Managing RVT Link Visibility

 I stole this idea from Autodesk Revit Forum member de_smith, sharing it here now. 😀

Another member asked: We have multiple view templates set up for various types of plan views, so when a change needs to be made to the visibility of a linked model, that change must be carried over multiple times, for each view template. It easily becomes hard to track that the visibility is consistent everywhere. 

Is there a way that the linked model visibility settings can be applied independently of view templates, so that when modified, they can carry across the entire project?

de_smith replied with (some editing on my part): 

Control linked models with their own view template then layer the regular view's template back over it. 

Create a "REVIT LINK CLEAN UP VIEW"  view template (for each unique link)

• in the view template dialog box untick the 'include' column for everything except V/G Overrides RVT Links
• in this template do all your required visibility modifications to the revit link
• in all your other view templates under the 'include' column untick V/G Override RVT Links

Apply the 'REVIT LINKS CLEAN UP VIEW' to all your views in your project browser at once

• then go back and apply the other view templates to the views.
• This holds the info from the Revit Links Clean up view

If there are any changes needed to the linked models, make the changes once, in the Revit Link's view template, apply it to all views at once and then reapply your other view templates. This is much quicker than changing the Revit links in every single view template.

I've done similar for Imported Categories (DWG links) and try hard not to override RVT links but this should work nicely when it's absolutely necessary.

Large Extents -Can't Navigate in a View and-or View Will Only Show Wireframe

I've written about Revit's fussiness regarding large extents numerous times over the years. In some of those posts I mentioned a related view issue. A view that refuses to show the model in anything other than wireframe is a symptom of the large extent issue.

I recently encountered a project that didn't have any DWG files to blame for it. Not only did the view not show according to graphic style settings it didn't allow navigation of any sort. The view was frozen. We could open or close it but nothing else. I noticed I could use a crossing selection window but then using Filter to focus my troubleshooting effort was still too coarse.

I've been meaning to mention how much I like IDEATE Explorer (IE). It has been very useful to examine projects and track down issues. It permits examining a model in ways that Revit can't. for example, I can select a category of elements or instances of each family/type within the category.

I use it routinely to check for excess DWG imports (resulting from exploded DWG content), workset assignment, reviewing warnings (more effectively than Revit's own), phase assignment/usage, content naming/usage and resolve line style usage (and more).

After using the crossing selection window in various parts of the view I realized some structural elements seemed quite far apart. Keep in mind the view was a white screen of nothing...imagining gazing toward Earth from Mars and trying to pick out where California is or my house. The Project Base Point and Survey Point didn't even show up in the view.

I started with trying to isolate where in this vast white space the structural element was but no matter what I tried I seemed to always select some structural framing.

Once I knew which category to hunt in I used IE to look at individual framing elements. I found a single framing (W Beam) was 2+ million feet long. I expected to find a family very far away, not one that was just very long. I realized that a Structural Framing schedule could have revealed this element too, if I knew which category and to look at Length. I did make a schedule just to see if I missed any other really long framing.

One Beam, one verrrrry looonnng beam killed any view it was visible in. 3D views are where we were confronted with the problem but other views whose extent permitted the beam's true extent to affect the view were also victimized. In the end we rolled the project back to just prior to the beam being added. 

The views didn't "recover" from the harm when the offending beam was deleted. I surmise other aspects of the model were altered by the extent of the beam, perhaps scope boxes, crop boundaries, a connected or joined element...not sure. That will remain a mystery.

May your troubleshooting be quick, effective and "trouble" free.

Insert From File and BIM 360

When we're working on a BIM 360 hosted project there are times we'd like to use the Insert From File > Insert Views tool. Unfortunately BIM 360 isn't an available path in the Insert From File dialog.

Yes, we can download a copy of the project or open both projects and use Copy/Paste but it would be nicer to be able to use the tool itself as it is an easier/faster (more obvious) process.

Create or Opening a Section View Crashes Revit

Have you encountered this issue (and/or elevations)? By crash I mean Revit stops responding, the blue spinning wheel of death. One cause I've identified is HVAC Zones. I've been able to resolve each on so far by deleting the related zone(s) and creating the zone(s) again. I haven't figured out what is going wrong with the zones. I'm just calling it corruption for now but I have no idea if it is something I can prevent or see first yet.

Happy to hear if any readers have encountered this situation too.

Rename View Click Twice - Wish I Could Turn That Off

Title says enough? I'm sick of getting to rename a view when I really mean to open it. I must be losing my double clicking mojo...

If possible add it to the existing Double Click behavior options? Pretty please?

That was quick!! My wish is already granted: See Michael's comment for the Revit.ini code that provides my wish. Thanks Michael!

Edit: I changed both ini files for Revit 2020.2 and it doesn't disable the renaming behavior...so wish not granted, unless I'm doing it wrong.

Reveal Elements - Hidden Viewport

The other day I was looking at a sheet a user reported it was impossible to select a floor plan view on. It seemed as though Revit did not see the view port on the sheet. People frequently pin views to make it a bit harder for other people to move them on a sheet accidentally. That will still allow a view port to be seen by Revit, it will still highlight as the cursor travels over it.

Then I thought of right-click Hide In View > Element. I used Reveal Elements and I could select the viewport. Using that tool does not hide what is visible in the view, it just disables the ability to select the view port.

Good? Bad? It isn't expected, well I didn't expect it.

Moving a Viewport Error - Disjoin

The Move tool offers us an option called Disjoin. When it is used Revit deletes the original and creates a new element at the new location. That isn't obvious to us but if you examine the GUID (ID's of Selection) you'll find it has a new GUID after the Move is complete.

The option is sticky, we have to remember to disable it when we use the Move tool again. When we are working on sheets and adjusting views we now have an opportunity to run into a confusing error message.

If you run into this or people you support do, just remember to Disable da Disjoin.

Per a comment: My previous post on re Disjoin.

Structural Plan View - Column Symbolic Offset

From the Dept. of Subtle we only find this parameter in Structural Plan views.

The help documentation says we can use this to "Specify the offset of a beam join to a slanted structural column. This only applies to coarse detail levels.". I've mocked up some framing to see what it does.

In this next image I've changed the offset value to 5'-0". You'll notice that the column symbol moved down toward the bottom of the column.

In this next image I've changed the offset value to -5'-0". You'll notice that the column symbol moved up toward the top of the column.

If a column doesn't pass beyond the view's level a negative value doesn't do anything to change that column's symbol location. Pretty subtle...

Open Sheet - Equal Rights for Panel Schedules

This new right-click choice exists, within the Project Browser, for views that are on sheets. Views that are real that is. Schedules are special views, they can be placed on more than one sheet (like Legends). Electrical Panel Schedules share this distinction but unlike other schedules they are not nearly as likely to require being placed on more than one sheet. Their schedule-ness makes this right click option invalid for them too.

I realize it probably isn't easy or perhaps even possible to segregate this schedule-ness from Panel Schedules but I would have found it very handy to be able to use the Open Sheet concept for them several times today. In this instance it would have been faster than navigating through a very long list of sheets. I suppose it is also possible that some firms do need to be able to put Panel Schedules on more than one sheet, in which case...bummer for me and my wish...

Multi-Segment Grid and Crop Boundary Interaction

When one segment of a multi-segment grid passes entirely beyond a views crop boundary that segment is not displayed. That seems reasonable to me. The annotation at the end of the grid however also disappears and that doesn't seem as reasonable to me. I'd like that to remain especially since (when) that end isn't coming into contact with the crop boundary. It is easier to see with a video capture embedded below. Whaddyathink?

Smaller Grid Bubbles

I wrote about one way to achieve using smaller grid bubbles in different views HERE. That written I can't help but wonder how much smaller is appropriate. A user recently complained they need a smaller grid bubble in a 1:1000 (metric) view. My gut reaction was "really?...maybe the grid bubble is just too big to begin with?" For example, this is what 1:100 and 1:1000 scale views look like side by side for a tiny footprint of grids using a stock grid family (6.5 mm radius/4.5 mm text).

That image is captured after using Zoom to Fit. How effective are grid bubbles at that scale to begin with? In imperial units that's equivalent to a view scale of 1"=120'-0". Keeping in mind that Revit's bias is to maintain the printed size of annotation, how much smaller does the bubble and text need to be to be better but still useful? This next image is the same sheet with grids bubbles that are half as big, text half as high (3.25 mm radius circle and 2.25 mm text).

I could argue that if the 1:1000 scale size is acceptable it might as well be the standard for all the views? This is how it (the smaller size grid bubbles) looks if I use Zoom Sheet Size and pan the view to show the grids side by side. This is more representative of what it will look like on the printed page.

Having the ability to turn off the bubble graphics only leaving the Grid name's text only might be a nice option. It seems to me that decreasing the size of the text means it is likely to no longer be legible. That's never good for documentation. For example, quite a few standards dictate a minimum text size of 1/8" which is larger than the 2.25 mm text I've shown in the images above.

Using a smaller font than what is shown above is going to start being too small to read on half-size prints; which is what I see getting printed more often these days. Fwiw, it's my understanding that 1/8" text as a requirement was decided upon because half size documents are printed so often and the resulting 1/16" text is at the brink of no longer being legible so standards set it accordingly.

Regardless, it's a frequent enough request that the development team ought to see what they can come up with. Something that is easy to implement and provides more flexibility for documentation.

Walking and Relative to View

When we turn on shadows in a camera view they are affected by a subtle setting called Relative to View.

This setting is part of the Sun Settings dialog. When we turn on shadows in the view, activate the Steering Wheel and use the Walk feature the shadows will move as we walk when Relative to View is checked.

This caught me off guard today while discussing it (the Walk feature). One of the guys noticed the shadows were moving and remarked, "Why are the shadows moving? That can't happen as you walk through a building or around it!"

I wasn't focused on it, didn't even notice it... It took me a moment to get out of my fog, and in that moment, I even imagined Walk was moving the building instead of the camera (walking to and from the building). Then I opened the Sun Settings dialog to check things and another person said, "Oh it's got to be that!" (Relative to View). Yep...

When the option is not checked the shadows stay fixed relative to where the Sun is located. Crisis averted :)

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.

Finding Families - IDs of Selection

When we need to track down a family that might be loaded into one or more project files we can use master schedule project that includes links for all the relevant project files. If one of the project files already has links to all the others then we can just use that one for this instead.

A schedule focused on the relevant category that also uses the option Includes elements in links can be quite useful.

It can help us track down which models and how many there are in each of them. A little clever use of the Filter tab in the schedule can be a big help. Once we've figured out where the family is we can deal with each of them in each project.

We can search through the Families branch of the Project Browser and then use the right click option for Select all Instances in Entire Project.

Now I can reach for IDs of Selection.

Revit provides a list of Element ID numbers for each family.

It is not unusual for the list to be quite long so I often reach for Notepad (or better still Notepad++...which reminds me I need to install it on this new PC). I use CTRL+C to copy the element IDs to the clipboard and then CTRL+V in Notepad. Notice the commas between the Element ID numbers.

In Notepad I can be selective about which ones to start examining more closely. I just select one or more of the element IDs and then use Select Element by ID (CTRL+C and CTRL+V again in reverse).

Notice the instruction in parenthesis (in the image below)? It says to use a semicolon between the numbers but Revit used commas earlier. Odd.

...and...believe it or not, this is the reason I decided to write this post... commas work too. Yeah, that's definitely subtle.

As for the element hunting and selecting process, I'll be interested and waiting to see what sort of Dynamo approaches pop up in comments.

Temporary View Templates

View Templates are quite useful and potentially powerful when they are allowed to be aggressive, placed in charge of Views. To make a View Template the Boss we just need to assign one to a view via its View Template parameter.

Using the Right Click option to Apply Template Properties does not a boss make. It just applies the template settings but then leaves the view open to abuse.

When we do take advantage of placing a View Template in charge of views we bump into this Boss and its rules whenever we want to change the way the view looks. Normally that's good because the View Template is preventing arbitrary changes. In the following image I've mocked up structural walls and separate Veneer walls because I want to accentuate the structural wall in plan views (a common request). It also allows for fussy exterior finish changes (though these are hardly fussy).

In the plan view I've reduced the intensity of the veneer walls. When we need to change the way a view looks and it has a Bossy View Template we can use the Temporary View Properties button on the View Control Shortcut Bar. Usually it is sufficient to click Enable Temporary View Properties. Notice the other choice; Temporarily Apply Template Properties.

If we often find ourselves needing to apply the same kind of override to certain views it makes sense to create a View Template for that and then use it to apply an override to the view, like this next image. I've changed the appearance of the veneer walls to make them stand out; so it is easier to adjust them.

I created a Filter that is looking for a specific value in Type Comments. I picked that because it was easy for this example but it could be any parameter you like, as long as it sets the element(s) apart from others.

I also made another Filter to change the wall the other walls look so they don't compete graphically with the veneer walls as much as they would normally.

When I'm done adjusting the veneer walls I just need to click Restore View Properties and the Boss is back in charge.

Next time you find yourself using Temporary View Properties and Visibility/Graphics to tweak a view again, for the same reason as the last couple times, consider creating a View Template for it.

Transparent Elevations and Large Coordinates

Back in December 2011 The Revit Clinic shared a post called Interior Elevations and Large Coordinates in the Project. It's worth echoing it again four years later.

It boils down to this. If you link a DWG file that has geometry that extends beyond Revit's 20 mile threshold then you may find elevation views (or section views) look transparent. In 2016 I find that some views just stop responding to Visual/Graphic Style settings at all. If you remove the offending file the problem goes with it.

It is necessary to clean up and reduce the size of the offending file so that the threshold is not crossed. I shared this list in the past, in particular consider using the WBLOCK technique.

• Import multiple Survey files individually (don't nest them as xref's)
• Purge everything you don't need, purge again
• Use Wblock if you can't get Zoom Extents to focus on just the relevant portion of the site
• Remove Named UCS (Revit only wants the World Coordinate System)
• Set UCS (User Coordinate System) to WCS and Plan to WCS
• If the survey isn't oriented to WCS, North is "up", have the civil engineer/surveyor change their file first
• Identify a specific location within the relevant part of the survey, put a marker, identify its coordinates, better still make those coordinates easy to use, even clean numbers.
• Make sure everything actually aligns correctly in AutoCAD first, no point setting it up in Revit if it doesn't work there
• Once you get a working first survey file, pass it back to the surveyor so they know what you need in the future

That might be a lot of work...so fortunately there IS an easier fix. Just make sure the offending DWG file is NOT visible via Visibility/Graphics in views that are acting up. It should restore normal behavior.

I prefer elevations that aren't see thru. Watch out for those surveys folks.

Filter Linked Grids and Levels

As soon as we rely on or need to use linked files we are confronted with the presence of their grids and levels. Some people use Visibility/Graphics to interact with the linked files and override them so they can shut them off. I like using a Filter for each instead.

Since I have control over the naming of my grid and level types I can make them unique enough that it is unlikely to compete with the naming used for those that are in any of the linked files. Naturally, the last thing I want to attempt is to get the other trades to align their grid/level names. It's a lot easier to just deal with my own naming.

For example let say there are four linked files; Structure, HVAC, Plumbing and Electrical. They all have grids and levels that use different names. As long as mine are distinctly different from theirs I can filter them all off with one filter for grids and another for levels...since I may want to restore one or the other at times, separately.

Here's the Filter dialog configured to filter out all Grids but mine; I called it Not Local Grids. My Grids have a type name prefixed with AEC, but a firm's own acronym or something else that makes it unique works too. This can change from project to project easily too...if necessary.

Now I just add the filters to my View Templates and all the views that are going to get put on sheets and printed will behave with minimal input from me here on out. For coordination I'll use working views that don't have the filter applied or temporarily override the view template so I can toggle either of them on if necessary.

Here's a bonus Filtering tip that was shared at RTC (sorry I don't recall whose session it was). If you are filtering with a specific criteria but can't recall if the first letter is capitalized or not just leave that letter out. For example if you aren't sure if it is Concrete or concrete just enter oncrete as your critera. Pretty subtle and clever!

Revit 2016 - Selection Box and Scope Box

I keep forgetting about the new Selection Box tool. It just requires us to select something and it will open the default 3D view and turn on the Section Box to match the extents of the selected element(s).

The new tool is also quite handy when used in combination with a Scope Box. I don't think of one (a scope box) as an model element, not like a door or a wall at least. The tool doesn't mind though. That makes it easy to crop a large model down to just a selected Scope Box. Easy!

Heads Up, it will use the active 3D view if there is one. Just be sure to close the 3D view you don't want to alter or open one you do. If no 3D view is open it will use the default 3D view, yours (the one with your username appended) if you are using worksets.

Create View Template - Tool Description

Oh so...subtle...

The command via the ribbon is called Create Template from Current View.

The right-click context menu offers this version of the command instead (Create View Template From View).

It's subtle because the right-click version is based on the fact that we've selected a view and used right-click. The context doesn't demand using the language Current View because it's based on the view we selected in the first place. The ribbon version leaves out the word View because it is listed as part of the View Templates button already. It also declares that it will create the template based on the Current View since it is possible to have accidentally changed which view has focus prior to using the command; for example if views are tiled or cascading in the drawing window.

My initial reaction was that they were inconsistent and wrong to use a different description for a command that will produce the same result. After mulling it over I think it is a reasonable subtlety since their use is different and the phrasing is intended to help us know what to expect in each situation.

Revit 2016 - IFC Observations

Autodesk recommends that we visit Autodesk Exchange|Apps to download the latest IFC application before starting to work with IFC data.

While testing these features I exported some walls and doors to IFC 2x3 so I could import them as IFC geometry. When I used Link IFC there were Generic Model openings filling the door openings to provide room bounding geometry.

There is a bit more going on behind the scenes when we import IFC. In the past we had to open an IFC which created a Revit project file we could then link. Those extra steps are done for us now as a background operation. There are three files that Revit creates based on the source IFC we link.

If I get obnoxious and delete these files and then open my active project file I get a warning message that Revit couldn’t find a linked file. When I use Reload From and select the IFC file I linked in the first place Revit creates those three files all over again. In the background it’s really just referencing the IFC file named "Linking.ifc.RVT".

I then opened the .RVT file that Revit created during the Link IFC process and deleted the openings and replaced them with Room Separator lines. Rather than doing that we can just leave the Generic Model elements but we need to use a Filter to turn them off. Revit creates a shared parameter file based on the IFC data. We can create a Project Parameter using one of its parameters (ObjectTypeOverrides) so we can create a Filter focused on the Generic Model category.

Once we understand that we can use the same approach to override the appearance of the existing walls, doors and windows so they look more like existing elements.