How can I prevent a sweep path from flexing inside a baluster family?

How can I prevent a sweep path from flexing inside a baluster family?

T2ioTD
Enthusiast Enthusiast
471 Views
4 Replies
Message 1 of 5

How can I prevent a sweep path from flexing inside a baluster family?

T2ioTD
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

I made a baluster family by creating an extrusion pole and a S shaped sweep. By making both solids merely touch the "Top" reference plane I got the wanted behavior of the the two solids following that plane up, but also i got the unwanted behavior of the S sweep being stretched. How to prevent that stretching behavior?

T2ioTD_0-1688719919106.png

 

0 Likes
Accepted solutions (1)
472 Views
4 Replies
Replies (4)
Message 2 of 5

kostask_oionei
Advocate
Advocate

Hi,

You can create a separate generic model family with the S sweep and insert it in the baluster.


If my post help you, please give a like.
If your question was answered please mark it with ACCEPT SOLUTION. This helps others to find answers...


Kostas Kouris
Architect Engineer, M.Sc., ACI, ACP

0 Likes
Message 3 of 5

Mike.FORM
Advisor
Advisor
Accepted solution

Something is broken in your template or you have something locked to the angled reference plane defining the top cut angle. You can see in the second pic that angled ref plane did not move with the top ref plane and it looks like the bottom curl of the sweep stayed in the same place relative to that angled ref plane.

 

You can see it functions properly in my attempt.

MikeFORM_0-1688736856502.png

 

0 Likes
Message 4 of 5

T2ioTD
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Yes, something was broken in the model, and believe or not, the path for the sweep was not clean, and it is weird that Revit had accepted it in the first place! Anyway, now it is corrected. Thanks for all replies, and although I'm sure making the S as a family is good option also, I'm reluctant for the time being to create too many additional files.

0 Likes
Message 5 of 5

ToanDN
Consultant
Consultant

Using a nested family is recommended so that you can constrain it more easily.

0 Likes