Autodesk Installation and Updates Exercise Survey

Autodesk staff are reviewing the terms that are used for software installation and applying updates. They are looking for our help by performing a set of exercises that should take less than 15 minutes to complete. Your responses will help them organize and more clearly describe things that are delivered as part of the installation or update process.

Would you like to help? START HERE

Revit 2016 R2 - Changes to Underlay

They've reconfigured the Properties Palette and changed how they describe and provide access to the Underlay concept.

As you can see above, the Underlay concept now has its own Group Header in the Properties palette. They've renamed the Underlay parameter itself to Range: Base Level. The new Range: Top Level is a read-only value that just reports the next level above the Base Level. That can be helpful when it isn't the one you expected, for example when there is an intermediate level for a stage .

Keep in mind that if a view is created for a level we can't prevent that level (like Stage above) from being the next one, the one that appears in Range: Top Level. I think it could be better if a Level's Building Story parameter could influence this condition so a view could exist for the level but not be factored into the Underlay's display process, allowing it to skip past or ignore the Stage level.

The Underlay Orientation parameter kept its name but the words used to describe its choices are now Look up and Look down. The plainer language seems to help people understand what Underlay is really doing. At the very least Look up is more accurate than implying it is really generating what we have learned is meant by Reflected Ceiling Plan.

Also very worthy of a mention is that new plan views have their Underlay - Range: Base Level assigned to None instead of the Level Below like in earlier versions.

Hmm, writing that last section, it occurs to me...this feature used to just be called Underlay, a parameter AND concept on its own with a second related Underlay Orientation parameter. Now we have a concept of Underlay with three parameters.

Experienced users will now confuse new users by asking them, "What's the view's Underlay assigned to?" or telling them, "You need to change your Underlay setting."  ...ah progress...

Oh, and Hat Tip to Niklas Strannefors, an Autodesk Application Engineer in Sweden, for prompting me to write about this subtle change.

Language Flexibility

There are a few things that are hardcoded values that we can't do much about. For example the word "Grand Total" at the bottom of a schedule or "As Indicated" for view scale when used as part of a sheet's titleblock. The choice of words, the language used and formatting all  remain out of reach still after all these years. It would be excellent if these were added to project settings so a team could define what these should say. It's all part of refining the product itself and the documentation we produce using it.

Hosted or Not Hosted

The description "hosted" or "not-hosted" that we use for component families can be a bit confusing. Technically ALL families ARE hosted. They are either hosted by a level, a wall, a ceiling, a floor or a face (surface of some element). When we say not-hosted or non-hosted we generally mean that a family is not specifically associated with a certain host element like a wall, ceiling, floor or face. A chair, desk and various other families across many categories are "not-hosted" though truly they ARE hosted by a Level. They can sit on the floor or are free to be above or below it by altering their Offset parameter.

I often think that it is a disservice to spend time calling them just one or the other. It seems more explicit to use a family name that describes what host is required. A family called, "MyCoolFamily-hosted.rfa" might be better called "MyCoolFamily-Face.rfa" or "MyCoolFamily-Wall.rfa" or "MyCoolFamily-Level.rfa". We could reduce it to a single letter designation. For example the families could be named "MyCoolFamily-W.rfa" or "MyCoolFamily-L.rfa". What if the file extension allowed for this subtlety so the names are not affected by it? Extensions for families could be .RFF, .RFW, .RFC, RFF... Uh oh floor and face both are "F"...so we could use S for surface instead of face?

These different placement methods also mean we have to be careful to consider what sort of hosting nature a family has before we start placing it. We have to resort to reading the family name and/or glancing at the ribbon for any placement options to figure out what the family expects us to do. It would be great if a family could be assigned to a primary placement option. For example, light fixtures usually want to attach to a face, not the vertical face option we are offered by default. Ideally we could specify the hosting priority for each family and use the ribbon only to choose an alternative when those rarer situations happen. Maybe the ideal spot for this parameter is in the Family Category and Parameters dialog, like OmniClass and other settings..

Just writing out loud...

Funny Words I Learned Today

This gang here...funny bunch, good spirits. Tossed in my general direction today were these:

Façadification - The process of designing the building façade
3Deality - Yet another way to refer to 3D computer generated virtual reality

There was another one I really liked too but I've been wracking my brain all night, no luck. Maybe they'll remember tomorrow.

Sharing Data and Language

Interesting thing is happening to a friend and his firm as they collaborate with an engineering firm based in China. Language is an obvious issue for project meetings and documentation. At a little deeper level how about between applications. Let's say using Navisworks and exports from Revit...

There is no translate option during export!

Seems to me the "solution" to sharing this is to use a common language for the modelling/software/documentation. Easier said than done perhaps to choose English as the "language of business"? What if the project is to be built in China? Better make sure you have native Chinese speakers on staff?

Architecture/Engineering work is increasingly international and multi-national, I imagine we haven't seen the last of this sort of thing.

Dept. of Flashback - Mark and Type Mark

This subject pops up now and then as I encounter people doing the implementation "thing". I wrote this little piece in March 2009. I've clipped it out and posted it here again:

...snip
Language...with Revit's parameter naming the follow is true:

Door Number = "Mark" (not the person but the signature, ID or identifying "mark")
Window "type" = "Type Mark"

Out of the box, Revit's tags are assigned to these as described above. A door number is unique for each door so its tag is using a label assigned to the "Mark" parameter. Windows, for the most part, are defined according to a "type", a common letter or number designation for each window of a given "type" or configuration, therefore a window's tag is assigned to the "Type Mark" parameter.

"Mark" is located in the Element properties dialog while "Type Mark" is located in the Type Properties dialog. Most of Revit elements have both. Some Mark values are automatically supplied based on the "last" value entered and many are not. Type Mark values are not supplied with the assumption that each project will have its own needs and will be defined accordingly.

If you don't approve of the out of the box setting, you can create your own tag so that you can properly identify an element according to your needs.
...snip

The Factory - Where Did That Come From?

It is fairly common to hear someone refer to the folks at Autodesk responsible for Revit as someone at the "Factory". Greg Demchak, a product designer who's been working on Revit since before Autodesk bought Revit Technology Company, told me that the idea of working in the "factory" resonated (found it funny and interesting) with him and others. In fact for Autodesk University he wanted to have people wear lab coats which, if I recall correctly, materialized at The Lounge one year during Autodesk University. Greg's avatar at AUGI is inspired by the term too.

The oldest post I can find at AUGI (actually dating back to Zoogdesign) referring to the Factory is by David Conant and his post was on December 11, 2003.

Does anyone remember who the first person is that used the term "Factory" in connection with Revit and its "people"?

It's possible that we started using the term before the forums at Zoogdesign which would place them at the original RUGI forums or even alt.cad.revit newsgroup. Incidentally my response to David was the next reply in that thread just 11 minutes later the same day. Followed by another factory worker, Steven Campbell 27 minutes later. I joked about them wearing their safety glasses and he confirmed that he does!

Writing about alt.cad.revit made me curious and I found that I can search some of that data still via Google Groups.

Dept. of Reviteristics - Component or Loadable

For many years now Revit families have been called Components. The 2010 and 2011 release help documentation calls them Loadable families. I don't remember if 2009 started calling them this or not.

The ribbon offers us the Component tool however.

I see how loadable is more descriptive of how we get them into a project. I find it interesting that we have to think of them as components when we want to place them but as loadable when we need to design them and add them to a project. I suppose it isn't that hard to blur the distinction.

Language is fun!

Dept. of Subtle - Air Terminals

Revit calls the device that HVAC systems use to pass air through a ceiling or wall and connect to duct work and plenums - air terminals. They are much more commonly referred to as diffusers. Turns out that an air terminal is the sharp end of the stick in lightning protection systems. One engineer I met recently was a bit annoyed by the inappropriate use of the term.

Language is hard!!

According to Wikipedia:
Individual lightning rods are sometimes called finials, air terminals or strike termination devices.

Also according to Wikipedia:
Air terminals are the supply air outlets and return or exhaust air inlets. For supply, diffusers are most common, but grilles, and for very small HVAC systems such as in residences, registers are also used widely. Return or exhaust grilles are used primarily for appearance reasons, but some also incorporate an air filter and are known as filter returns.

So there you have it, both are correct! Rest easy knowing that if you call your diffusers air terminals or your air terminals diffusers you are good to go! Unless you do lightning protection too? Confused?

Dept. of Subtle - Template Notes

This is very subtle and on the verge of picking on them. I said I'd post it when someone in class pointed it out today, so here it is. Some Revit family templates have notes to guide your first few steps. One of these is the generic tag template. When you open this one you'll see this instruction.

The instructions however are referring to the language and locations used in previous releases. The current location is the Family Properties panel and the button is called Category and Parameters. This panel shows up on all of the Family Editor Ribbons.

Dept. of Subtle - Design Ribbon

I don't know about you but I'm having a tough time purging the language I've been using for many years now. Two in particular...Design Bar and Save to Central. In class I keep catching myself saying "Design Bar". When I'm doing better I catch it before I say it but there is still, occasionally, a pause where I intentionally avoid saying it which results in a slower more deliberate ...Riiibbbbbaaaahn. The switch from Save to Central to Synchronize with Central isn't a huge departure but it seems just a little harder to say and I find myself struggling, at times, to say it instead.

I may just starting calling the Ribbon the "Design Ribbon" instead of the Design Bar...since that's what it really is? A compromise? If I can say "Design" it may help or at least I'll feel better 8-). Overanout!

Revit 2010 - Edit/New = Edit Type

Another little change in language with the release of 2010.

When you open the Element Properties dialog you see this in previous releases, an Edit/New button. Edit for editing the Type Properties and New for the opportunity to make a new Type.


With 2010 the button just says Edit Type.


Once you are in the Type Properties the button for Duplicate is present.


The previous button implied you could Edit or create a New element. Or maybe I'm just used to that being possible so it makes sense now? With the 2010 language I just see Edit and no "clue" about how I'd make a "new" version or that it would even be possible. Only after the dialog opens does it become apparent. Maybe the average use won't be confused and they'll only care about how they make a new one later on?

I like the new Element Properties button. This permits us to open the instance properties dialog by clicking on the primary part of the so called Split Button or selecting the Type Properties from the two choices Instance or Type. Not less clicks on the "way in" but a little less mouse travel and one dialog to close instead so less clicks on the "way out".


I guess we'll see if anyone actually notices the difference and says one way or another?

Dept. of Reviteristics - Modify?

There are four ways to "quit" something in Revit. The first and perhaps best way is to just pick another tool/command and do something else. Next (number two) is the ESC key on the keyboard. Sometimes you have to tap the ESC key twice to truly exit a command. Another (number three) is to use the Right Click > Cancel. This also may require using it twice in order to completely exit a command.

Last (number four) is the Modify button...on the Design Bar, the first one at the top of every Design Bar Tab.
Does the word Modify make you immediately think "Quit", "Stop", "Bail Out", "Escape", "Wait", "Let's not do anything now" etc? No? You are not alone. It is something that always puzzled me but I've never questioned, I just accepted it as "the way it is". Probably the best thing to do, but it remains a Reviteristic in my book!