Announcements
Welcome to the Revit Ideas Board! Before posting, please read the helpful tips here. Thank you for your Ideas!
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Parameter Library

Parameter Library

Often I create parameter sets for others in a blank family and then just export the family type and attach it to a PDF of any relevant dimensions. It would be nice if there were either a central library of user created parameters we could submit to or a network based parameter library.

 

In order for this to work, there would most likely need to be a parameter superclass, let's call it "universal parameters". Every param would start as a universal param, and would have checkboxes to indicated whether it was designed as a global, shared, type or instance param. A universal param with none of these boxes checked would be a shareable object via the API with the ability to contain the other param types, kind of like the blank family that I use for this purpose. A user could then import the universal param, which would create in their project all of the global and shared params contained within, and imprint them as type and instance params on the families selected as indicated by that user.

 

I understand that this is a ground-up redesign of the way parameters are handled and how they interact with the API, but with this system in place, params could be exported as packages, stored in a central file for on a network or in the cloud, or even in an AutoDesk maintained vault to be perused by the many denizens wandering the Revit wastelands, scratching their heads over how to get a family type configured just right to be parameter driven.

5 Comments
Anonymous
Not applicable

While I understand that much of this can be kickstarted by using the Shared Parameters txt file, that doesn't take care of assigning those parameters to families, the creation of subcategories and global parameters to govern them, or links between any of that.

aaronrumple
Enthusiast

Rather than rely so heavily on the Shared Parameter file... ADSK should just add in industry standard parameters as Built-In parameters. The shared parameter file is (was) a necessary evil to coordinate tags and families.

  • Build in more parameters to the family templates. Not things like "Frame Width" in the door template that can't be scheduled or tagged.
  • Eliminate project based parameters like "Frame Material" from doors that is created when the family is loaded. These belong in the family template so they can be preset. Everyone just ignores this parameter anyway. Gibberish.
  • More project based info. How about all the code information as fields that can be used for calculations. Right now I have to make a bogus schedule for Analytical Nodes to I can create this sort of data. How about a project team directory I can place on the titleblock?
  • Add more tag templates to resolve the coordination of Built-In parameters. For each family template category, there should be a tag template.
  • Simple stuff like NCS discipline designators for sheets? Why have every firm make there own parameter with a different name and GUID? How about an index number and sheet x of y for sheet numbering.
  • OpenRFA.org tried to control the shared parameter Tower of Babble, but it isn't too progressive and the information there is thin and not really going anywhere.
  • Maybe just start with the crappy parameters the government wants? They area idiotic, but the Corps wants then. Everyone making these as shared parameters with different GUID is stupid.
  • The parameters are the object model. They are the I that make BiM BIM.

 

aaronrumple
Enthusiast

..and what you are really asking is that parameter bindings be stored in the shared parameter file (I think they should be.) The shared parameter file could use the PARAM column to list the PARAM type (BUILTIN, KEYSCHED, GOBAL, PROJECT, etc... (I do that now in Excel.)

Ric_Weber
Collaborator

This would be a huge undertaking.  The way I'm reading this, there would be one Shared Parameter File to rule them all.  I'm not saying it shouldn't be attempted...  I'm just saying this would be huge!

 

aaron_rumple
Enthusiast

The Tower of Bable syndrome is the failure point of communication in software. AutoCAD failed because of the mess of layers and proliferation of layer standards. It was unsustainable. Civil drawings are still plagued by this.

Revit's Achille's heel is parameters. They are a pile of gibberish. IFC has tried to put some order to the mess, but it is still a mess and digging out from under all of it will probably take another software product that displaced Revit. For Revit to continue to be viable:

  • Revit needs to build in as many Built-In Parameters as possible. This isn't hard and would go a long way in standardizing parameters across the industry and across languages. There are enough examples on the Autodesk cloud figure out what parameters an item like a door really needs.
  • User created parameters should be a rarity. Not the norm.
  • The parameter system needs to be much more highly structured.  Door material is just called - "Material". Which is the same as a endow - "Material"? Maybe it should be more explicit as Door Material and Window Material (as a simplistic example)
  • Parameters should be easily readable. Things like IfcLocalPlacement, IfcOpeningElement are fine under the hood for programmers. But not suitable for end users.
  • The shared parameter system needs to vanish. It was a necessary and expeditious evil when Revit was (and is) very much file based. It was a way of pushing information from file to file. With a cloud-based system, this shouldn't be needed.  Autodesk can pull all the parameters from every file on their cloud and make them part of a standard parameter database.
  • All parameters should be "shared". Meaning any parameter should be able to be used in a schedule and tag.
  • Short term - We need the ability to rename parameters. You should be able to pull down a family with Dutch parameters names, Chinese parameter names and convert them to the language of your choice. Right now, there is no wat to Internationalize or Localize parameters. Tower of Bable.
  • Personally, I think parameters should be able to carry both type and instance information at the same time as well as multiple data types. But that is a much deeper conversation, and programers hate that sort of thing.

Parameters are a hot mess with no roadmap for solving this most basic element of communication in BIM. Making it really BiM.

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Submit Idea  

Autodesk Design & Make Report