Is it possible to show family model lines only when family is cut?

[paul.t.macknight]

For reasons that I'm not entirely thrilled with, we need to have model lines rather than symbolic lines for our door swings (for 3D views for other disciplines, not us). This is making some of our visibility controls a little more annoying, such as trying to show these swings only when the door family is cut. Is this possible with model lines, or only with Symbolic lines?

I could always turn off visibility for all 2D views for the model lines and have them and symbolic lines (that only appear when cut) overlaid, but to retain better editability I would prefer to not if there is a better alternative.

[jvpantin2]

Hi, @paul.t.macknight,

Watch this video, it could have the answer. 

https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/revit-products/learn-explore/caas/screencast/Main/Details/df9...

Notice that model lines can be converted into symbolic lines (and viceversa), if that your case. The lines will show only when the family is cut by this option:

Both lines -model and symbolic- can be controlled by this option. Remember you can only draw or display symbolic lines in 2D views.

Hope it works. Regards,

[barthbradley · Accepted solution]

Not sure if I understand.  If the Swing Lines assigned to a Subcategory - whether they are Model Linework or Symbolic Linework - you should be able to turn the Subcategory ON or OFF through VGOs.  

...are you Modeling the Door Swing for Interference Checking?  In other words, extruding a quarter-round sketch?  If so, I would place that geometry in its own unique Subcategory with no visibility state in 2D Views, and then keep the Symbolic Swing Lines visible in Plan/RCP.  

[paul.t.macknight]

@jvpantin2, The options you show in your screenshot are for model lines, and I have set the bottom (when cut), and it appeared regardless of whether it was cut. I tried turning off the top option (Plan/RCP), but this hid the lines entirely.

When using symbolic lines, I only get one option, which is to show only when cut. This works, but doesn't give our other disciplines the 3D door swing in our coordination model. But then model lines don't act right when trying to show them only when the family is cut, hence my question and lack-luster solution.

@barthbradley I hadn't thought about using Subcategories, and I'll definitely stick it in my back pocket, but the issue here is I have some areas on our plan that have doors show below the cut plane (they are on a level below) whose door swings I want to hide, while maintaining the door swings for the doors that are actively cut in our plans.

As for modeling the door swing, they just requested lines. They didn't specify why, but I presume to better identify that there is enough clearance between our door swings and equipment, as not everyone is modelling in Revit on this project. I will bring this up to the team, though, as I would tend to prefer this method; Still gives me overlapping geometry, but this way it would be a lot clearer which of the two you're selecting (rather than just a single property you have to look for).

[barthbradley]

---

@paul.t.macknight wrote:

but the issue here is I have some areas on our plan that have doors show below the cut plane (they are on a level below) whose door swings I want to hide, while maintaining the door swings for the doors that are actively cut in our plans.

---

If Doors are visible in the View, then the View Range's Cut Plane is intersecting some element in the Door Family. Ever hear about or use the "Old Model Line Trick"?  That would explain your issue.  

Post the Door Family here as an Attachment to a reply post.  

FWIW: Revit OpEd: "Aaaah,The old invisible line trick, eh "99"?"

[ToanDN · Accepted solution]

@paul.t.macknight 

I would include both symbolic line and model line door swing in the family, assign them to different subcategories,  use VG to turn off the model swing subcategory in plans so that they show as you have always had them do, and leave the model swing category on for 3d views or coordination views.

[paul.t.macknight]

I'm familiar with that trick, I've had to do that for some other families before. But I don't see how that's possible here, I created one of the two doors from scratch, and only used 2 elements (one for the door panel and another for the door frame) outside of the Ref. Level view. I did look back in the family just to triple check, but no luck. So unless the reference planes are somehow doing it (which color me impressed if I managed to trick Revit into that), there's nothing for the plan cut to interact with for those doors at lower levels.

I'll have to look through the family and ensure there's no proprietary info before I can post it for your review, though, so expect that tomorrow.

[paul.t.macknight]

It's looking like that's the best route to take, so I'll be looking into that. I'll mark answers (including this) in the next day or two, just in case there's a eureka moment someone can post in the mean time. Thanks for the input!

[RDAOU]

@paul.t.macknight 

Filter out the doors which are on the level below?

[paul.t.macknight]

I like this solution, but is it possible to do this in a view template or is it per view only? I only see specific levels and no "level below" or "current" option for the level selector. It's a large enough project we need to use view templates to manage the views, and I'm trying to future proof this so that if I'm no longer on the project others don't have to do this process on their own.

[RDAOU · Accepted solution]

Filters use specific level. Level below might not help u much unless you have levels only at the FFL of each for building story. So if you are not into dynamo you will have to set that filter for each floor plan.

Using dynamo you could get the bottom plane from the view range of each view and set the filter to all plan views

[paul.t.macknight]

I hadn't thought about using Dynamo for that purpose, so that's a good idea, especially if I can make it work nicely with the Dynamo Player for others to use. I'll definitely be looking into this. Thanks!

[paul.t.macknight]

Thank you everyone who provided feedback. I marked three answers I have confirmed work, but for my purposes on this particular project, I am opting for the second one (model + symbolic lines) with a potential for moving towards modelling the full swing depending on upcoming feedback from other disciplines.

I prefer the filter option with Dynamo, but I have a little more work (of which I do not have time, and I already implemented the other solution before posting this question) to do before I'm comfortable with implementing it for the project in the event I get moved elsewhere and cease to have access to the project.