Spot Elevation on Mass Objects

[Anonymous]

I cannot place a Spot Elevation Tag on Mass Objects, well just not always. I have tried simultaenously in a 3D view and on the Floorplan. Whenever i create a very simple Mass, just a small cube i cannot place a Spot Elevation Tag on the Top surface, just on the Edge where it snaps and shows the height. When trying to place it on the surface it snaps to the next taggable surface, like a slab on the bottom for exmaple, as if the Top surface of the mass was transparent (wireframe)

On the other hand, by reasons i don't know, i can place Spot Elevation tags on some Mass Objects i created earlier. So knowing this i tried the following, without a recurrent result, so as to be able to recreate the error:

- Changing the Subcategory of the Mass i created, thinking it has something to do wit Category Definition or Material on the surface -> It works like 50% of the Tests I made

- Closing the Mass Editor and reopening the Mass, thinking it has something to do with Refreshing the 3D Objects being shown in the 3D View/Floorplan -> it works 20% of the times

- When two or more Masses are joint or sectioned (negative empty volumes) i can sometimes place Spot Elevation Tags on Top -> Maybe then the Masses are "baked" and are no longe editable by extrusion?

- When i grab a Mass that is working, that means i can place a Spot elevation Tag on Top and copy it to the side, the new mass is not taggable.

I just can't seem to find the source of the Problem to be able to Tag different Masses. In our practice we design the starting Building Volume using Masses and different subcategories for different Functions in the Building. It's useful to se the Elevations when planing.

[barthbradley]

Neither can we. 

[ToanDN]

[lucdoucet_msdl]

@Anonymous 

Did some testing with Inplace Mass and Mass families with simple cubes (horizontal tops) and here are some results:

1. Inplace Masses (created from the site menu or from the Architecture|Inplace Component menu with Mass type) don't allow the top surface to be tagged;
2. A placed instance of a Mass Family made from the default Conceptual mass template allows the top to be tagged;
3. Copying an existing Mass Family instance will result in losing the ability to tag the top;
4. Placing a new instance of the same Mass Family from the project browser or with the Create Similar tool will retain the ability to tag the top;
5. Reloading the Family of a previously top taggable Mass Family instance will make it lose the ability to tag the top;
6. Copying a previously tagged Mass Family instance and it's elevation tags will retain and update the level association of the tag even after reloading the Family but lose it's ability to add new elevation tags.
7. Joining a top taggable Mass Family instance to an Inplace Mass will lose the ability when joined and after being disjoined from the Inplace Mass.

I can't see any logic to this behaviour.

-luc

[lucdoucet_msdl]

Having a sloped top does not seem the modify the behaviour:

-luc

[RDAOU]

@Anonymous 

The only case where it is inconsistent and random is if the mass is copied...Otherwise, it should always be consistent in picking both the edges of the mass as well as the top surface EXCEPT when the mass is modeled as an In - Place Component ... in such case (See GIF 1 below)

1. edit the in-place mass
2. Tab select the top surface
3. unlock the Top surface
4. Finish the in-place and you should be able to place a Spot Elevation on the top face of the mass (regardless if it has material assigned or not)

When is it a copied Mass In-Place...the fix is similar to the above (See GIF 2 below)

1. Edit the copied In-Place Mass
2. Select Mass and Lock Profile
3. Finish Mass
4. Re-Edit the Mass
5. Select top Face and Unlock
6. Finish the mass and it the Spot Elevation should pick the top face

Modeling the mass in Conceptual Massing Environment and loading as a family is the alternative with lesser headaches

PS: In either of the above cases instead of Copy make it a habit to create similar or place new...

GIF 1

GIF 2 - FIx a copied Mass

[lucdoucet_msdl]

@ToanDN 

Your enigmatic screen captures don't seem to distinguish between Inplace Masses and a Mass Family. This said, your method seems to work for InPlace masses when you added a U/V subdivision of 1x1 to the top surface.

But this subdivision seems to prevent a join operation between two similarly subdivided Inplace Masses.

-luc

[lucdoucet_msdl]

@RDAOU 

This technique works with single instances of Inplace Masses and Mass Families, but doesn't seem to survive a join or intersection in the project environment.

Can you confirm?

A work around would be to make sure all boolean operations are in the same Inplace Mass or Mass Families but this would limit the flexibility for making design decisions in the project environment.

-luc

[RDAOU]

🙂 @lucdoucet_msdl 

Instead of hijacking the post (and I am sure it is in good intentions - massing is an interesting topic), we can discuss this in a separate post or privately and give the OP a chance to read the replies and see if any solves his issue.

Nonetheless the short answer...No. It works for both single and multiple Joined instances (irrespective whether the geometry is joined in the same instance, or 2 instances/separate Mass components joined and the combination of both) See GIF below

[barthbradley]

hijacking the post???  @lucdoucet_msdl is spot on topic. In fact, I think @lucdoucet_msdl and @Anonymous have got a Vulcan Mind Meld going on here.  😉  

[RDAOU]

@barthbradley 

I believe reply #6 answers to the issue described by @Anonymous in the OP and reply #9 is more than enough to answer  @lucdoucet_msdl query and I'm 100% sure he will figure it out from that 10 sec GIF.

As for being spot on...You did nail it in reply #2 😉

Nothing left to add on this post...

Cheers

[lucdoucet_msdl]

@RDAOU 

"The only case where it is inconsistent and random is if the mass is copied...Otherwise, it should always be consistent in picking both the edges of the mass as well as the top surface EXCEPT when the mass is modeled as an In - Place Component ... in such case (See GIF 1 below)"

Copying is not the only case here. There are other Revit operations which disable the ability to tag the elevation of the top face.

When following your example for making InPlace Masses and Mass Families, the following operations will also disable existing instances ability to be tagged:

1. Reloading the Mass family;
2. Grip stretching an InPlace Mass;
3. Joining or cutting an InPlace Mass or Mass family;

Your instructions on repairing an InPlace Mass will work after cases b. and c. But in the case of Mass families, when reloading the family it seems a shame to have to manually replace each existing instance with a new instance of the family to be able to tag it. And I don't see any way to have them retain the elevation tagging for boolean operations. It seems that InPlace masses are more flexible, design and documentation wise in this respect.

"Nonetheless the short answer...No. It works for both single and multiple Joined instances (irrespective whether the geometry is joined in the same instance, or 2 instances/separate Mass components joined and the combination of both) See GIF below"

Your second GIF example seems to side step the problem. For the joined cylinder and middle shape, if you joined the middle shape to the cylinder and not the other way around, you did not try to tag the object which underwent the transformation. Try elevation tagging the middle shape instead of the cylinder.

In the case of the cut prism on the left, it would seem to be an InPlace Mass and it's tagging ability may have been restored by being edited in placed after having been cut. Can't know since you didn't include the boolean operation in your steps.

Theses comments and the subject of joining and cutting relate directly to the OP's list of cases in which he doesn't understand why the elevation tag is not working.

"- When two or more Masses are joint or sectioned (negative empty volumes) i can sometimes place Spot Elevation Tags on Top -> Maybe then the Masses are "baked" and are no longe editable by extrusion?"

It may seem I have "hijacked" the thread by including the subjects of InPlace Masses and Mass families, only because the OP's simple reference to "Mass" objects is ambiguous and both types are typically used in the planning stages of conceptual design.

And my reading of the OP's question is:

"I just can't seem to find the source of the Problem to be able to Tag different Masses."

Or when and why is elevation tagging not possible on mass families.

And, respectfully, the answer is more complicated than "unlock the profiles/top face" and "don't copy". In some ways, @ToanDN solution is more practical as it breaks less often in both cases of Mass families but is less intuitive.

-luc

[ToanDN]

---

@lucdoucet_msdl wrote:

@ToanDN 

Your enigmatic screen captures don't seem to distinguish between Inplace Masses and a Mass Family. This said, your method seems to work for InPlace masses when you added a U/V subdivision of 1x1 to the top surface.

But this subdivision seems to prevent a join operation between two similarly subdivided Inplace Masses.

-luc

---

Join forms > Divide Surfaces > Set Pattern > Change Pattern Presentation > Place Spot Elevations.

[RDAOU]

@lucdoucet_msdl 

I am starting to believe that the original post was your problem/question and not that of the alias that posted it 🙂

Earlier I did say that there was nothing left to say on this topic, I guess I was wrong. It is not Revit and not the Mass (whether an in-place or a loadable) or the tag... I believe it is the users and their workflows or maybe it is just easier to blame the software when it doesn't work - same saga of various other tools and options in Revit

We can keep rolling this discussion over and over...try tagging the middle one, join two in-place masses, an in-place and a family, a family and another family, switch the join, single instance multiple instance...unfortunately one cannot cater for everyone's wishes and requests (Not when it is non-paid lol). Anyhow...here is another one with all the possible combinations as you will notice, the SE tag has no issue picking any of the top faces. The fix was for those who might have missed to unlock that face the first time...

What is kinda odd is that all these conditions are hard to come across all together outside massing studies...is there actually someone who actually does massing studies all In-Place in Project Environment?

[Anonymous]

you did some extensive testing! Sadly me too an also no behaivour i can control

[Anonymous]

It doesn't seem to work with the Masses i already modeled. Otherwise it looks promisng

[Anonymous]

Thank you very much for your reply. I'm able to replicate your workflow and locking and unlocking the surface actually works. For some reason i cannot do the same with the Masses I already modeled. I will keep trying with the Rest of the Shape to try and find out the problem

[Anonymous]

I'm using only In Place Masses and Model Lines. No Reference Lines to create the shapes

[RDAOU]

@Anonymous 

When the surface is locked the mass form becomes wrapped and the spot elevation fails to detect the surfaces...when you unlock it the Geometry becomes unwrapped making it possible for the tag to pick up the surface

As I said, it is more about the users and their workflow...when a specific workflow becomes a habit then one spends more time building stuff and less time breaking them 

You can upload the masses you have and I would gladly have a look at them....everything is fixable. Worst case scenario you can use dynamo to recreate them all the proper way in no time

[Anonymous]

@RDAOU 

Thank you for your time. I can recreate your GIFs but I'm not able to apply the Workflow on my Model. I'm sending to you the Masses I'm having trouble with. I have tried lokcing an unlocking every posible surface without any result. I prefer just like you to get used to a better workflow rather than wasting time searching for solutions to my maybe broken ones. This is how we make Mass Studies:

- In Place Mass

- Model Lines on the chosen Reference Plane (Sometimes reference lines, only for simple shapes)

- Create Form and reshape it ro please the design.

- Sometimes joints or Booleans

- Set different Subcategories to control the appearence when creating diagramms

- The key is to Place a Spot Eleveation on the Top an be able to resize the Mass (outside the Mass Editor) and read the elevation after reshaping, hopefuly without needing to open the mass, lock and unlock the surface.

Would you recommend working differently to achieve the same result? Masses are very flexible and using subcategories has proven to be the best way to create diagramms and mass studies.