Revit :: Change All Model Geometry From New To Existing?
Sep 11, 2013
Is there an easy way to change all the model geometry from New to Existing in one easy command? I drew a three story building complete with structural columns, beasms, curtain walls, doors, walls, floors, etc. and I need to now make it all 'Existing'.
Possible to change/set the work plane while sketching the path of an in-place model? This guardrail extension is an example of where I would have liked to change the work plane while sketching the path because the path shifted planes. I believe you can do this in the family editor, but I could not get it to work in the in-place modeler. What I ended up doing (as an experiment) was to create masses and picked their edges to get the path I wanted. I would love to be able to have more control over the work plane, like defining the workplane by a face and then being able to move it relative to the face selected.
I'm running Map 2012 64 bit on Windows 7. I've connected to an sdf file through FDO. In the sdf file, it has points representing where people live. Some of the records have the person's information, but no point associated with it. Is there a way to add a point to an existing record through FDO? Typically, i'll create a new point, then re-enter all the data i need for that person and then delete the old record.
I have an iCopy solution that when resized smaller than the master some frame members no longer reference existing geometry (and aren't needed).
Is there a way to delete these with an iLogic rule? Curtis has a neat solution for sick constraints, I was hoping to use the same type of rule, but I'm at a loss as to how to reference the frame elements.
I have an image which is simply a one color gradient, with transparency from nothing to something. I would like to be able to access the existing gradient on the image and change only the color. I have hunted high and low and cannot see how to do this.
(I am familiar with how to make a new gradient and how to change the colors in a saved gradient via the gradient dialogue. But for the life of me, I can't see how to access an existing gradient on an image and change only this one parameter.
I have been using Autocad on and off for a while, I am currently using 2005, but have only really worked in 2d.
I have designed a chassis for my hot rod and I have a side elevation and a top elevation which I have extruded and subtracted to produce a 3d model of the chassis rail.
My problem is how do I pull the true 2d geometry off of the 3d model or extrapolate ( I think thats the right word ) from the top and side elevations to produce a cutting path for the laser cutters.
I am trying to see my model space in paper space but nothing is there. tried creating viewports, but they are blank, tried to try different scales, still no joy? tried different layers etc, all layers are on!
This is only happening last couple days but is same for all my drawings. I must have changed a setting or got something very wrong?
Is there a way to hide project geometry from model sketch? I am modeling a sheetmetal part where I need to sketch centermaks, part number etc. for laser cutting. I want to use xy planes for symmetry reasons when sketching, but I don't want them to appear in dxf. This is a problem if I create a dxf directly from the model.
Usually I create dxf files from drawing by adding new sheet where I create flat pattern view from the spesific part (excluding machinigs etc, only thermal cut boundaries visible). In the drawing I am allso able to show model sketches and hide unwanted project geometry. Is it possible to include these sketches to dxf?
Using acad 10 I just start using annotative styles now, so far in order to detail a part I use to actually copy the geometry, change styles and scale and start detailing.
The problem is that often when Im detailing and annotating a part I need it to be clipped.
Is there any way to tell autocad that in scale 1:25 I don’t want to see all the structure but only a specific area of it(clipped inside a rectangle)
Is it possible to have model space geometry print through a watermark in the layout? My watermark consists of mtext with an arial font placed manually in the layout. It is on it's own layer which is set to print at Shade 40 (plot style tables). Draworder works with other layout objects but not the geometry from the model space viewport. My watermark covers the model space geometry so it is not visible when printed. Is this possible?
We just noticed that the imported cad geometry in a Mass family will not cut in a floor plan view which contains a plan region. Regardless of the location or height of the plan region.
I have an empy Revit model that has view pre-configured for exporting. The model has several linked Revit files that I want to export to NWC, but I get an error message that there is not suitable geometry, even though I can see the geometry. I have "convert linked files" checked.
When I zoom in or zoom out the model, normally the dimension will follow the model too.But now in Autocad 2013, even the model size change, the dimension still remain unchange. why? Is there any setting I miss out? URL....
I then created a Custom iProperty which consisted of the following "formula": Finished Material Size = <Thickness> x <Width> x <Length> Lg.
eg. of Finished Material Result : Finished Material Size = 6 x 25 x 300 Lg.
The problem comes up when dealing with diametrical components as the above formula will only populate for square or rectangular parts. Which would work if I could use iLogic code to populate the Finished Material Size iProperty. I have tried but failed.
First I created another user parameter called "Geometry Type" which has a drop down selection of either "DIA" or "SQUARE, RECTANGULAR".I then created the following iLogic code to set 0 as the value for the "unused" size parameters
If PART_GEOMETRY = "DIA" Then WIDTH = "0"If PART_GEOMETRY = "DIA" Then THICKNESS = "0"If PART_GEOMETRY = "SQUARE, RECTANGULAR" Then DIA = "0" The part I just can't get to work is as follows.
I need some iLogic code which will populate the "FINISHED MATERIAL SIZE" custom iproperty with one of the following based on my "GEOMETRY TYPE" selection. "DIA" would return the following to "FINISHED MATERIAL SIZE": = Ø <Dia> x <Length> Lg.
While "SQUARE, RECTANGULAR" would return the following to "FINISHED MATERIAL SIZE": = <THICKNESS> x <WIDTH> x <LENGTH> Lg.I tried the following code but it does not work:
If PART_GEOMETRY = "DIA" Then iProperties.Value("Custom", "FINISHED MATERIAL SIZE")= "Ø"DIA "x" LENGTH "Lg."If PART_GEOMETRY = "SQUARE, RECTANGULAR" Then iProperties.Value("Custom", "FINISHED MATERIAL SIZE")= THICKNESS "x" WIDTH "x" LENGTH "Lg."
I'm trying to Join First and Second Floor walls that are interrupted by floor framing. I've separated sheathing and siding layers and extended these over to the lower wall. All looks good, except for the joint line. In section view, I use Join Geometry tool and it works, the joint is gone. However on Elevation and 3D viiews the line is still there.
I am semi-new to Revit and am trying to make a go of it. I am trying to make a window, that looks like my AutoCAD window. So I open the Window Family.rft to start creating. I can adjust my wall thickness to match my brick wall, I can set the frame to the void that is already there.....my problem comes when I want to put on the brick mould. This overhangs the window frame and thus is outside the pre-ordained void. When I try to make a void extrusion to cut back the outside face of the wall and allow the brick mould to show, it will not work - only the originally supplied void (that comes with the template) works.
Revit will not allow me to "Cut Geometry" saying "A Family cannot have an opening and cut in the same host". If I set the brick mould inside the supplied opening, then the inside face will have a gap between the drywall and the window frame.
I need to resolve the corner condition where two boards intersect. I am not able to create a void in order to cut the corner for the geometry. I would like to shape more than one side of the board and make it rounded. How do I edit the different sides of the geometry?
I have recently purchased a 3d model of a car which I need to make 3d print ready for a project. I have come a long way since, getting to know the software and finishing all of the chassis. However, whilst editing parts of the car's bottom side, I noticed that when viewed from this perspective it is badly out of shape. When compared to a real model, one can see that the body is way too narrow in between the tires, making the whole thing kinda look like a bone. I have attached pictures of both, the unedited 3d model I purchased as well as a real model which I know to be very accurate to the real thing, to show you what I mean.
I'm trying to import one Revit file into another. When I try to link the file I get a dialogue box that says:
"The import geometry will not be visible in the view using current settings. The Oringin of the import will be centered on the origin of the model instead. You can view the import in any view where its geometry is within the extents."
For this it sounds like the imported model is way off to the side or way up high or low but even in a view that I increase the extents to maximum i can't see the object.
I've tried "center to centre" and "origin to origin". I've check in the visual graphic and can't see anything turned off.
The file i am imported ia a structural model export from Tekla that I imported into a Revit and cleaned up. Everything looks fine when i open the file on it's own.
The company I work for is a wooden packaging company. We recently purchased Inventor to open large file models from John Deere to design a wooden pallet/crate to package the part. Basically, what I am asking for 'get started'. I know how to pull in files, but I am just trying to figure out how to design packaging around this existing model.
Here’s the scenario – field crews are going to collect data for a 500 ft long concrete (trapezoidal) drainage channel. The bottom width varies from 7 ft to 19 ft wide with vertical walls varying from 4 ft to 7’ high. The channel will be filled and capped.
I considered using one of the channel subassemblies with Civil 3d and establish targets along the existing channel top and bottom of walls. However, I don’t see that the stock subassemblies are intended for this and don’t really lend themselves to perform this. I suppose the other option is to use linkwidthandslope subassemblies and use multiple targets for inside bottoms, inside tops and outside tops of walls.
Now I'm trying to make another part, which will be aluminium plate that needs to have holes in exactly same points as the motor. My assembly containts both that parts.
What I'm trying to do is to reference in sketch a point that comes from different part (motor).
I could do it by hand, make it look that the holes are on top of each other but then there will be an error which doesn't seem professional.
In some tutorial on yt I have only found that using points one can reference the holes more easily, but it didn't show how.
You know the square, traingle, circle, and the hexagon shapes that are used on the revision tags? How do I change the size of the geometry to be smaller? If I just change the text size, all that changes is the text, the geometry remains the same. I'm wanting to make them ultra small so that when there are lots of revisions, it doesn't clutter up the drawing too much.
I am designing a vacuum part in Autodesk Inventor, which is essentially a long cuboid shape with various valves and spaces for windows along it's length (see attached pic). Upon finishing the design of this part, a few details need to be changed - one being the fundamental shape of the object. It now needs to be a larger square section attached to a long cuboid section (as I found out the valves on the right hand side of the drawing are around double the size they are in this drawing). Rather than restart the project from scratch, I would like to only modify one of the ends to be extruded out into a square shape, or something like that. My first idea was to use the split command in order to split the faces into what I did and didn't want to change, but upon starting this, I don't think this is the best way.