Dept of Subtle - Select Everything in a Property's Field

Sharing this because someone observed me selecting a parameter value and was curious about how I selected everything. If they didn't know...maybe you don't either?

When you just click in a parameter field in the Properties Palette or Type Properties dialog the cursor will usually land where you click. You can use Home or End keys to move the cursor to beginning or end of the entry. You can also use the CTRL + A button to select everything in the field.

If you want to select all of (with the cursor) what is entered, in order to replace it entirely, this is very subtle...

When you move your cursor over the field, as you click...drag the cursor arrow down (or up) away from or out of the field. Done correctly it will select everything in the field. Once familiar with the motion it is quite easy to do.

Originally I realized that clicking in a field past the end of the entry (in empty space) would select everything. That was useful to me but the width of the field is usually not wide enough to do that every time. Yet, every now and then when I clicked in a field I'd select everything. Eventually I took time to notice why it was happening. Happy selecting?!

Move Room Tool

Following on yesterday's post about rooms and their tags. It occurred to me that a Move Room tool might be helpful (via Dynamo or app). I imagine being able to start the command and choose a room. Then I'd choose between options for This Floor or Another Floor.

If This Floor is selected I'd choose between options for Move All Associated Tags or Delete All Associated Tags and then I'd be prompted for a new location.

If Another Floor is selected then under the hood the room would be deleted, I'd choose between tag options, and then prompted to choose another plan view to open, followed by placing the room in the new location.

Multiple room selection might be useful too? I don't often move a collection of rooms together. It's certainly possible that could be necessary and very helpful if so.

Whatcha think?

Room Tags and Leaders

For many years I wished room tags would turn on a leader IF I dragged a room tag outside of the room's boundary. I got my wish in Revit 2023.1. I also got more than I wished for which is not that uncommon unfortunately, thus the saying, "Careful what you wish for".

When we are moving rooms around things go awry. If we drag a room to a new location the tag turns on the leader instead of bringing the tag along with it like it would for other tagged elements. When I move a room that already has a tag with a leader the leader will update and point to the new room location. However, if I decide to remove the leader the tag returns to the original room location, not its new home. I have to turn on the leader, to wake it up, so it will point to the new room location. Then I have to turn off the leader to get the room tag to jump to its new home. Here's an image of the sequence I describe above.

I should be careful to select the room tag and move it with the room. That doesn't contend with all the other possible views that have tags referencing the room though.

The documentation review and cleanup we have to do when rooms are relocated is a necessary part of the design process, with all the potential changes that can occur. In the past warnings were generated when a room and its tag(s) were not reconciled. We could then deal with those warnings by activating the Warning dialog and clicking the Move to Room button. When such a warning occurred while opening a model we could resolve them all at that time too.

Yes, we'd still have to review and fine tune them most likely but all the tags related to the room would at least be in the room. We can also choose to delete all the tags in a view and use Tag All Untagged. What if most of the room tags were positioned nicely with and without leaders? We'd lose all that work and have to do it over again.

It's my opinion that dragging a room's tag outside a room should be treated as different from dragging a room outside its boundaries and we should have a different result for each.

• Drag a room tag away from its room and turning on the leader is cool and it should remain view specific.
• Drag a room (to within new boundaries) should leave whatever condition is true for all of its room tags but move them along with the room proportionately (see next).
• Drag a room and if there is no leader the tag should follow the room and not turn on a leader. If the leader is active then it should maintain its position relative to the room but move along with it.
• Delete a room and the associated tags should be deleted too (which is what happens). We can then place that room elsewhere and tag as required.

Documentation review and adjustments are unavoidable but these actions should mitigate how extensive the task might be as well as be more consistent with what I'd expect to happen when I move rooms around.

Slanted Walls Don't Miter

What if I'm asked to create a vertical bottom wall that will transition into a slanted upper wall? Initially the wall configuration looks like the walls on the left in the following image. I added another vertical wall at the top of the slanted portion just for fun.

Each wall doesn't know anything about the other so there is no attempt by Revit to miter them together. We might have expected them to join? If we consider what happens in plan views for a similar layout (see image) I don't think it's unreasonable to think that might have happened. If an automatic join occurs in plan views maybe using Join will work in a section? No. Wall Join tool? No. Attach? YES!

To resolve the clumsy look of the left walls and end up with those on the right side of the image we can take advantage of the Attach tool. We just need to add reference planes to define where the miter joint should occur. Then Attach - Top will fix the bottom wall and Attach - Base will fix the upper wall. Repeat as required until all walls relate to each other better.

Phasing and Replacement Windows

Over the years people have often complained about trying to document replacing existing windows with modern windows but maintaining the existing opening. This means swapping windows with families that are the exact same size. This is related to the wall that Revit creates to infill a wall that has a demolished window. You may have encountered this warning message?

That message appeared when I attempted to place new windows in the New Construction phase after demolishing the existing windows first. I was careful to set up views assigned to different phases and phase filters so there wouldn't be any display conflicts.

I got interested in this issue again recently because of a thread at the Autodesk User Forums for Revit Architecture. A fellow member was sharing how much trouble Revit has been giving them trying to do this kind of work. After some back and forth I narrowed it down to one window family and another member realized that family uses a void to cut the hosting wall in the family itself versus the usual opening.

This led me to write some hypotheses for testing purposes. I wrote:

Hypothesis A: Within phasing we can replace Existing Window A with New replacement Window B using the exact same sizes (same size opening dimensions) IF they both use an OPENING in the family to cut the host.

Hypothesis B: Within phasing we can replace Existing Window A with New replacement Window B using the exact same sizes (same size opening dimensions) IF they both use a VOID in the family to cut the host.

If either of the above are false then...

Hypothesis C: Within phasing we CANNOT replace Existing Window A with New replacement Window B using the exact same sizes (same size opening dimensions) IF one uses an OPENING and the other uses a VOID, in the family, to cut the host.

I did some testing using the latest release of Revit, 2024.1 and I determined the following:

Hypothesis A is TRUE

Hypothesis B is FALSE

Hypothesis C is neither

I find that I can replace a Void based window with an Opening based window but not the reverse. Also any alterations to the hosting wall in the project; such as length adjustment, or top/bottom offsets, attach/detach will place the void type window at risk of being deleted. Weirder still is that it might not delete all of them, one or more.

It seems that the short answer is: eliminate window families that use a void to cut the hosting wall IF you intend to place identical sized windows in phased projects; to demonstrate existing window replacement without altering the existing openings. Windows created this way will not work for this task. A logical next hypothesis is to anticipate similar behavior in door families.

I speculate that this warning happens because an opening cuts fully through the host while a void (or combination of voids) might cut more and/or less of the host as it travels through it. I suspect that the infill wall can't abide the shape a void might create and that in turn means a void won't be viable as a window to alter the location of the infill wall. I think it's similar to curtain walls only supporting non-rectilinear panels with the system panel families.

I'd love to hear that the developers will test this against their own experience and expectations. I know that a lot of people rely on voids to shape the opening in a host wall to match a variety of actual construction techniques for openings. To eliminate voids in families as an option for this kind of project (replacement windows (and doors?)) is not ideal. They'd probably have to revisit the entire logic of infill elements where demolished hosted elements occur. Perhaps leave it up to us to fill in holes?

Revit 2024.1 Now Available

 Like the post title says, the latest release/update is now available. Read all about it at The Factory blog.

Revit 2024 - Template Views Crop Boundary Controlled by Scope Box

 There are new multi-discipline templates for Revit 2024 (imperial and metric).

In the new multi-discipline template the views that are placed on sheets are controlled by a Scope Box. When you look at the properties you'll notice that Crop View is disabled (gray).

We can turn off the visibility of the crop boundary but we have to disable the association with a scope box if we want to change the crop independently. Of course if we like and want to take advantage of the scope box being defined and used for the views, we need to open a view that isn't constrained by the scope box so we can adjust the Scope Box extents (it's called Views Overall)

Blog Post Takedown - Revit 2008 Released - 2007

 Got a strange email this evening telling me a post from 2007 about Revit 2008 being released has been taken down (draft status) because it contains links that violate the DMCA. The links pointed to a place you could download Revit 2008 once upon a time... I didn't check if they still work. I just deleted the post since Revit 2008 is a bit irrelevant no?

The great and powerful internet watchdog is watching...

Revit 2024 Installation

Imagine my surprise when I started to install Revit 2024 this morning and I was greeted with a message that it couldn't install because Autodesk Access is running. That "software" is the least impressive body of work Autodesk has released yet...

I closed Autodesk Access and installation has resumed...thank goodness :)

Edit: I should add that this was the fastest installation of Revit I can remember except for maybe the earliest few releases.

Sanitary Pipe Calculations and Venting

I wrote THIS POST years back regarding adding vent pipe to a sanitary system of pipe and fixtures. I'm happy to write that it's simpler now than then.

Just use an endcap family (made to look more like a vent cap) the vent pipe at the top and your fixture count should propagate all the way to the building connection as expected. That of course assumes you don't have open connections somewhere else along the way. The example above shows vent pipe using a separate type and a view Filter based on Type Name.

Use the Show Connections feature to identify them if any exist. I won't be shocked if you find some.

Snap Option - Mid Between 2 Points

When this new snap option appeared in Revit 2022.1 it was a LONG time coming. Not being able to snap to place something between two point has annoyed many a user for years. My problem is remembering it exists now. I've been using it quite a bit lately so perhaps the habit will stick. While it never really bothered me that it wasn't available I'm quite happy to have it now.

If my memory serves me it wasn't built into AutoCAD initially, perhaps an Express Tools addition? Regardless it does help speed up a common task!

Haven't noticed or used it yet? It's just a right click away while many tasks are in process, such as sketching a line, wall, or sketch segment. It's also useful for placing components. Check it out.

Revit 2023.1 - Add Leader to Room Tag

I laughed out loud when I read this today after installing R2023.1. I'm guessing but every user has muttered this when getting the message "a tag was moved outside it's boundary". I've probably whined about it here once or twice...

It's the little things in life!

Rumor wasn't a rumor - B.I.M. After Dark Conversation

I just wrapped up my conversation with Jeff, The Revit Kid on his B.I.M After Dark livestream. It was nice to chat about Revity stuff with Jeff and I hope it was interesting enough for those that attended and watch later. Jeff's done great work with his channel and B.A.D products as well as his legacy of The Revit Kid blogging. His passion for it is self evident.

I owe the folks at Ideate an apology. I neglected to mention how much their Explorer features in my day to day. I'm shocked that I didn't bring it up. I'll blame it on the whisky, a very good whiskey too. To all the hardworking folks at Ideate, keep it up! Glad you're on it.

Rumor Goin Round

I'm crawling out from under my rock later this week. I'm joining Jeffery Pinheiro's (aka The Revit Kid) BIM After Dark livestream on Thursday evening. He plays guitar and I play drums, we might get around to talking about Revity things too.

Revit Updates and 33 Percent

 There must be something magical about 33% and Revit updates lately?

I installed the Hotfix the other day and it "hung" at 33% long enough that I thought the install failed. I just started to look at a forum thread on the subject and it magically finished. This morning the same thing is happening with the 2022.1 update. Progress gauges aren't much good if they don't actually show progress the whole time, no? Looking forward to checking out the new features when it jumps from 33% to Finished!

The Void and the Revolve

 A tale of mystery set in ancient times...a fairytale of majestic proportions...

Sadly it's more mundane than that. This morning I noticed a distinctly Reviteristic situation while answering a client's question. To get a void to cut a revolve, their orientation to one another seems to matter.

If I create a revolve in the Front view of a Generic Face Based template and then create the extrusion in a side (Right/Left) view the void won't cut if the extrusion extends too far toward the other side of the revolve (seem image).

It took two voids on either side of the Axis of the Revolve to get a full cut of the revolve form (see image).

However if I create the revolve in the Right side view AND create the void extrusion in the same view one void is enough (see image).

Perhaps this is old news to some but it's definitely subtley quirky (which defines a Reviteristic for me). Next time you're taking a journey with a revolve and void...remember this? I'll try.

This was done using Revit 2020.2.4 BTW

Entering Values using the Project Base Point

A recent message asked how they can enter values into the Project Base Point (PBP) like we used to be able to do when the PBP had a clipped/not clipped status.

The answer is Specify Coordinates at Point (SCaP).

They wanted to enter 8,000,000/8,000,000 as their example. R2021 won't accept that value but R2019 would.

In the past, when we selected the PBP, entered coordinate values, it actually shifted the Survey Coordinate System (SCS) away from the Origin/PBP. It was easy to assume we moved the PBP because it is easy to overlook the information that displays above the selected PBP. It says PBP but right underneath (see image) it says Shared Site: and the coordinates it displays are relative to the SCS.

Entering values in the PBP directly (in the past) is same as using SCaP (now). The Survey Point will move to mark the 0,0 origin of the SCS after we enter our values. The PBP will still be at the Internal Origin (IO). The following image is 2019 and 2021 showing the same end result, just using a different tool.

Entering values directly into the PBP now will move it away from the IO, something it did not do in the past. This invokes a Local Coordinate System (LCS) that uses the PBP as its origin. Spot Coordinate/Elevation annotation can reference this LCS. This why Revit won't let us move the PBP too far (10 miles) from the IO.

I think Autodesk should change the PBP reference to the Shared Site since it is confusing. I think the PBP should show reference coordinates back to the Internal Origin. There is probably some room for disagreement though, which is why it probably still references the SCS.

This change seems to annoy people the most because we can't just enter values into the PBP directly and get the "old" result. We can enter values but not to alter the SCS, which is what really happens with the clipped PBP of old. The unclipped status of old is when the LCS is invoked.

The PBP only moves in an unclipped state now, thus no clip.

Local Save Does Not Work - Follow Up

 After speaking with an Autodesk developer we now know that our issue is related to past eTransmit use. Revit mistakenly retained a flag it uses to mark that file as such.

If we can successfully use Synchronize with Central and we get that message when we use Save then the correct response to the warning dialog is the top option: "Save this model as a central model in its current location - Revit will remove this message and allow users to create local copies of the model."

Remember, the message is accurate for files that have been created via eTransmit too. In our situation the files were working fine on BIM 360 but they retained the flag that should have been removed when they were added to the cloud.

Info Added 6/4/2021: The warning is triggered ONLY in the following scenario:

The warning is triggered ONLY in the following scenario: The model has been transmitted and then upload to BIM 360 from Revit using the option “Work temporarily”.

To eliminate this warning for future project, please make sure you choose “Save as a central model in its new location” when uploading the models to BIM 360 from Revit.

BIM 360 Warning Using Save not Sync

Lately we see this warning message appear, in BIM 360 hosted projects, when clicking the Save button (local) instead of the Synchronize with Central button.

It isn't happening for all models or all projects. I haven't isolated a cause yet and it shouldn't be happening at all. This is true for projects running in Revit 2020.2.3. Anyone else see this?

Overriding DWG Layers Didn't Work

A team was trying to override the appearance of the DWG layers after linking the file to their Revit project. Usually the reason for this not working is elements are not assigned to color or line pattern BYLAYER in the DWG.

In this case it wasn't working because the DWG was not within View Range's Primary Range, it was in the View Depth zone. Projection and Cut linestyles work inside the Primary Range and the <Beyond> linestyle is used for elements within View Depth.

Good catch Mia!