Cyclical Level Symbols???

[dan302720]

I hope the answer is yes, but I'm pretty sure it's no......
I am wondering if anybody knows if you can "cycle" through some options for level symbols; similar to how you can switch symbols for a section mark (Heavy tail, no tail, section head, etc.) and have it be view dependent.?
Example:
I want the level symbols in my overall building elevations and sections to be different than those in my wall sections and section details.

I already have a work around, but I would like to be able to (hopefully if possible) have this as part of my default view templates so that we can use it easily for all of our offices, rather than having to teach each office the work around and hope that it happens on every project.

Dan Sawyer
Kelowna, BC

[Alfredo Medina]

The "cycle" icon that we see in section symbols is not included in the set of controls when we are creating families, unfortunately. Also, the Visibility Graphics window does not let us save a specific preference for symbols. It would be nice if it could have an additional column to set the preferred symbols for levels, grids, etc, so that we could save that as part of a view template. The "Additional settings" menu does not contain an option for levels, either. In conclusion, the only method available so far is to have a project template already set up with your preferences, and establish that as the office standard.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

I want the level symbols in my overall building elevations and sections to be different than those in my wall sections and section details.

Dan, at the risk of sounding like a Revit apologist, other than preference, why and how do you need these to be different?
I'd be curious to hear what your proposed workaround is and whether it would be worth the additional effort or if it would require some sort of 'manual' intervention on the users behalf.

[dan302720]

To give a little perspective into what I am doing here:
I have recently joined a large company that is in the midst of making the change into Revit. There are four separate offices working independently of one another, but trying to create the same end product graphically, some users using CAD, others using Revit....
Because I came from an office that had been using Revit for the past 6-7 years, I have offered my experience to try to develop the "office standards" for Revit. I am basically trying to set up the default office Project Templates.
Inherently, as they have a very well developed set of CAD Standards, and the entire company will not be making the change over to Revit all at once, they have tasked us in the Revit committee to try to create our standards for Revit based on their existing CAD Standards.
Obviously this is an extremely onerous task.
I have been trying my best to accommodate this request, and one of the things that they would like to ensure is consistent between Revit and CAD produced drawings is that the level symbols for Overall Building Elevations and Sections differs from their Wall Sections and Section Details, as it currently does in the existing CAD Standards.
It is easy for me to change the graphics of the Level heads to reflect their existing CAD Standards, however, it occurs globally in Revit, and from what I can tell, cannot be view dependent, as per the "existing standard".

My work around is a manual user intervention. I have created a family that will display exactly as per the existing standard, but is manual in nature (only for the Overall views - the default that I have set-up is for the smaller wall sections and details as there are typically way more of these on a project than overall views). You will have to turn off the level heads in each overall view, and add the family that I have created to end of the level line, manually input the elevation and level name, and align it to the desired level line; obviously not something I would like to be doing and making sure that everybody working on every other project between all the other offices is doing as well.
It would be MUCH simpler for me to have the "cycle" option as part of the system family, and set my default view templates that I am creating as part of the office standard Project Template, to reflect which level heads I would like to display for each view type.

Kinda long winded, I know, but thought some insight might prove useful.

ANY other tips on how I should approach this would be greatly appreciated.

Dan,
Kelowna, BC

[Dimitri Harvalias]

It would be MUCH simpler for me to have the "cycle" option as part of the system family, and set my default view templates that I am creating as part of the office standard Project Template, to reflect which level heads I would like to display for each view type.


Actually it would be much simpler (and a far more effective use of everyone's time) if the AutoCAD standard changed;)
All kidding aside, the bottom line is that if they are transitioning to Revit there are certain things that Revit simply CAN'T do. Why fight that for what seems to be a purely cosmetic preference. Now is the time to reevaluate the CAD standard and ask three basic questions.
Why is it currently set up this way?
Is this a preference or a requirement?
Does it really make a difference to the clarity and value of the deliverable?

If Revit can keep things consistent and globally controllable is the manual override really worth the time and effort (both initial input and on-going coordination) to maintain an arbitrary 'standard'. Eventually (hopefully) the AutoCAD factor will not be a big part of your Revit CD workflow so you may end up doing extra work for no reason other than historical precedent.
I sympathize. You have been put in a tough spot trying to bridge the old with the new and it's not easy satisfying everyone. Your current solution is probably about the best it will get. Keep up the good fight. :beer:

[dan302720]

Thanks Dimitri,
I had to laugh when I was reading your response, because I brought up ALL of the exact points that you just made with the Revit and the existing CAD committees.....It would be SO much easier to re-evaluate the existing CAD Standards based upon what we will be doing for the Revit Standards. Easy enough for me to create all of the existing standard door/window/wall tags, etc...why complain about the very FEW things that I won't be able to control with a Project Template, and simply change the CAD standards to reflect these small, seemingly trivial, mostly graphical items...
The fight goes on and I plan on converting all of the die-hard AutoBAD users with my parametric+nested detailed families, my crazy ability to schedule pretty much anything they desire, and my easy-to-use workflow and chapter based custom project browser....and everything in between...
Have a good one and thanks for the response.

Dan