Revit Architecture Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Revit Architecture Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular Revit Architecture topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Formula not working correctly in family

23 REPLIES 23
SOLVED
Reply
Message 1 of 24
rosPNXGN
2050 Views, 23 Replies

Formula not working correctly in family

I have a bracket for a speaker that has 3 different pin positions for its tilt. For each pin position, the bracket has a maximum and minimum tilt threshold. For pin position 2 and 3, the formula works fine. For pin position 1, if i type an angle that goes beyond its limit, initially, it looks like Revit has recognised the formula. However, when apply is clicked, it doesn't recognise it and it applies the angle that it can't do. I have checked the formula and it appears to be exactly how it needs to be. Can anyone help? Or is this Revit just being unhelpful.

Labels (2)
23 REPLIES 23
Message 21 of 24
rosPNXGN
in reply to: rosPNXGN

ToanDN, Hi! Your solution appears to work with your constraint parameters and more simplistic formula. Thankyou.

I would still like to know why Revit was unable to function correctly with the formula that I had initially used on one type out of the 3 within that family. Would you be able to explain why, or is it an unknown?

Message 22 of 24
RDAOU
in reply to: rosPNXGN

RDAOU_0-1631532063082.png

 

The formula functions perfectly ok based on the conditions you have set for position 1...Above is what you wrote...look closely at the formula you have (Highlighted in yellow) is there anything which relates to as upper limit of 15 degrees in it?

 

So what is wrong is you typed something but had something else in mind

  • You have set 45 Upper Limit
  • You are expecting 15 Upper Limit 

 

Something else which doesn't tally between your family and Toan's family is

  • You have set the conditions based on "Pin Position Length" and "Angle" (ie: formula works exclusively for a fixed Pin Length)...ie: if you change the Pin Position Length in your family the formula will default to (Angle + 90)
  • What Toan posted for you to use...the formula functions based on the Angle regardless of the Pin Position Length the user might enter. Which is more logical considering that one might consider adding more position

 

 

YOUTUBE | BIM | COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN | PARAMETRIC DESIGN | GENERATIVE DESIGN | VISUAL PROGRAMMING
If you find this reply helpful kindly hit the LIKE BUTTON and if applicable please ACCEPT AS SOLUTION


Message 23 of 24
RDAOU
in reply to: rosPNXGN

@rosPNXGN 

 

Forgot to add the GIF to previous post... @ToanDN 's family flexed (not sure this is how it should work or is it)

 

RDAOU_0-1631534965113.png

 

 

Flex Family.gif

 

 

 

YOUTUBE | BIM | COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN | PARAMETRIC DESIGN | GENERATIVE DESIGN | VISUAL PROGRAMMING
If you find this reply helpful kindly hit the LIKE BUTTON and if applicable please ACCEPT AS SOLUTION


Message 24 of 24
ToanDN
in reply to: rosPNXGN


@rosPNXGN wrote:

I have a bracket for a speaker that has 3 different pin positions for its tilt. For each pin position, the bracket has a maximum and minimum tilt threshold. For pin position 2 and 3, the formula works fine. For pin position 1, if i type an angle that goes beyond its limit, initially, it looks like Revit has recognised the formula. However, when apply is clicked, it doesn't recognise it and it applies the angle that it can't do. I have checked the formula and it appears to be exactly how it needs to be. Can anyone help? Or is this Revit just being unhelpful.


My general approach is always breaking a complex issue into smaller trunks to solve it.  So, instead of diving into fixing your original multi-level nesting condition formula, I broke it into parts:

- 3 pin locations = 3 family types: it is just my understand of how 'pin' works for this type of equipment

- each location has a fixed set of upper and lower limits, so they are also type parameters

- with the above, the final formula is dead simple, no more nesting

 

As for your original formula, it does appear correct reading it in linear form.  If you want to get to the bottom of it, break it into tree form and you may find where the problem lies.  I did not do that because it was a moot point for me.

 

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Forma Design Contest


Autodesk Design & Make Report