Door Swing Less than 90 degrees?

[Archimac]

I can't figure out how to get a door to show less than a 90 degree swing
in plan. I know it must be simple as it is in ADT, but I can't seem to find
the switch.

Thanks

[BomberAIA]

Check out the doors on Rugi.org site. You can access the site under Families on this site. The door you're looking for is there.

[Scott D Davis]

There are doors available that have a swing parameter built into them, so you can set the degrees of opening. I just looked, and I can't find any on my system, but someone here will post one for you, or they are available at www.RUGI.org/download.htm (http://www.RUGI.org/download.htm), and probably at www.revitcity.com (http://www.revitcity.com/)

[Henry D]

I posted these detailed instructions on how to do adjustable door swings in the tips and tricks forum a while back:

http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=2367&highlight=door+swings

[Archimac]

Looks like it is more complicated than I thought. Thanks for the links. The Rugi site has some great content!:-D

[Scott D Davis]

All of that great content is being ported to AUGI in the Exchange (http://www.augi.com/exchange/default.asp)

It will be an incredible resource! Coming Soon!

[JamesVan]

I have a couple of these families. Posted here.

[rhys]

All of that great content is being ported to AUGI in the Exchange (http://www.augi.com/exchange/default.asp)

It will be an incredible resource! Coming Soon!
But when,oh when?

[m_cahoon14336]

Ditto to Rhys!

[mlgatzke]

The problem is that, normally, you want the 3D objects to remain in the closed position and the plan elements to appear in the open position (at the angle you desire). This is done by creating 3D objects that are not visible in plan or when cut through in plan. Then you use symbolic lines for the plan representations. I always suggest that you build your symbolic representation at an angle to avoid accidentally setting relationships with any RefPlanes or other objects. Then, when the symbolic representation of the door is complete, you move it into position (using the object-snaps). Also makiing sure that the hinge location of the door sits at the intersection of two RefPlanes. Finally, you place an angular dimension from one of the hinge RefPlanes to the exterior surface of the door panel and give it an instance based parameter for the swing angle. This should do it.

Yes, it is a little complex. However, it isn't anything that you couldn't get a grip on with a little practice.

I've begun to create my door assembly families with nested families. This allows me to control the door and sidelight panels better. You can then set up a visibility parameter that will allow the visibility of the nested families to react to the visibility settings in the overall family.

I've attached a family for you to reverse engineer to better understand (only the composite, not the separate nested families). However, one warning, this family was created for a client that only uses one assembly size. So, I didn't have to be too careful about how the door and sidelight widths reacted at different width and height settings. They work, but not in a way that I would prefer if this was a concern.

Take care and good luck. It's allot of fun when you get the swing of it.

[Steve_Stafford]

I too have been enjoying nested parts to assemble families. I recently even went so far as to use a nested 2d symbolic plan rectangle for the door panel. It's much easier to constrain it and change an angle than the "normal" way.

[jbalding48677]

But when,oh when?

That is very difficult to pin down. It is a relatively complex thing that we are pushing for and most of the time is volunteer time so is spotty at best.

I can say this, the RUGI content (most of it) has been ported over and is being prepared for review and posting. Those families will be ready for download first. The next task is to get the submittal page going, it is mostly there. Once those are finished and running smoothly we will turn our attention to other content; fill patterns, background images, template files, etc.

Like Scott said it is going to be a nice site, and hopfully worth the wait.

Hope that helps tide you over -

[Scott Hopkins]

James,

Just curious - where did you get those swing doors that you posted? I created those a while back and I don't recall ever posting them anywhere. I gave a few copies out to friends. I am just surprised that they that they traveled so fast on the Web.

[JamesVan]

James,

Just curious - where did you get those swing doors that you posted? I created those a while back and I don't recall ever posting them anywhere. I gave a few copies out to friends. I am just surprised that they that they traveled so fast on the Web.
Must have been either RUGI or RevitCity. You never posted them to Zoog?

[mlgatzke]

I recently even went so far as to use a nested 2d symbolic plan rectangle for the door panel. It's much easier to constrain it and change an angle than the "normal" way.
Oooooo, I like that. I never thought about doing it that way. I think I'm going to steal that before you apply for a copyright. Can you still attach the plan swing arc to it? Or does the arc have to be another nested family?

[Archimac]

I hear the discussion by all the long time users but wonder why it is not a simple percent open setting with all doors like in ADT? I have not tackled creating families and sure it will be a while before I learn Revit well with it's out of the box content. It does not make sence to have such complexity to novices like me. Showing doors at less than 90 degrees in case of plan conflicts should be drafting 101.

I really think that the next verison should ship with these adjustable swings by default in the properties panel.

[Phillip Miller]

I agree with Aquav. Why is this so hard? I use it every day in ADT and it is so simple. I thought Revit was easy to use. Doesn't sound so easy to me!

[Scott D Davis]

We couldn't have made it any easier for you. Download the doors provided and use them! Don't even start telling us how simple ADT is....

And, quite honestly, its not that hard to do in the family editor. Yes, the family editor is one of the more advanced aspects of Revit, but it is also necessary to learn it. Don't put it off, thinking its too difficult to tackle, jump in and learn it!

[Archimac]

Sorry, I don't want to make it seem like I am longing for ADT. It is just a few things that disappoint me and I get frustrated. But, overall the program is so much more fun and powerful. ADT is complex overall with a just few neat buttons.

I feel like I have a tool that enhances my daily pursuit of architecture.

[muttlieb]

I feel like I have a tool that enhances my daily pursuit of architecture.

Great line aquav, that quote should be used in Autodesk's Revit marketing. And I totally agree with you. I am just now making the switch from ADT and I feel like I can focus so much more on design since so much of the menial CAD tasks are handled so well by Revit.

[Steve Cashman]

I love Revit and I personally want to see it take over the AE world. Even though the door swing is a little issue, it's one that should be in all the door families distributed with Revit allowing the swing to be adjusted from 0 to 180 degrees or whatever. Architects are strange at times and little things like this can mean a lot to them/us. It seems so easy to make it a default part of Revit that I think it should. Most architects are not computer people. I have inherent computer capabilities, but a lot of talented architects I hire don't have those abilities. It's a little thing that would get a lot of bang for the development buck - IMHO.

[Steve_Stafford]

Can you still attach the plan swing arc to it? I put the arc in the plan symbol family too. You can't set the swing langle to less than 5 degrees however. Revit will draw the arc as a circle if you do since it can't turn off the symbolic arc. But it will go from 5-180 degrees nicely. I haven't used a door with a swing of less than 90 degrees in months, guess I've been lucky to work only on new projects lately?

[Archimac]

Architects are strange at times and little things like this can mean a lot to them/us. It seems so easy to make it a default part of Revit that I think it should. Most architects are not computer people.
Steve hit the nail on the head. If we want Revit to take over the AEC world then it has to become more architect friendly. Look how the ipod/itunes has made electronic music files approachable for the non computer people. It's all about great interface design.