Sort Order Revisited

Earlier I wrote THIS POST about sorting nested families so they appear in a logical order when swapping them out in a project via their host family. I've since stumbled on a subtle way to maintain some sense of order. Success will vary depending on the naming conventions used naturally.

Using Insert > Load from Library - I found I can get alphabetical order behavior if I select the last family first and then select the first family after pressing SHIFT to select everything between the first pick and the second pick. If I start at the top of the list and pick the last file Revit won't honor the order.

In my case I was loading panel families from A-W. Picking last first and first last I get A-W in the pull down list. If I pick first and last I get W first followed by A-V (specifically the pull down list inside the properties of a host family that allows me to swap panels). That's probably unique to my particular situation but I found it interesting that the pick order during import affected the outcome. I'd be interested to learn if readers concur with my findings in their own content projects.

Order of Nested Families in Drop Down Lists

When we use nested families and use the data type to switch between different nested families we often encounter the annoying sorting habits of Revit. For doors this can mean that we get a list of panel choices that could look like E,A,B,D,C,F, and G. For shared nested families it matters how they get loaded into a project.

I find I get predictable results if I load the nested panels into a project first and then load the host doors. I also need to load all the panels in together, at once, not a few at a time. If I don't I find they get jumbled in the list box. If I behave then Revit puts the panels in alphabetical order in the drop down list when I want to swap out a panel later. This is easy to sort out if we are starting a project. If we need a new panel type during a project then we'll probably have to live with the new panel ending up in a strange place in the list.

Fussy Fussy Revit.

Families with Nested Families and MEP Connectors

While trading some emails with Aaron Maller recently he mentioned that he observed that he could create circuits for nested shared electrical families. I don't recall Autodesk publicly taking credit for adding or allowing this behavior but I find that it has been possible as far back as the 2012 release. I'd try earlier releases too but I don't have them installed anymore. Since I started preparing this post I've discussed it with Jose Fandos and he confirmed that it is possible in 2011 too.

I'm a bit frustrated because I thought I tried to explore this possibility a couple years ago while making some electrical content. Rather than dwell on what I thought wasn't possible I'll focus on what IS possible instead.

Experience tells us there are many components that have a variety of options or configurations that can prove difficult to include connectors in, for example a boiler with its electrical panel available either on the right side OR the left side. When a single connector is placed we are inclined to placing it in the "middle" so we can "connect" it to a power supply. That's easier to accept for electrical connections but not as easy for piping or duct.

When the connectors are native, placed directly in a family, it isn't possible to put two connectors in place but disable one or the other. Revit sees both even if we only use one of them in the project. With two connectors in the model we can define where connections take place more accurately but ultimately we end up with one valid connector (connected) and another lurking as "unassigned" within the system browser. It might not a big deal but Revit's developers encourage to assign everything to systems so this approach means there will always be some we can't assign properly.

If the connector is part of a nested shared family and this nested family is assigned a Yes/No parameter to control its Visible parameter we gain control over not only when it is visible but also whether or not Revit sees a valid connector in the host family when it is loaded into a project. This is a crude example with connectors for pipe, electrical and data circuits, offering a conceptual right and left configuration.

When I use a yes/no parameter to control the visibility of the nested families it is interesting to find that the system browser responds to their condition. As can be expected Revit will delete a circuit or system associated with a nested connector if we choose to turn it off.

So far I find that I can create systems, connect pipe and duct, draw wires as well as tag the nested shared families. This means that it may be a bit easier now to define a component that has multiple circuits. This can help counter the limitation that a family can only report circuit information (in a tag) for the primary connector when multiple connectors are in a family.

It isn't perfect...naturally.

Nested families with connectors are harder to see and therefore are harder work with. The connectors are only visible when you hover over the location where they are when you are using the appropriate tool, like duct, pipe or wire. That also means we can't use the convenient right click "create pipe/duct/wire" options because we can't see the connectors.

It may also confront us with a need for sub-categories for connector geometry, not for the connectors themselves but any forms we use to host them. It can be easier to find the connectors if we can see the hosting forms but we may not want to see them in every kind of view.

Ultimately I think it's worth exploring further. Perhaps you'll agree?

Clean the Nested Content Too

Just a little reminder to myself as much as anyone, remember to purge and cleanup nested content as much as the parent. This includes materials and object styles. If you clean up the parent family but don't pay attention to the nested parts you'll find some of those things polluting the parent.

Doors and Frames and such

Back at the end of 2005 I presented a class at Autodesk University that attempted to cover a door family. It was too aggressive in scope to fit into the lab session but I think it was a good subject nonetheless. I've posted the handout HERE for anyone who might be interested in it now.


I get an email now and then asking about it and decided after getting another today to post it which will hopefully make it easier for people to find it.