Yes / No Parameters

[nsinha73]

Ok guys....
I am making an ADA compliant urinal.....Which has to show a 30"X48" Clear Space on Plan if it is an Accessible Urinal.
So I am making one urinal with 2 types. If "Standard Type" is selected then ok...but if "ADA" selected, my Urinal drops to 17" (Lip Height from Floor) and Clear space becomes Visible.
I am brainstorming on this...but also seek your input as you might have already approached this.
Any formulas out there which can control visibilities?

Thanks in advance

[aaronrumple]

Ok guys....
I am making an ADA compliant urinal.....Which has to show a 30"X48" Clear Space on Plan if it is an Accessible Urinal.
So I am making one urinal with 2 types. If "Standard Type" is selected then ok...but if "ADA" selected, my Urinal drops to 17" (Lip Height from Floor) and Clear space becomes Visible.
I am brainstorming on this...but also seek your input as you might have already approached this.
Any formulas out there which can control visibilities?

Thanks in advance
Yes/No can be tied to the object visibility. Just look at the little button next to the Visibility property in the object's property dialog.

[ford347]

Not to throw confusion in the mix, but I think I heard a method here in the forums that was a good idea in my opinion. Load a mass object into your ADA family, a mass void. Have this mass void tie to dimension properties and ref planes in your ADA family and use the ADA clearances as your extents for this mass. This way you can run an interference check in your project against these doors to see if anything is interferring with these ADA clearances. I haven't done it yet, but I thought it was a good idea, makes doing the check on all your ADA items in a large project easy. If you do a search, I'm sure you'll find something if you're interested.

Josh

[nsinha73]

Thanks guys.....Really appreciate your input...however I was wondering if the "Yes/No" can be toggled if a condition is met...

Thanks once again for the Masses technique....I will incorporate into my ADA Components

[robert.manna]

Ford347 your are correct, various people, inlcuding myself have talked about using masses for interference checking.

The simple answer is yes, yes/no parameters can be driven by a conditional evualtion (this is documented fairly well in the help section that is availble from the family types dialog box). So if your dimension(s) change per type, you should be able to evaluate the dimensional change to affect visibility of objects.

If you decide to use inteference checking geometry I reccomend putting in on its own subcategory and providing a visibility control that is off by default.

-R

[dbaldacchino]

I don't see a reason for conditional formulas for what you're doing. All you need is to create family types and just assign the appropriate visibility for each type (check/uncheck the Yes/No parameter you assign in the Family Types). The same applies for dimensions....for ADA make your Height parameter = 17", and for the Non-ADA Type make the Height = 20" (ex).

[ashwin]

I don't see a reason for conditional formulas for what you're doing. All you need is to create family types and just assign the appropriate visibility for each type (check/uncheck the Yes/No parameter you assign in the Family Types). The same applies for dimensions....for ADA make your Height parameter = 17", and for the Non-ADA Type make the Height = 20" (ex).
David:

Do you think Number instead of Length as a Parameter would be more appropriate, if this dims. are not going to change?

[dbaldacchino]

Ashwin, in this case, if you want to drive actual elements through a labeled dimension, you HAVE to use a Length parameter.

[robert.manna]

I don't see a reason for conditional formulas for what you're doing. All you need is to create family types and just assign the appropriate visibility for each type (check/uncheck the Yes/No parameter you assign in the Family Types). The same applies for dimensions....for ADA make your Height parameter = 17", and for the Non-ADA Type make the Height = 20" (ex).
I agree, you don't need/have to use a forumla here. However, if you know that you always want the visibility of the "item" conditional based on dimensions, then, if you use the formula to drive visiblity you don't have to worry about changing the visibility parameter as well. Now, if you want to have a disucssion about whether or not that is too much automation, I'm perfectly willing to embrace that. I agree that at a certain point, just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

-R

[mibzim]

I would also have to agree - formulae tend to slow down families when loaded into a project, although they do have your uses. Decide whether the benefits offered by formulae are worth the related slowdown.