How do I overide a Dimension?

[Baldwin_4-6-0]

HOW DO YOU GET RID OF THE DIMENSION NUMBER AND REPLACE WITH TEXT ONLY

[Scott D Davis]

Dimension text cannot be edited in Revit. This keeps people from hardcoding in a dimension, which can really throw things off.

You can place a text box with an opaque background over the dimension text.

[aaronrumple]

...which is actually a very elegant solution compared to AutoCAD dimension overrides.... <working on an office building in AutoCAD where very other dim is an override...Arrrrgh!>

[gregcashen]

I think that overridden dimensions are a must have. What about making any dimension that is overridden appear in a different color or something?

[aaronrumple]

I'm 100% opposed to this. An overridden dimension is an annotation object - not a dimension.

[Archman]

An overridden dimension is an annotation object - not a dimension.

That's fine, but how about a tool that works like the dimension tool, but creates an "annotatiohn dimension"?

I, too, think it is critical to be able to override a dimension from time to time.

[Baldwin_4-6-0]

I want the dimension to read brick ledge varies, refer to elevation, i don't want it to say 6'-0". How do I do the opaque Text box?

[gregcashen]

I should have been more clear...

I am 150% in need of this. It is such a pain in the @$$ to have to write "VERIFY IN FIELD" over a dimension and then have to eat the cost of the re-plots because a notation that was fine before has now moved and the VERIFY IN FIELD is hanging out in left field. The note, while not a dimension, is definitely a drafting standard and should be accomodated as such using the existing tools...not half-@$$ed workarounds. Also need it for VARIES. I agree that it should not be used as a way to fake dimensions, but it is a needed tool. Whether it is implemented as part of the existing dimension tool, is a separate dimension type or style, or is a completely separate annotation tool, it needs to be implemented.

[JamesVan]

In my experience, the VERIFY IN FIELD issue can be handled simply by creating a separate dimension type that has the suffix "V.I.F." or "VERIFY IN FIELD". This way the dim text might read something like:

7'-0" V.I.F.

If you're measuring something that you're not exactly sure of, you want to protect yourself from liability, but wouldn't you want to give a builder something to base an estimate on?

The VARIES issue is a bit trickier. Everyone does diagramatic layouts where this is needed. A quick fix would be to allow dimensions to display a preset user text as part of a dim family type instead of the actual dimension. This approach is dangerous because someone could always enter the text as 3'-6"...you catch my drift?

This issue was discussed at the recent Client Advisory Board in Waltham, so the wheels of the developers are turning and it's on the list. I trust an elegant solution will reveal itself in the near future.

[Scott D Davis]

Why not add a suffix to the dimension, so that it reads:

6'-0" (FIELD VERIFY)

OR

6'-0" (VARIES)

It will be tied to the dimension, and move with it, and if the dimension changes, the number will still be correct.

I don't know a good way of doing the annotation that couldn't be used as a fake dimension.

[Baldwin_4-6-0]

Ok, thanks to all.
However, It should be possible to edit them instead of what I did, I drew a line placed text on it and put a couple of hash marks at the end of it, and then grouped it. A bit lame & old-school, but effective.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

I like the idea of a dimension style which can be categorized as 'annotation dimension' as opposed to 'measurement dimension' (if that makes sense)
I think that would be prefereable to separate display control over the dimension text, dimension line, witness line, suffix text, prefix text ....(aaaaaarrrggghhhh ..... DIMVARS flashback... I'll be OK)

[gregcashen]

Why not add a suffix to the dimension, so that it reads:

6'-0" (FIELD VERIFY)

OR

6'-0" (VARIES)

It will be tied to the dimension, and move with it, and if the dimension changes, the number will still be correct.

I don't know a good way of doing the annotation that couldn't be used as a fake dimension.

I appreciate your thinking, but at some point we are being so timid about the potential for human screw ups that we are changing long standing drafting standards to accomodate the software. not what I expect from the guys in waltham. I am sure they can come up with something. Aaron's approach seems to be that if we make it hard enough to accomplish something, then you'll have to think about it harder. I disagree. I think it will result in a that-can't-be-done attitude and so it won't get done...at least not properly.

Putting a number dimension and the word varies implies that that the variable will still be close to the number shown. That is not even close to the case in several of the applications for which I use this. I think it would end up confusing people even more. I just put an opaque text note over the number now, but I hate that...very un-revitish.

Like I said, give us an option to override, but make the dimension red or soemthing so it is clear that it is not displaying the auto-generated distance dimension.

[aggockel50321]

Like I said, give us an option to override, but make the dimension red or soemthing so it is clear that it is not displaying the auto-generated distance dimension.

I'll do that when I go out to field verify stuff. I create a new dimension style & change it's color to something that stands out, i.e. red for critical and green for "check if you have time".

Works pretty good.

[bclarch]

Even though I am a strong advocate of true and accurate dimensions, there definately are instances where overrides are needed. I support the idea of an "annotation style" dimension. It should have a different on-screen color as a reminder to the draftsperson. It should also attach to the relevant geometry and flex with changes like the standard dimensions.

[Allen Lacy]

Why not create an annotation family that will act as a dimension for such occasions?

[Scott D Davis]

Just talking out loud here, throwing out some ideas:

if you had a situation that a dimension varied greatly from the actual placed dimension, maybe it needs to read something like:

6'-0" (VARIES 2'-0" TO 15'-0")

Which would mean 'at this point the object is 6'-0", but also falls within this range'

[gregcashen]

That would work well for most cases, but it is an awfule lot of text to put vertically in a detail, for example. I use this in foundation details all the time, and the dimensions may vary from 2"-6"; it is really important to be able to fit a note that says VARIES... into the tight space of a our detail layout. Again, I appreciate that the workaround works, but I think it should just be done right. As we all expect it.

While I'm at it, have I mentioned lately how important it is to have a weld symbol annotation?

[Scott Hopkins]

Here is an idea. What if when you clicked the element properties box of a dimension, one of the available instance parameters was an override toggle that gave you several options to replace the given dimension distance. These options might be "Varies" "Verify in Field" "Verify with Architect". There might even be a customizable one that was just a little bit difficult to set so that some nitwit wouldn't change it to 7'-6”. :roll:

[gregcashen]

Yes...I could see a text file that you had to manually enter the available options for the pull-down, so that if you wanted to override a number dimension, it would be a pain. I still think that anything that is overridden should be a different color on the screen...blue, maybe, like the heads of levels, elevs, sections, etc.

[Tibor]

Dimension override along the lines that Scott suggests, and using different color for overridden stuff are both very good ideas.

[PaulB]

I don't know that changing the colour of the said dimensions is going to work, after all the drawings are going to a builder, usually in printed format, and not everyone has the luxury of a colour printer, photocopier, fax. etc.

[gregcashen]

The point is not for the contractor to see it in a different color...in fact, that doesn't matter, as he should be looking at the notes and dimensions with equal scrutiny. The point is for the designer/drafter to be able, at a glance, to see that he has an overriden dimension and if a distance dimension appears in blue, then he will know that it is overridden and may force himself to check to see if the overriden value makes sense or not. As for text notes on the dimension, it will just be a visual reminder that the note is part of the dimension.

[Chad Smith]

I too would like a dim override.
When doing multiple rows of dimensions it sometimes gets a bit hard to find what dimensions are referenced to which objects.

I'd mainly use the overrides to list rooms. Dimension above line, room under line.

e.g. 5700
/-----------------------/
(Living Room)

Actually, It would be nice if you could link a dim override to an annotation family. So I could link it to a Room Tag. 8)