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
Thanks for the comment. The column grid is a reference to a structural element. Just because the elevation is not orthogonal to the grid doesn't mean the grid/structural element should not be showing (the column is still there). If the grid is a plane, then the view would still intersect the plane (at an angle). Whether the view intersects at an angle or 90 degrees, the grid should show. As far as the location, why couldn't the grid show up at the intersection of the structural element?
A grid is not "a reference to a structural element".
It is a reference to severalstructural elements. If there are three columns along Grid A that all show in the elevation, which one would you choose? Please don't say all of them. That sound like a disaster waiting to happen.
And lets not talk about placing dimensions on those grids.
Lol I appreciate your honesty and feedback! At this day and age, I would assume we could figure this out. Placing one elevation on a sheet that shows grids and another elevation that doesn't seems inconsistent. Open to suggestions!
I think I have to agree with dplumb on this one. Grids are plains and if you are not viewing perpendicular to that plane then placing it does not make any sense.
Thanks richardbeatson for commenting. The idea is purely based on the need to show grids because at the end of the day, I have to provide a set of drawings that's provides the necessary information to the owner/contractor. If the grids are planes and the view intersects the plane, then why wouldn't the intersection cause the grids to show? The only difference between the other views is that the intersection is at a 90 degree angle.
Perhaps you would like to upload a sketch/drawing in plan showing where your steels / grids are, and also the location of your view. Would you be able to do that?
Here's my point of view, as simply as I can show it.
Where should the Grid be displayed? At the intersection of the View PLane? At A, At B?
For that matter, which grid? Would Grid B or Grid 1 be shown on the left column?
What Dimension should be placed between the two columns?
Here's a better idea for you:
You can create a Structural Column Tag that displays the "Column Location Mark" parameter, which specifics the two grids that intersect where the column is placed.
You can cheat the system by using a segmented grid. Place a small portion of the grid to be perpendicular to the view right at the edge of your view line/wall/cut line.
Be aware that any view that encompasses the part of the grid that is perpendicular to the view will show up at that specific location.
Hello everyone, as shown in the picture below, in option -1, we made a cross-section grid that is visible in straight condition. Option 2 for inclined wall shows grid - 1 in plan view but not visible in section view. In Autocad, dimensions vary based on plan, but in Revit, at least one identical grid element representation is displayed.
I believe Autodesk Revit should investigate and incorporate this detail.
