Multiple views on one sheet

[dzatto]

I'm going for the record of mosts posts in a thread! Okay, another problem has arose (arisen?). Whatever. Anyway, here it is.
I have different constructs for finished floor and mezzanine. I created different view files for each for my reflective ceiling plan. I prefer to just use my own light blocks in the drawing, and don't use the actual reflective ceiling display. So, I created my sheet and realized that I have enough room to put both finished floor and mezzaning plans on one sheet, rather than having a mezzanine on one with a bunch of wasted space. So, when I drag the finished floor view, it's fine. As soon as I drag the mezzanine view, all exterior wall for both plans give the the red circles of doom, and there's even some really tiny circles of doom I've never seen before. Also, some of the walls change color. What gives? I checked it by opening one of the constructs, then overlaying the others in it and it was fine. It's only doing it in the sheet.

[Steve_Bennett]

Because you've got 2 files with walls in the same exact place is why you are getting the red circles of death. rcp's were designed to be placed in either the same construct as the floor plan or a separate file with the walls xrefd in as an overlay for reference.

[dzatto]

Because you've got 2 files with walls in the same exact place is why you are getting the red circles of death. rcp's were designed to be placed in either the same construct as the floor plan or a separate file with the walls xrefd in as an overlay for reference.
But they are on 2 different levels. They don't interfere with each other on my sections and elevation views. Shouldn't ACA realize that the walls are on different levels and place them accordingly?

As far as the RCP's, I really don't use them. I just take my floor plan construct with my light blocks in it. They aren't set up to display in the reflected view, and I'm not using ceiling grids. I just place them manually.

[Steve_Bennett]

Go to the sheet file and look at it in 3D. what do you see? either that or etransmit the sheet file and post here.

I understand what you are doing with the rcp's. What I meant was that they should all be done in constructs. Since you are placing them in views that might be part of the problem.

[dzatto]

Go to the sheet file and look at it in 3D. what do you see? either that or etransmit the sheet file and post here.

I understand what you are doing with the rcp's. What I meant was that they should all be done in constructs. Since you are placing them in views that might be part of the problem.
Okay, that's the problem. I'm still a little confused, though. Let me walk you through what I did again, I think I explained it wrong. I have 2 constructs, one for finished floor and one for mezzanine. They each have their own levels assigned. I put my spaces and light fixtures in my construct. I then created a view for each lighting plan. When I drag and drop the view into a sheet, all is well. But, as you mentioned, when I drag them both into the same sheet, the mezzanine plan is inserted at level 0 instead of at 9', which is causing the circles of death.

So, is there no way to combine views of different levels onto sheets? Will it always put it at a 0 elevation?

[stelthorst]

Hi Dan,

Are you creating named views within your view drawings? I have used multiple views on one sheet but I always create named views. When you drag a named view into a sheet a layer is created for that view. Then when you drag another named view in the first view layer is turned off in the new viewport.

I just wrote that and I'm confused :? but ultimately my question is do you use named views?

[dzatto]

Hi Dan,

Are you creating named views within your view drawings? I have used multiple views on one sheet but I always create named views. When you drag a named view into a sheet a layer is created for that view. Then when you drag another named view in the first view layer is turned off in the new viewport.

I just wrote that and I'm confused :? but ultimately my question is do you use named views?
Well, let me think. I'm pretty sure that's what I do. Basically, I create a view, dimension it, annotate it, all that good stuff. Then I right click in PN and choose "New Model Space View". Then it asks me for the name and scale. Then I do a pick window and it creates it and puts it in PN under the original view file. Then the new model space view is what I drag into my sheet.

[dzatto]

Okay Steve and Scott (and anyone else). I need help on this. As the pirate once said about the steering wheel in his pants "Arrrgh, it's drivin' me nuts!" Anyway, I can't figure out how to put multiple views on one sheet. When I look at it in 3D, the mezzanine level is inserted at a 0 elevation, which is screwing everything up. Here's the zip file. It's rather large. I hope you guys can figure this one out. I'm outta here for the weekend. Have a good one, hopefully talk to ya's on Monday.

[stelthorst]

Okay Steve and Scott (and anyone else). I need help on this. As the pirate once said about the steering wheel in his pants "Arrrgh, it's drivin' me nuts!" Anyway, I can't figure out how to put multiple views on one sheet. When I look at it in 3D, the mezzanine level is inserted at a 0 elevation, which is screwing everything up. Here's the zip file. It's rather large. I hope you guys can figure this one out. I'm outta here for the weekend. Have a good one, hopefully talk to ya's on Monday.

Hi Dan,

First, you can thank MBH for me taking the time to look at your files she had "girls night out" tonight and I was bored.

Now for the fun part, I took your files and created my own test project to see what would happen. I too could not get multiple levels on one sheet without getting interference symbols. I then created a view with both levels in it and it looked as I would have expected (ie with the mezzanine in the correct position.)

What I ended up doing was shifting the mezzanine level 100' east in the view drawing and this allowed me to create a multiple level sheet with no interference symbols.

Since I'm not an Architect I'm not sure if this is the solution although I have received many drawings from Architects that had done just that.

If you would like to see my test project PM me with your email address and I will send it to you. The e-transmit file is over 10 mB otherwise I would post it here.

Hope this helps,

BTW: Very nice work :)

[dzatto]

Hi Dan,

First, you can thank MBH for me taking the time to look at your files she had "girls night out" tonight and I was bored.

Now for the fun part, I took your files and created my own test project to see what would happen. I too could not get multiple levels on one sheet without getting interference symbols. I then created a view with both levels in it and it looked as I would have expected (ie with the mezzanine in the correct position.)

What I ended up doing was shifting the mezzanine level 100' east in the view drawing and this allowed me to create a multiple level sheet with no interference symbols.

Since I'm not an Architect I'm not sure if this is the solution although I have received many drawings from Architects that had done just that.

If you would like to see my test project PM me with your email address and I will send it to you. The e-transmit file is over 10 mB otherwise I would post it here.

Hope this helps,

BTW: Very nice work :)
Scott!! Well, first, thanks to your MUCH better half. Second, thanks to you for taking the time on the weekend to check it out.

I actually thought about doing the same thing. As a matter of fact, I was about to do it, then I had a realization. If I move the mezzanine part at all it will mess up all of my section and elevation files. Unless, of course, I duplicate it. But then updates will be a disaster, not to mention all of my schedules. There has to be a way to do this. I can't imagine Autodesk missing something this big. I'm sure it has something to do with a setting somewhere, but all my stuff is on the correct level, so I really don't know what it could be. :?

I guess, for now, I'm going to have to increase the scale to 1/4" and put each view on a separate sheet. That's not all bad, but it wastes paper and sure does look weird when a sheet is plotted with a whole bunch of blank space in it! Thanks again for trying to figure it out. At least now I know it's not just me! Isn't it wierd that the view with both levels in it stacks them appropriately? Maybe Steve will have some insight. Oh Steven......................

Oh, thanks for the compliment. :Oops: I try my best, sorta helps me keep my job!

[stelthorst]

Hi Dan,

You could always create your sections and elevations in new views. What you would do is run the section command in your floor plan but choose create a new section drawing (or something like that I don't have AMEP in front of me now) Then when you create the new section drawing pick the 1st floor and mezzanine constructs.

I actually think that is what the developers had in mind for PN.

[dzatto]

Hi Dan,

You could always create your sections and elevations in new views. What you would do is run the section command in your floor plan but choose create a new section drawing (or something like that I don't have AMEP in front of me now) Then when you create the new section drawing pick the 1st floor and mezzanine constructs.

I actually think that is what the developers had in mind for PN.
That's how I did it, but don't they have to have the same location in the drawing space relative to 0,0? Otherwise, won't the upper floor be 100' to the side?

[stelthorst]

That's how I did it, but don't they have to have the same location in the drawing space relative to 0,0? Otherwise, won't the upper floor be 100' to the side?

Only if you apply your offset to your construct. I'm suggesting apply the offset to your mezzanine plan view drawing. This way your section view will not have the offset applied only the one view drawing.

[dzatto]

Only if you apply your offset to your construct. I'm suggesting apply the offset to your mezzanine plan view drawing. This way your section view will not have the offset applied only the one view drawing.
OOOOOOhhhhhhhhh okay. That makes sense, but one question comes to mind. This may not happen, I'll see tomorrow, but if I move it in the view, the Xref will know where I moved it to upon reloading, right? I mean, I won't have to move it every time it is updated, will I?

[stelthorst]

OOOOOOhhhhhhhhh okay. That makes sense, but one question comes to mind. This may not happen, I'll see tomorrow, but if I move it in the view, the Xref will know where I moved it to upon reloading, right? I mean, I won't have to move it every time it is updated, will I?

Once you move it. The insertion point x value will be at 100' (or however far you move it) and you shouldn't have to mess with it after the initial move.

[dzatto]

Once you move it. The insertion point x value will be at 100' (or however far you move it) and you shouldn't have to mess with it after the initial move.
Well, that didn't work because I have some spanning constructs. Once I moved the top part over, the constructs don't line up because they can't be Xref'd into the plan twice. Once for each floor. I called my reseller, and he said I needed to set up one view with both levels in it. Then do a named view for each level, but that didn't work either. It won't let me have 2 named views with different things in them. It keeps overwriting both named views so they look the same. Back to the drawing board......................

[stelthorst]

Well, that didn't work because I have some spanning constructs. Once I moved the top part over, the constructs don't line up because they can't be Xref'd into the plan twice. Once for each floor. I called my reseller, and he said I needed to set up one view with both levels in it. Then do a named view for each level, but that didn't work either. It won't let me have 2 named views with different things in them. It keeps overwriting both named views so they look the same. Back to the drawing board......................

Hmmm. Let me play with it some more. As soon as I can get back into my house (evacuated due to the fires out here) I'll play with the test project I created.

It sure seems like it should be fairly simple. Of course, I've spent many a day on "10 minute" projects.

[dzatto]

Hmmm. Let me play with it some more. As soon as I can get back into my house (evacuated due to the fires out here) I'll play with the test project I created.

It sure seems like it should be fairly simple. Of course, I've spent many a day on "10 minute" projects.
I sure do appreciate it. My reseller told me it should work, so I'm gonna give it another go tomorrow as well.

Damn those Santa Ana winds!! I used to live in San Bernadino (actually Rialto), so I feel for ya!

[dkoch]

I sure do appreciate it. My reseller told me it should work, so I'm gonna give it another go tomorrow as well.

Damn those Santa Ana winds!! I used to live in San Bernadino (actually Rialto), so I feel for ya!
DISCLAIMER: I do not use PN at work, so the following is based on reading too many posts and minor experimentation of my own. I also confess to not have read and fully integrated every word previously posted in this thread, so please excuse any repetition.

My understanding of the intended PN workflow would be to create your models, one floor/section at a time, in Elements (repeating stuff) and Constructs. These are then combined, as needed, in View files. Create as many separate View files as you need; you may be able to get "double duty" out of one View File, but in general, especially for floor plans, you would probably want a separate View file for each separate "plan" in your drawing set - the annotation on each would be unique, at the very least. Named views within the View files are then dragged to Sheet files. This is where you would assemble your two plans on one sheet, and, yes, the default would be to have the views overlap and, if you have cleanups enabled across external references, you will have cleanup problems. Either disable cleanups across external references -OR- offset the external reference(s) for one of your views to get it to clear the graphics of the other, then adjust the Layout Viewport accordingly.

[dzatto]

DISCLAIMER: I do not use PN at work, so the following is based on reading too many posts and minor experimentation of my own. I also confess to not have read and fully integrated every word previously posted in this thread, so please excuse any repetition.

My understanding of the intended PN workflow would be to create your models, one floor/section at a time, in Elements (repeating stuff) and Constructs. These are then combined, as needed, in View files. Create as many separate View files as you need; you may be able to get "double duty" out of one View File, but in general, especially for floor plans, you would probably want a separate View file for each separate "plan" in your drawing set - the annotation on each would be unique, at the very least. Named views within the View files are then dragged to Sheet files. This is where you would assemble your two plans on one sheet, and, yes, the default would be to have the views overlap and, if you have cleanups enabled across external references, you will have cleanup problems. Either disable cleanups across external references -OR- offset the external reference(s) for one of your views to get it to clear the graphics of the other, then adjust the Layout Viewport accordingly.
How do I disable cleanups across Xref's? That sound like it is exactly what I need. We've discussed moving the Xref over in a view file, but then I'd have to slide all other xref's in the view over, and it just seemed like it could get messy. Oh, and it seems to mess up any spanning constructs, because when I insert the views in my sheet, the spanning construct only xref's once, so it will either line up with the floor plan (original coordinates), or the 2nd floor (moved over). Maybe I did it wrong, but that's what happened to me!

[dzatto]

Now that I think about it, I don't think that turning off the cleanups across Xref's will work, unless I can choose which xref's clean and which don't. I have separate drawings for interior and exterior, and they need to clean up in the views.

[dzatto]

Okay, my reseller is telling me to bring in both levels into the same view, then just unload whatever levels I don't need to create multiple named views from one view file. ACA won't let me do it. It keeps making both named view identical, so I can only have one level or the other. Am I doing something wrong, or is that the way it's supposed to be? It let's me have multiple named views with sections and elevations, but I think that's because each view is a separate 2D drawing.

I wound up just inserting them both in the sheet, then moving the upper level over 100', rather than doing it in the view. I gues it really doesn't matter, does it?

[vsem]

Be sure that the cleanup group definitions have the "allow wall celanup between host drawing and x ref drawings" UNchecked. ?

[dboggs]

I am having the same problem and it is frustrating me also. I have posted a question for the same situation and am waiting for a response. In the mean time, I have figured out a workaround that is ok. In model space for the sheet move the mezzanine 100’ up and then go into the viewport and adjust the view up 100’ using “–pan” command. I tested this process and it worked for me, and because you are only moving an xref in the sheet it will not affect any of your plans, elevations, or sections.

This solution works ok but if you want to develop a sheet for enlarged plans, like stair plans for a 10 level building, you need to spend time to moving plans around and updating all of the viewports. I also think Autodesk must have some kind of plan for this, but I haven’t found it yet.

[dboggs]

I found a better workaround than the one I mentioned above thanks to a user in another forum. Go into model space for the sheet and move the mezzanine plan in the Z elevations 1". Then close and reopen the file; all of the red circles of death should be gone. Test either workaround and let me know. Still looking for a better solution.

[dzatto]

I found a better workaround than the one I mentioned above thanks to a user in another forum. Go into model space for the sheet and move the mezzanine plan in the Z elevations 1". Then close and reopen the file; all of the red circles of death should be gone. Test either workaround and let me know. Still looking for a better solution.
Thanks dboggs, but the bug was fixed in 2009. I upgraded as soon as it came out, and will be installing 2010 if my IT guy ever gets the new network online.