then, apply trigonometry. There is a complete list of trigonometry formulas in Revitforum in the resource that we have mentioned above. Did you see it?

[ssw9UZNL]

Yes- that was my question that I had posed.

I have found it, its a bit more complicated as there is no right angle, but I solved it.

Thanks for your help. Sam

[barthbradley]

---

@ssw9UZNL wrote:

I have solved it with the following forumula:

(Width - 2 * Mullion_Width) * sin(Inner_Angle_A) / sin(Inner_Angle_B)

---

That equation doesn't make any sense. The length of the yellow line is the hypotenuse of the 15 -degree Right Angle.  

Width - 2 * Mullion_Width could equal 1348 , or Width -2 * Mullion Width could equal 1300.  There's no parentheses/groupng.   

And nowhere do I see "Inner_Angle_A"  or "Inner_Angle_B".  

Are you just making this up?   There is an equation to find the length of the hypotenuse by using 1400, 38.26 degrees and 15 degrees to find the common Opposite (a) lengths between the 2 Right Angles, as well as solve for Adjacent (b) Lengths of both Right Angles.

Does (Width - 2 * Mullion_Width) * sin(Inner_Angle_A) / sin(Inner_Angle_B) = 1081.8mm?   Because that's the length I get for the yellow hypotenuse in your screenshot.  

If the overalll width is 1400mm- (2*50mm) (the Mullion Widths) then the hypotenuse is 1004.5mm.  Is that what you get?

[ssw9UZNL]

Hi, Sorry it wont make sense unless you are privy to the paramters I have made.

My formulas are below, but to help other in the future, once I have finished it, I will post the family.

But you will be able to see in the figures below that it is correct.

[barthbradley]

Yep, I was right. 1081.8.