Spot Elevation for Massing/ Levels in Architectural Elevation View

[saisreedhar.gf]

Greetings!

Is there a way to mark the Spot Elevations for Level differences in an Architectural Elevation / Building Facade? 

I am currently marking as just plain text instead of a "smart" tag.

[barthbradley]

---

@saisreedhar.gf wrote:

Is there a way to mark the Spot Elevations for Level differences

---

I don't know what you mean by this.  "mark the Spot Elevations for Level differences"? 

[saisreedhar.gf]

If you refer to the image in my original post, the facade has a vertical wall flushed/aligned with ±000 and then a part wall which is at +150mm and the next is at +300 and so on... Just to create some features in elevation treatment.

Not sure if "spot elevation" is the correct term to be used here.

[barthbradley]

Ah, I get it.  Generally, we annotate popouts/niches in Elevation with a plus/minus symbol.

Looks like you are doing same. 

FWIW: the "LVL" designation is a little confusing, though.  "LVL" is "Level" in my world.  Those numbers are NOT related to the Level. 

[ToanDN]

Yes.  You can place a spot elevation with the elevation base = relative, and choose the level that you want to reference.

[saisreedhar.gf]

No. It can't be done with "relative" spot elevation tags as the "Relative Base" is only limited to horizontal levels in the project. [See image] So the marker will give levels perpendicular to these horizontal levels.

What I need is a level which is parallel to these horizontal project levels! (It would be cool if Revit could recognize a Reference Plane as "Relative Base" instead.)

[ToanDN]

I see what you want now. You can create a face based generic family with an instance depth shared parameter, place each on the surface of a wall and stretch the depth to meet the base plane 0, then you can tag it to report the depth.

[barthbradley]

Perhaps this screenshot will lend some "perspective"...

Then again, maybe it won't.  

Cheers.  

[saisreedhar.gf]

Yes. This works! Did you use the Face based generic family tag as suggested by @ToanDN?

[barthbradley]

...one more:

[barthbradley]

---

@saisreedhar.gf wrote:
Yes. This works! Did you use the Face based generic family tag as suggested by @ToanDN?

---

What exactly is "working"?  

[saisreedhar.gf]

---

@barthbradley wrote:

---

@saisreedhar.gf wrote:
Yes. This works! Did you use the Face based generic family tag as suggested by @ToanDN?

---

What exactly is "working"?  

---

The tag associated with the figurine, shows the depth which I need to replicate on Walls in Architectural Elevation

[barthbradley]

---

@saisreedhar.gf wrote:

---

@barthbradley wrote:

---

@saisreedhar.gf wrote:
Yes. This works! Did you use the Face based generic family tag as suggested by @ToanDN?

---

What exactly is "working"?  

---

The tag associated with the figurine, shows the depth which I need to replicate on Walls in Architectural Elevation

---

There is no "magic" here. It's user-defined Model Text. No different than a Text Annotation.  Think about it. What is the depth/distance in relationship to?  Answer: Whatever you choose it to be in relationship to.    

[barthbradley]