ROOM TAGS AND VIEW RANGE

[Anonymous]

I noticed when i edit the view range of the floor plan to show devices close to or in ceiling, the room tags go away. I'm assuming this has something to do with the height limit of the associated room. Can you disassociate the height of the room with the room tag so that they stay visible when I modify the view range?

[MuirEng]

Why not simply adjust the room heights to reach the ceiling?

try a section if you aren't sure what is going on. 

[Anonymous]

Because I would rather not have to modify the architectural model.

[RobDraw]

Good answer @Anonymous.! As well you shouldn't have to, but I am wondering why you need to modify your view range in that way as opposed to using V/G overrides...

[Anonymous]

Referring to electrical plans - we have devices like fused disconnects
located above the ceiling. Unlike mechanical, we cannot use RCP for these
devices because we use RCP for lighting.

[fabiosato]

Hello,

You need to show only the elements above the ceiling?

[ennujozlagam]

have you tried to use plan region?

[trey.ruiz]

We have a similar issues as a consultant to an architect.  We need to show the RCP and linked-view room tags/names in the same floor plan view (can't use ceiling views because we can't set linked-view to correct architects view).  We  have set the linked model view to "linked view" to show their room tags, but apparently the linked view room tags cannot be seen if unless the view range cut plane intersects the architect's room bounding box.  The architect has their room Upper Limit set to the same as the room level and upper offset set to 8' (which is the default value I believe).  We would rather not ask the architect to alter their room limits.  I don't know if Autodesk intended for room tags to only be visible to the cut plane, and not the view range, but the odd thing is we can see our own lighting fixtures above the cut plan, just not the RCP if we lower the cut plane to intersect with the 8' room bounding boxes.

[RobDraw]

I've never used the architectural room tags. They are usually way too big and almost always in a place that interferes with the MEP stuff. Room tags in the MEP model allows for much more flexibility in placement and they can be scaled down from the monstrosities that they use.

[ToanDN]

---

@trey.ruiz wrote:

We have a similar issues as a consultant to an architect.  We need to show the RCP and linked-view room tags/names in the same floor plan view (can't use ceiling views because we can't set linked-view to correct architects view).  We  have set the linked model view to "linked view" to show their room tags, but apparently the linked view room tags cannot be seen if unless the view range cut plane intersects the architect's room bounding box.  The architect has their room Upper Limit set to the same as the room level and upper offset set to 8' (which is the default value I believe).  We would rather not ask the architect to alter their room limits.  I don't know if Autodesk intended for room tags to only be visible to the cut plane, and not the view range (YES), but the odd thing is we can see our own lighting fixtures above the cut plan, just not the RCP if we lower the cut plane to intersect with the 8' room bounding boxes.

---

Create RCP views with the view range cut plane below 8'.  Do not display linked model by linked view, try by host view first then custom if needs be.  Tag linked rooms yourself in your views.

[trey.ruiz]

Thank you @ToanDN for the quick response!  We have considered tagging the rooms in our model, but for the size projects we work on (typically 100s to 1000s of rooms in a single model, across up to two dozen separate trade views, ie power, lighting, plumbing, mechanical, FA, LV, etc) we have had disastrous results on the handful of projects we try it on, even recently.  We must rely on seeing the architectural linked model's tags for all views.

It appears if you want to see "linked model room tags", and an "RCP" in the same view, Revit has no options for this scenario.  I just wanted to confirm here if that was statement was true.  I was hoping since we can see our own model's light fixtures above the cut plane (at the RCP height), that there might be a setting to allow us to also see the linked model's RCP up there too.

[BBur]

Agreed.  As a mechanical contractor, I like to see the structure in the ceiling (linked model) and the plumbing on the floor in my model (toilets/floor drains).  I can have the cut plane at 4' and tag all for room numbers (from links), but then i cannot see the structure (overhead beams) or other trades while coordinating.  When elevating the cut plane to include the steel above, the room numbers disappear. It is useful to show the room numbers and the structure on production drawings.  

As someone said above, the solution that could work in the future, but not on the dozens of current projects which are mainly Floor Plans (as it is quite the process to remake all the floors (highrise) with multiple areas/sheets), would be to do Reflected Ceilin Plans with the view range all the way to the floor with the cut plane on the floor. 

Could there be any drawback to not using floorplans?  

A solution from Autodesk that could be useful would be to be able to tag a room as long as part of the room is within the view range instead of where the cut plane is located. 

[curtisridenour]

You may consider double stacking views on the sheet to be able to tag the rooms.

We use this method all the time for Existing Rooms on Demolition sheets.

https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/revit/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2016/ENU/Revit-T...

[johna]

@curtisridenour agree, we do this all the time, there are lots of add-ins to add views to sheets or use dynamo script. we do stack rcp and floor plan for the reason @Anonymous mention.

[davecomis6694]

There are (2) problems with drawing MEP Fab in RCP's which I've been doing for years.

1. Hidden lines no longer work (not a huge deal)

2. More importantly other trades will not be able to see your annotation and also you will not be able to see any annotation in any of your links unless everyone is drawing in RCP (which I doubt).

[RobDraw]

---

@davecomis6694 wrote:

There are (2) problems with drawing MEP Fab in RCP's which I've been doing for years.

---

I would not use RCPs for anything other than ceiling and ceiling coordination plans. You can mark that as problem #3.

---

@davecomis6694 wrote:

1. Hidden lines no longer work (not a huge deal)

---

What is a huge deal is that the break gets put on the lower ducts in RCP. So, if the worked they would be opposite of floor plans and could lead to confusion in the wrong hands. Not worth the risk.

---

@davecomis6694 wrote:

2. More importantly other trades will not be able to see your annotation and also you will not be able to see any annotation in any of your links unless everyone is drawing in RCP (which I doubt).

---

Is your point that nobody uses RCPs for this stuff? If so, I agree. It's confusing because your first sentence makes it sound like you you've been using RCPs for fabrication which I wouldn't do.

[davecomis6694]

@davecomis6694 wrote:

There are (2) problems with drawing MEP Fab in RCP's which I've been doing for years.

I would not use RCPs for anything other than ceiling and ceiling coordination plans. You can mark that as problem #3.

Sorry but I do not consider the fact that you would not use RCP's a problem. I have been drawing my Fab duct in RCP for years with only (2) problems. Still just (2) problems unless you have a better reason than "I would not"?

@davecomis6694 wrote:

1. Hidden lines no longer work (not a huge deal)

What is a huge deal is that the break gets put on the lower ducts in RCP. So, if the worked they would be opposite of floor plans and could lead to confusion in the wrong hands. Not worth the risk.

Yeah, like I said it doesn't work. I just use wireframe and override some ducts that are underneath other ducts to make them hidden.

2. More importantly other trades will not be able to see your annotation and also you will not be able to see any annotation in any of your links unless everyone is drawing in RCP (which I doubt).

Is your point that nobody uses RCPs for this stuff? If so, I agree. It's confusing because your first sentence makes it sound like you you've been using RCPs for fabrication which I wouldn't do.

Yes, that is my point. If everyone used RCP's that problem would also go away. 

So I'm back to using floor plans but still cannot show room tags and steel at the same time, which is a problem.

[RobDraw]

---

@davecomis6694 wrote:

Yeah, like I said it doesn't work. I just use wireframe and override some ducts that are underneath other ducts to make them hidden.

---

The hidden lines and breaks in RCPs are opposite of floor plans. By doing this you are turning off the inherent properties of an RCP and making it look like a floor plan.

---

@davecomis6694 wrote:

So I'm back to using floor plans but still cannot show room tags and steel at the same time, which is a problem.

---

People are doing this on a daily basis. You should ask about how others are accomplishing it.

---

@davecomis6694 wrote:

unless you have a better reason than "I would not"?

---

Let's start with the fact that what you are doing, by definition, is not an RCP. By turning off hidden lines and reversing the breaks, you've made a plan view. I would not, because I don't want to do what you are doing to make them work for you and no one else does it that way as you have already stated.

How about hidden lines and breaks being reversed? It's just plain wrong for ductwork and piping. What the program does is correct for RCPs. What you need is to overlay ceiling grids on your floor plans. If you want help with that, start a new thread. This one is about something else.

I've got a feeling my time was wasted here and you won't correct your way of looking at this but good luck anyway.

[jdeyoung]

@RobDraw  I think that you have completely missed the point here.  This was in response to what drawback are there to using the RCP vs the floor plans. To which the answer was yes there are a couple.  You haven't added anything to this discussion so thank you very little. 

[RobDraw]

I know you are but what am I? What have contributed oh critical one?

Me thinks your reading comprehension is lacking if you see no value in what I've posted.

Good luck, grasshopper.