Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: What controls Window inset?

  1.    #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 14, 2012
    Location
    Where the plains meet the mountains
    Posts
    518
    Current Local Time
    10:34 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by seychellian View Post
    On another note.... do architectural firms typically build every window and door family that they put into their projects? That seems very labor intensive and time consuming. Especially for small firms or sole practitioners. I am finding myself spending huge amounts of time building 40+ window fittings in this project most of which have different configurations and peculiarities which i have been unable to find in generic families. I'm still trying to get my head around how its done.
    This is part of the "investment" of Revit. Once you've started building families, you can start re-using them. It does seem tedious at first, but every time I try to circumvent the process, I always discover building it myself is not that time consuming or difficult. Also, consider how much detail needs to be modeled vs shown in a drafting (i.e. detail) view. Determining that balance for an individual firm is part of the development process.

  2.    #12
    Administrator Twiceroadsfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    11,394
    Current Local Time
    11:34 PM

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by seychellian View Post
    On another note.... do architectural firms typically build every window and door family that they put into their projects? That seems very labor intensive and time consuming. Especially for small firms or sole practitioners. I am finding myself spending huge amounts of time building 40+ window fittings in this project most of which have different configurations and peculiarities which i have been unable to find in generic families. I'm still trying to get my head around how its done.
    There are several options, for dealing with things like Doors and Windows:

    1. Completely build your own flexible/parametric set, with modular (swappable) pieces, so you can make one-off sub-parts, when you need to make additions to the library. Pretty substantial initial investment (time)

    2. Buy libraries that are purpose built, with flexible/parametric modular (swappable) pieces, so you can make one-off sub-parts, when you need to make additions to the library. Pretty substantial initial investment (money)

    3. Use OOTB stuff, and be forever hodgepodging things together on the fly, on jobs. Slow bleed, of time and money, for the forseeable future.

    4. Use Manufacturers stuff, and be forever hodgepodging getting things to work correctly together, schedule together, look similar, or show exactly what you want when you switch manufacturers. Slow bleed of time and money, for the foreseeable future.

  3.    #13
    Moderator DaveP's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 10, 2011
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    3,425
    Current Local Time
    11:34 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    People tend to forget that they've had years (or decades) building up their CAD standards and libraries.
    Then they make the move to Revit expect to have everything ready to go on day one without much extra investment.

  4.    #14
    Forum Addict GMcDowellJr's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 21, 2010
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    2,874
    Current Local Time
    10:34 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveP View Post
    People tend to forget that they've had years (or decades) building up their CAD standards and libraries.
    Then they make the move to Revit expect to have everything ready to go on day one without much extra investment.
    The difference is you didnt need standards and libraries to get **** done in AutoCAD. And if you had them, odds are they werent as sophisticated as youd need/want them to be in Revit. They could be close enough and the rest you could manage with linework.

    IMO, Autodesk needs to invest in a more robust set of families OotB. Most of the asks here are entirely reasonable and foreseeable.

  5.    #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    August 19, 2011
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    527
    Current Local Time
    12:34 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by GMcDowellJr View Post
    IMO, Autodesk needs to invest in a more robust set of families OotB. Most of the asks here are entirely reasonable and foreseeable.
    I've asked a handful of times if they wanted assistance with that, but no positive responses thus far.

  6.    #16
    Administrator Twiceroadsfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    11,394
    Current Local Time
    11:34 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew K View Post
    I've asked a handful of times if they wanted assistance with that, but no positive responses thus far.
    We actually had a very positive and productive conversation with some of the Revit Dev team, about OOTB/Default content. During that conversation, we VERY briefly discussed what it *could* look like, if a lot of the content libraries we currently sell at Parallax Team, simply were the OOTB Libraries.

    But the Long story Shorter, is there were certain big picture theories/issues that were in conflict, that would prevent it from ever happening:

    1. Perceived Simplicity vs Actual Simplicity: The OOTB content LOOKS very simple, when you see it. Thats a positive. It isnt until you get "75%" of the way in to detailing your objects, that you realize the content falls short. Our content "looks scary AF" when a user sees it the first time. This is undesireable (according to some folks). But, our content can "get there."

    Ultimately, there are a wide range of opinions on this topic (how much is too much to show new users). Obviously we have trained brand new revit users, mid level revit users, experts, etc, in our content and we have had folks in each classification be successful, but its a mindset.

    So, our content is seen as a bit too complex, for some to be comfortable with that. That also dovetails in to:

    2. Component Hierarchy- Nesting: Without rehashing basic Component Editing strategy, someone building families has to decide between the Power of Shared/Nested (which means Filtering and managing schedules) or the "simple easy to understand experience." Those two things are permanently (currently) at odds, in Revit. We HEAVILY use Shared Nesteds, and i see ZERO value in swapping the categories to "something else" since all that does is "move crap from one pile to another." So yes, it means when you place our standard Double Door, its placing 16 Doors (yes, 16) in the model. The thing is: it doesnt matter. The schedules are pre built and pre filtered, as are the Views and View Templates.

    But again... Its a no go for people who want things "simple."

    3. Component Hierarchy- Categories: When i did demo the content for some folks, there was a fair amount of irritation that our Window Components were/are Generic Models. But they have to be, over the cuttability/non-cuttability issue. Now, that directly relates to how you react to the issue of:

    4. Component Visibility- 3d or 2d: With the exception of swing lines and things of that nature, we dont do the "2D" detail item, masking region, linework thing, in families. I think its awful, and i TRULY believe it slows the model down a TON. All of our families are 3d all the time, which is why the cuttability matters so much.

    ---

    All that said, we have a ton of success implementing our libraries in the offices that are willing to listen and understand why certain decisions were made in the content, and most of our clients are over the moon, with the libraries. I think the libraries could be better, if certain core things in the Application were changed, of course. Then the content could be WAY better. And i think Revit would be stronger with way better OOTB content. Totally agree.

    But, i also enjoy constantly adding and updating our libraries, soooo... This way works.

  7.    #17
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    December 27, 2014
    Posts
    35
    Current Local Time
    09:34 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
    Without seeing your family or a screenshot, all we can do is guess that you have a constraint wrong.

    The method Scott described DOES work, and you can pick (just like any other revit family) whether or not those dimensions are Instance or Type controlled. If its not working, something in your family needs to be corrected.

    Hi Twiceroadsfool, did you manage to take a look at the Revit file i posted in comment #9?
    Last edited by seychellian; November 16th, 2020 at 06:40 PM.

  8.    #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    December 27, 2014
    Posts
    35
    Current Local Time
    09:34 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
    We actually had a very positive and productive conversation with some of the Revit Dev team, about OOTB/Default content. During that conversation, we VERY briefly discussed what it *could* look like, if a lot of the content libraries we currently sell at Parallax Team, simply were the OOTB Libraries.

    But the Long story Shorter, is there were certain big picture theories/issues that were in conflict, that would prevent it from ever happening:

    1. Perceived Simplicity vs Actual Simplicity: The OOTB content LOOKS very simple, when you see it. Thats a positive. It isnt until you get "75%" of the way in to detailing your objects, that you realize the content falls short. Our content "looks scary AF" when a user sees it the first time. This is undesireable (according to some folks). But, our content can "get there."

    Ultimately, there are a wide range of opinions on this topic (how much is too much to show new users). Obviously we have trained brand new revit users, mid level revit users, experts, etc, in our content and we have had folks in each classification be successful, but its a mindset.

    So, our content is seen as a bit too complex, for some to be comfortable with that. That also dovetails in to:

    2. Component Hierarchy- Nesting: Without rehashing basic Component Editing strategy, someone building families has to decide between the Power of Shared/Nested (which means Filtering and managing schedules) or the "simple easy to understand experience." Those two things are permanently (currently) at odds, in Revit. We HEAVILY use Shared Nesteds, and i see ZERO value in swapping the categories to "something else" since all that does is "move crap from one pile to another." So yes, it means when you place our standard Double Door, its placing 16 Doors (yes, 16) in the model. The thing is: it doesnt matter. The schedules are pre built and pre filtered, as are the Views and View Templates.

    But again... Its a no go for people who want things "simple."

    3. Component Hierarchy- Categories: When i did demo the content for some folks, there was a fair amount of irritation that our Window Components were/are Generic Models. But they have to be, over the cuttability/non-cuttability issue. Now, that directly relates to how you react to the issue of:

    4. Component Visibility- 3d or 2d: With the exception of swing lines and things of that nature, we dont do the "2D" detail item, masking region, linework thing, in families. I think its awful, and i TRULY believe it slows the model down a TON. All of our families are 3d all the time, which is why the cuttability matters so much.

    ---

    All that said, we have a ton of success implementing our libraries in the offices that are willing to listen and understand why certain decisions were made in the content, and most of our clients are over the moon, with the libraries. I think the libraries could be better, if certain core things in the Application were changed, of course. Then the content could be WAY better. And i think Revit would be stronger with way better OOTB content. Totally agree.

    But, i also enjoy constantly adding and updating our libraries, soooo... This way works.

    Hi, Could you possibly attach an example of your window so we can see how you build them and just how scary it really looks in the family editor?

  9.    #19
    Administrator Twiceroadsfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    11,394
    Current Local Time
    11:34 PM

    3 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by seychellian View Post
    Hi, Could you possibly attach an example of your window so we can see how you build them and just how scary it really looks in the family editor?
    No, sorry. We sell these as a library, so im not going to post them here for people to open. But, i can show you the family editor. They arent that scary. They just have more parameters than OOTB, because it takes more parameters than OOTB to do real Architecture.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2020-11-16_14-07-28.png 
Views:	26 
Size:	146.7 KB 
ID:	39703   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2020-11-16_14-06-39.png 
Views:	23 
Size:	249.4 KB 
ID:	39704  

  10.    #20
    Moderator snowyweston's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 21, 2010
    Location
    C.LONDON
    Posts
    4,489
    Current Local Time
    05:34 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by GMcDowellJr View Post
    The difference is you didn’t need standards and libraries to get **** done in AutoCAD.
    Well that's not entirely true... but anyway.

Similar Threads

  1. How do you create an inset to a wall?
    By DesignApparatus in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: August 10th, 2016, 09:43 PM
  2. Find what a parameter controls
    By DaveP in forum Architecture - Family Creation
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 18th, 2016, 03:45 PM
  3. Pipe Inset Tag
    By Mattmoot in forum MEP - General
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 27th, 2011, 11:53 PM
  4. Hide Flip Controls
    By DaveP in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: October 31st, 2011, 11:22 PM
  5. 2011 - Visibility Controls
    By Alex Cunningham in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: June 24th, 2011, 01:02 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •