Filters and Elevation Tags

[dmoodydesign]

I have a question that I know the problem to, but don't know the fix.

Elevation tags are made up of two pieces, the arrow and the circle reference. I know that I have to turn off both, and that it is possible to just select the arrow and leave the bubble still showing. I know that the elevation check box in Visibility/Graphics will turn off both.

So, my question is what is wrong with my filter? I have it setup to turn off specific elevations and sections based on their organization, but it is only turning off the arrow. How do I get the bubble hidden too? See the screen shots for the setup.

[cliff collins]

In the project, set up a Filter called Elevation Tags. Check the visibility check box to on/off
depending on if you want to show or hide the elev. tags.

I believe that you can set up Filters for "Exterior Elevation Tags" and "Interior Elevation Tags" to either show/hide these two types of elev. tags individually in your views.

Then, in a view that you want to ( for instance ) hide the elev. tags, selct all of the elev tags
( both the arrow and box/circle) and right click and select override graphics by Filter.

That should do it.

Another good use of Filters would be for destinguishing between " Building Section Marks"
and "Wall Section Marks", etc.........

Edit: I just tried setting up "Exterior" and "Interior" elev. tag Filters--but could only get "Elevations" to work properly............

cheers........

[dmoodydesign]

We are using a shared parameter for views called "Folder". We are sorting our browser based on this and I am trying to use the Filter to turn off specific ones. It works correct as you mention, but the bubble is still there. It shouldn't be, as I have turned the visibility for elevations off via the filter, see the screen shots. Turning items off in the view manually defeats the purpose of the filter doing it for me.

[dmoodydesign]

I tried your method and got the results I was looking for, but it requires me to make another elevation type for a separate discipline. I was trying to avoid this as it clutters the set up even more. For some reason, the shared parameter I am using won't tie itself to the actual circle, only the elevation. So, the only thing that actually turns itself off will be just the elevation triangle symbol. Any ideas?

[sajicr]

Dear all
I am new in this forum; please help me to post one new thread in this site
I am trying to find out how I can create a new thread here.
I want to clarify some doubts about CAD
Please help me

Thanks & Regards
sajith

[jamesgchambers]

The experience the OP has been having is pretty consistent with what I've found. Yet another thing Revit gets 90% there on then doesn't finish the thought...

[Charles.Leman]

I can hardly believe someone on this very day is having the exact same problem I am.

Our parameter driving the browser organization is the drawing set. We give it a value such as SD, DP, BP, IFC and it organizes both our sheets and views based on which drawing set they belong to. (Why am I having to invent my own method for doing this is beyond me)

We are also using it to filter out the view references (its built into a view template), so references to the DP set don't show in the BP drawings and vice versa. The only glitch is the %&%&$ elevation tags. Can't edit them, and the behaviour is completely wacko. Think about it, they thought of giving us a checkbox so unreferenced view don't print, but they didn't think of having one turn off references that aren't referenced in the particular set being printed...

BTW, this would go on my list of feature requests: a really, really good sheet set manager tool. This is such a fundamental part of the job, I can't believe it continues to be overlooked.

Also, it would be great to be able to create multiple sheets at once and assign them all to a set, or even to duplicate sheets for that matter....

[Scott Womack]

Also, it would be great to be able to create multiple sheets at once and assign them all to a set, or even to duplicate sheets for that matter....

I answered a survey at AU this year about making sheets. I know there is some work being done on a "project" for the future about sheets.

As far as the "Duplicate Sheets" Duplicating to a new name number is OK, but as a project manager, being able to have multiple sheets with the same sheet number would be IMHO a complete cluster xxxx! A large project team, or a project where more than one architectural firm in different cities are working on a project would lead to disaster and potential litigation.

Its too hard to get a large group working on a project to fill out sheet parameters, etc. Multiple sheets would exponentially complicate this process.

[twiceroadsfool]

I answered a survey at AU this year about making sheets. I know there is some work being done on a "project" for the future about sheets.

As far as the "Duplicate Sheets" Duplicating to a new name number is OK, but as a project manager, being able to have multiple sheets with the same sheet number would be IMHO a complete cluster xxxx! A large project team, or a project where more than one architectural firm in different cities are working on a project would lead to disaster and potential litigation.

Its too hard to get a large group working on a project to fill out sheet parameters, etc. Multiple sheets would exponentially complicate this process.

I unequivocally agree. I can already hear people in the office going "im working on A-102!" "Oh wait, im working on the OTHER A-102... from before we duplicated it." "Why did you duplicate it?" "Well i wasnt sure that change was really going to happen..." "But its modeled! Its changing on both anyway! LOL"

Hehehehee

[dmoodydesign]

Charles -

I didn't find an answer to this yet, but I have a support request to Autodesk open regarding the issue. Right now it sounds like we have a similar, if not same, problem. We have two parameters, one for views and one for sheet organization. Sheets are divided into contract packages, as this huge project is going out in several phases. Views are divided up into Arch and ID because both disciplines are working in the file at the same time. It has helped us turn off all the extra clutter that the other office is creating, but it doesn't do the complete job.

I will post if I get a response regarding this from Autodesk.

David

[david_peterson]

Time to bring this one back to life.
Has anyone found a decent solution to this issue?
You can hide the marker, but not the circle and view/sheet reference.
Seems to me this should act more like the section cuts. You can filter those without issues.

[CADastrophe]

Time to bring this one back to life.
Has anyone found a decent solution to this issue?
You can hide the marker, but not the circle and view/sheet reference.
Seems to me this should act more like the section cuts. You can filter those without issues.

If you want to use a View Filter to hide Elevations and such, I believe that you have to use the "does not equal" operator. For instance, if you create a Project Parameters ("Type") for Views and enter a value of "A" for some of the Elevations, you'd need to use the filter rule "Type" "does not equal" "A" in order to hide the entire Elevation symbol, and not just the View portion.

[david_peterson]

I thought so.
I just didn't want to create new additional types for each specific thing I need to filter by.
But alas that's what I ended up doing. Filter by family and type. done.

[tiago_marafigo909426]

Hey guys, has anyone come up with a better solution for this issue?

Quote "You can hide the marker, but not the circle and view/sheet reference."
Thanks!

[DToolman]

I have a similar issue. (NOTE: this is not a fix. It is just documentation of my problem, and a "Why hasn't this been addressed by AutoDesk sometime in the last 15 years?" question)

I'm wanting the elevations that I've created to appear differently, based on whether they are or are not on a sheet somewhere. I know that I can tell Revit not to print those Elevation Marks that have no referenced sheet, and I know that I can halftone or turn those marks off, but if I try to halftone those marks, it also halftones all of the Elevation Mark Bodies (the circles and squares) regardless of the filter. I really don't want to create different types of Elevations, when Revit should already know when the "Sheet Number" of an Elevation does or does not have a sheet reference.

I've attached a document that spells this issue out pretty well.104817

ALSO:
Wouldn't it be GREAT if:
- Revit allowed you to use an "OR" in its rules, not just "AND".
- If there was a toggle to easily inverse the selection set of a filter.
- If you could use a blank (like a non-character, a special charter, a space, double empty quotes, etc.) to indicate a null value in your "what you are looking for" rules field.