Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
We would like the ability to show existing elements from a linked model with a solid fill cut pattern. Currently this is not possible. If we change to ANY other pattern style, the overrides will work from the phase override dialog and override active elements and linked elements.
Really, the main problem is that when the view is set to an MEP discipline, it removes the solid fill patterns from any architectural elements.
Here are some troubleshooting scenarios I've run through...
Electrical Discipline view setting. Phase Override settings have been adjusted to show existing elements that are cut with a diagonal hatch pattern. Here is what the view looks like. ElecDisc_DiagonalHatch.PNG
This is how the phase override is setup:
Electrical Discipline view setting. Phase Override settings have been adjusted to show existing elements that are cut with a solid fill pattern. Here is what the view looks like: This is how the phase override is setup:
Coordination Discipline view setting. Same phase settings as #2.
As you can see #3 shows the solid fills, but unfortunately changing a view to either coordination or architectural does not work when you are showing MEP elements. It somewhat defeats the purpose. We would like to leave the discipline to elec (or mech, plumbing) and still see the existing walls shown with a shaded / solid fill cut pattern.
What I don't understand is why it is ok to show the other cut patterns for those architectural elements, but not show a solid pattern in an MEP discipline's view.
This seems like more of a current glitch, not really a new feature request. Either way, I think this should be fixed to allow any pattern to be set and shown regardless of the element's "discipline".
Either that, or allow folks to create filters that see an elements phase.
I faced with similar problems, however if you try to apply a solid fill on Revit 2015-2016, it works. It is either a "feature" which was taken out or a glitch, which started with Revit 2017.
I completely support the idea. Ran into this problem multiple times. As far as the mantasbuciunas' comment - I checked 2016 and it behaves in exactly the same way as 2017: no solid pattern for phases in MEP. I use Update 7 for R2.
Yes, this needs to happen. Both on the screen and the print. Solid fill for existing walls is a very common thing that we need to be able to show without resorting to workarounds with coordination view.
I know this thread is a couple years old, but is this still an issue for Revit 2020? I can't get solid wall hatches to show up in my architectural background.
We overhauled our MEP template. All view templates now use "Construction" discipline to give us control. In essence, "Discipline" is a useless feature. We tracked down every location in Revit that controls the shading/halftoning, lineweight and pattern fill of walls. We own walls now! Our construction documents rock... You can own them too. Tame the beast!
On the Manage Tab, Look into: Object Styles, View Templates, Visibility Graphics, Halftone/Underlay, Filters, Phase Graphic Overrides! ...
By default, the MEP template overrides wall fill patterns in the "Phase Graphic Overrides!" Who would'a thunk'it...
After many hrs searching for this, I found a workaround on an Electrical Template. Hopefully it helps someone:
1. On the Properties Tab, Change the Discipline from Electrical, Plumbing, etc to COORDINATION.
2. Now you will have to manually gray out/halftone the link, Go to VG and under Revit Link make sure you have HALFTONE checked in. See attached snippets.
The two steps above should solve the problem and then you will have to make sure your phases are matching your link.
@jkrlos02 , thanks for the post. The "Coordination" discipline is something I mentioned in my original Idea post, but it's not really a valid solution in my book. It requires an entire overhaul of all Object Styles and View Templates within an MEP template. It would really be best if Autodesk could just fix this issue (I feel it's more of a bug and a "request), and we can continue to use our view templates as they were intended to be used.
There are many things in Revit that were added for MEP as afterthoughts, many of which just don't work properly, this is one of those things that should just be fixed.
Yes, totally agree that Disciplines are completely useless.
They serve as a fast track to show the discipline but they have huge problems.
Let's name them:
-You cannot select Generic Model categories, so if you use them for something you have a problem...
-You cannot understand what is a wall, what is a simple floor line and what is structural elements as everything is transparent (as is the main point of this idea).
-If you need link by view to bring room names, stair paths and any other 2D information that may not be modeled (imagine Interior Design that is a dwg link) you may have problems if any of that information is a solid region because they also will be transparent. We had a project where all area of the first phase was covered by a detail region in the ARC model and that information was completely lost becaus of this...
-We also get plumbing fixtures form the ARC model in the lower floors appear because they usualy use view ranges to the ground floor.
This all this and the discipline shortcut may start to work... The fix for the walls will already be a nice improvement though.
Still having a View Template specific for Revit Links only and have them match the link by view per level is really the way to go - you may give up on improving Disciplines and leave them as legacy never usefull functionality...
