metal shelving schedule

[yanyan77]

how to create a metal shelving schedule as the file i attach here?
i can draw this in Legend , but i want to know if it is possible to create it in schedule.

[cliff collins]

I would create the shelving as Furniture, then make a Furniture Schedule.

cheers.......

[yanyan77]

I would create the shelving as Furniture, then make a Furniture Schedule.

cheers.......

I did that too, but i can not make the different type as fields.

[BigBadBIM]

how to create a metal shelving schedule as the file i attach here?
i can draw this in Legend , but i want to know if it is possible to create it in schedule.

Here is a quick project that I put togeher, I hope it helps.

I used a lateral file family. I would choose a different way to name the types, if I was going to tag or schedule the "Type Name." but I didn't put this family together.

I don't think that you will get the Revit schedule to look EXACTLY like your current, but the information will be there (of course some schedule GURU will come along and prove me wrong.)

Hope it helps...

[BigBadBIM]

I did that too, but i can not make the different type as fields.
Just saw this... can you upload the family?

[twiceroadsfool]

It will look a little different if you do if EFFICIENTLY. (See attached. Its just a regular Furniture schedule set to sort by either Room Name or furniture type first, whatever your preference is).

Can you make it look exactly like the OP's original schedule? Yes. But its a total non-value-adding-pain-in-the-rear.

You would need extra parameters, for "Furniture Type Count". Of course, for the "Desk" family, the "Desk" Shared paramater value is 1, and the Chair and Bed value are null (or zero). Then for the Chair, the Chair SP value is one, and the others are null, etc.

Then you just set them to not itemize every instance, and they count.


But this also means in a project with 80 pieces of different furniture, having 80 parameters in every piece of furniture. Its a waste...

[yanyan77]

Just saw this... can you upload the family?
Thank you, lew.
my file is too big to upload. i tried as yours, but how i can make the room number just show once with all the furniture types?

[yanyan77]

But this also means in a project with 80 pieces of different furniture, having 80 parameters in every piece of furniture. Its a waste...

Could you tell me which group paramter you use to set the type account? i did not find the one "Furniture Type Count" .
Yes. it is a waste. but i do not know if there is a better way.

[yanyan77]

You would need extra parameters, for "Furniture Type Count". Of course, for the "Desk" family, the "Desk" Shared paramater value is 1, and the Chair and Bed value are null (or zero). Then for the Chair, the Chair SP value is one, and the others are null, etc.

Then you just set them to not itemize every instance, and they count.


But this also means in a project with 80 pieces of different furniture, having 80 parameters in every piece of furniture. Its a waste...
could you tell me how you make the count works. because i add the parameter too, but have to fill the count number by myself.
and also i do not understand what is the value mean.

thanks

[BigBadBIM]

could you tell me how you make the count works. because i add the parameter too, but have to fill the count number by myself.
and also i do not understand what is the value mean.

thanks

Not sure why the "Count" parameter doesn't work. (If it's the default Count parameter) See below

[twiceroadsfool]

What i did ISNT the standard count. Thats why im saying its not worth the time and effort to do the schedule that way.

I posted two schedules. The first one (not sorted the way the OP asked) uses the regular Count field. minimal time investment, shows the same information, its just displayed differently.

The second one does the following:

Consider Type Parameters:

"Desk Count"
"Table Count"
"Chair Count"

In the desk Family, the values go 1, 0/null, 0/null, respectively.
In the table Family, the values go 0/null, 1, 0/null.
In the chair family they go 0/null, o/null, 1.

They have to be manually entered once in one instance of the family (they are type parameters). Plus, as i said, if you have 20 fields, youll have 19 useless parameters in every family in the project. It hardly seems worth it to me just to format a schedule a particular way.

[BigBadBIM]

What i did ISNT the standard count. Thats why im saying its not worth the time and effort to do the schedule that way.

Twiceroads: I guess it's easy to come across the wrong way here in the forum, I didn't mean to come across as questioning what you were doing. I didn't realize that your shared parameter was also called "Count." I was thinking that the OP was asking about the default parameter. I'll have to pay better attention. :)

BTW, I think we agree about the shared parameter count being beyond the point of diminishing returns. It looks like the old schedule, but the effort to get it to work isn't worth it. Especially when you can get the information you are after in a much easier way.

[twiceroadsfool]

Twiceroads: I guess it's easy to come across the wrong way here in the forum, I didn't mean to come across as questioning what you were doing. I didn't realize that your shared parameter was also called "Count." I was thinking that the OP was asking about the default parameter. I'll have to pay better attention. :)

BTW, I think we agree about the shared parameter count being beyond the point of diminishing returns. It looks like the old schedule, but the effort to get it to work isn't worth it. Especially when you can get the information you are after in a much easier way.


Totally agree. My harshness wasnt at you, either. I think its very easy for all of us to get tunnel visioned in Revit for the mindset of "I want to make it look like it used to." And as you said, its QUITE a diminishing return...

[yanyan77]

Totally agree. My harshness wasnt at you, either. I think its very easy for all of us to get tunnel visioned in Revit for the mindset of "I want to make it look like it used to." And as you said, its QUITE a diminishing return...
I agree with you too.
but when my boss read my drawings, he always asks why this does not like what we drew in CAD. :(