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
Give us the ability to control the visibility of a family based on the view scale. Some plan symbols differ based on the view scale. I would like to be able to use the view scale in formulas to control what appears in a family. (example "offset" if view scale is 1/4", offset is 3". if view scale is 1/8", offset is 6".
with many typical lighting fixture families, you only need part of the symbol to scale. being able to use the plan scale as an automatic parameter is ideal. I currently have to tell each family what scale plan i am placing it in.
Thanks for taking the time to submit your idea. Unfortunately, this idea did not get the support of the community over the last 6 months and as such we will not be pursuing it at this time. Please feel free to rework (titles and clear descriptions are really important) and resubmit this one down the road.
I also agree this idea is truly helpfull. I have also struggled with symbols visibility of multiple views in different scales. The offset problem can be mitigated using more than one symbol inside the family and designating their visilibity depending on the level of detail (coarse/medium/fine). However, this requires using and setting up multiple symbols inside each family (max. of 3, since we only have 3 different types of detail). Also, as you have to change the detail of different views, you have to give a special attention for the visibility configuration for them.
Now just think how this tremedous effort would be erradicated simply by having view scale as a parameter!!!!
There are N use cases for this feature. Revit should add this functionality regardless of community support to be frank. It is common sense.
Literally ALL Revit users' deliverables are somehow related to a scale. This functionality is imperative.
Yes, Revit scales nested Symbols/Detail Objects, however the limitation imposed by this workflow is, more often than not, impossible to circumnavigate without manual scale inputs to drive geometry.
Here is an example:
Give me a bar scale that adapts to the scale of the view it is placed on. This is a VERY common item in all drawing plans. The bar scale should always stay the same size, however the divisions and distance values need to adapt based on scale (ie, radio handles with visibility on/off driven by if statements). This is already clunky without the need to manually input the scale. We end up having a bar scale per view scale, and if one changes the view scale without manually updating the bar scale, everything on the drawing could be scaled wrong. It becomes a manual input prone to errors.
Another example: Having a detail component break line (our family has SHS Break, Pipe Break and Standard Break as different types). All break line symbols should be the same size regardless of scale. Yes, this can be done with nested symbols in detail components, however, it is almost impossible to have this work flawlessly with a masking region with a nested symbol. We have to manually input view scale to drive the geometry in this case. Crazy.
There is a big detach between Revit in THEORY and Revit in PRACTICE which the developers are quite clearly not privy to. I understand you have a large team with rigid processes to gauge which updates should happen, however the developers are depending on literally a few dozen users to make big decisions. Our office alone has more users than is the average amount needed to get updates passed. If we were to ask our office to upvote every one of our ideas we would get every single idea passed, however, that is NOT how this should work. What percentage of the user-base is involved in this decision-making? Some of us are building incredible things using some of the most advanced Revit workflows, however many of the most fundamental basics are not accessible/available. How does that make any logical sense? "Having view scale available as a parameter / variable is imperative". I don't think any Revit user who actually uses Revit in practice will contest that statement. @sasha.crotty
PS. I am also a very well versed in Inventor, and there are MANY common/basic workflows possible in Inventor that are simply not available in Revit.
Finally, as a closing statement, the coding should be extremely basic for the feature we are suggesting. One simply converts the scale to a factor like in BricsCAD, THE END.
Been working furiously on trying to use the “ viewscale. 1: “ as a parameter in a graphics bar family nested in the view title family with no luck so far. Do not want to use aan api macro or dynamo so this would require little addtional action which allways is prone to an error.
I found the parameter can be used to calculate the require values in a schedule, but so far no luck in using those values in the graphic bar family. Please allow use of this parameter for family creation.
