Elevation Marker

[STHRevit]

Does anybody know how to get rid of the little reference marker that is associated with the elevation symbol.
I have also tried to make a new elevation tag, but i cant find an elevation template to begin with.

Any suggestions?

[Justin Marchiel]

sorry which part of the elevation symbol dont you want?

to access the tag settings go to setting->view tags-> elevations. this is the only location you can change the elevation symbol. there is no way to make the symbol custom at this point (other then the options that are presented).

Justin

[kathy71046]

if you find the marker in the project browser, you can enter edit from there and save as a new name, then reload.

[iru69]

@ Andrew: Do you mean the Level marker? If so, you want the "Level Head" template.

If not, you might need to post an image of what you're referring to.

[mtyp]

Elevation Markers are not editable beyond what you can find in the Settings-->View Tags-->Elevation Tags

A workaround is to create and section tag to your own like and use that for your elevations (stretching the tail to hide it).

2nd Q - no way to change the tick or yes/no to a check box (sometimes called radio button)

[sgoodmansen]

Elevation Markers are not editable beyond what you can find in the Settings-->View Tags-->Elevation Tags

A workaround is to create and section tag to your own like and use that for your elevations (stretching the tail to hide it).

2nd Q - no way to change the tick or yes/no to a check box (sometimes called radio button)


thanks for the workaround, I'll have to try that. That one tag is the ugliest thing ever. Using a Section tag should help a lot.

Hopefully one day Autodesk will allow us to customize those kind of tags. We modified all of our standard symbols in AutoCAD to look stylized with our logo. Revit is a hard sell to my bosses when I can't make Revit drawings look as nice as our AutoCAD drawings. For them the look of our drawings on output is a very high priority and arguing the benefits of Revit is tougher when they learn they are sacrificing their style for it.

[chodosh]

While I completely understand and appreciate your perspective and how hard it is to sell a product that cannot match your company standards, it is important to note that the symbols in Revit are based on National CAD Standards, so while not graphically 'stylistic' or unique, ADSK has intentionally made them follow this standard in order to be more universally acceptable.

[Edit: <gulp> yes, I've sat in front of managers and said that verbatim and watched eyes roll and man, I've squirmed in my seat a lot defending that statement... as true as it is, it ain't well received!]

-LC

[sgoodmansen]

While I completely understand and appreciate your perspective and how hard it is to sell a product that cannot match your company standards, it is important to note that the symbols in Revit are based on National CAD Standards, so while not graphically 'stylistic' or unique, ADSK has intentionally made them follow this standard in order to be more universally acceptable.

[Edit: <gulp> yes, I've sat in front of managers and said that verbatim and watched eyes roll and man, I've squirmed in my seat a lot defending that statement... as true as it is, it ain't well received!]

-LC

Really that ugly thing is part of the NCS? I've never seen that symbol in use before.

NCS or not, Autodesk should be supporting local standards before cramming National standards down our throats. I'm surprised this issue wasn't on the top of the wishlist submission.

[chodosh]

Someone please correct me if I am wrong about NCS here, I know there are a few other threads where others have bemoaned the elevation markers, etc. where this is discussed...

Like here:
http://www.forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=48332&highlight=elevation+symbols&page=7

& It has been submitted to the wish lists, I am sure more than once. Check the date on this: http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=9396

[chodosh]

Autodesk should be supporting local standards

When you say "local," what do you mean?

[sgoodmansen]

Perhaps local wasn't the right term. Local for me is my own Office CAD standards or my clients CAD standards be it a corpoation, branch of the military, or some other entity. Flexibility is what is needed, and thats my big concern about Revit right now. If I can't produce document to the standard I was hired to create documents in, then Revit isn't all that helpful to me.

I saw that thread and I'm amazed Autodesk still hasn't done anything about this. Normally Autodesk is very good about giving us flexibility. Revit feels like a straitjacket.

[chodosh]

Gotcha, local graphic standards. I think most of us agree with you about improving the flexibility to accomodate graphic standards, but at the same time, looking at the other capabilities of Revit for managing data, I guess I've put this on the back burner on my list of things I wish would change. I don't think I am alone in that. However, that said, I will readily admit that it is frustrating to market Revit internally when the smallest expectation if left unmet can cloud the potential of everyone embracing the software, and not every client is happy with AIA or NCS standards (ahem, even those that claim they follow them:?).

[sgoodmansen]

Being a new Revit user, I have to say I am astounded with the power of Revit. The tiny portion I'm complaining about is also important however. It seems every Revit user I talk to has decided its not a big issue and they would rather make excuses for Revit's one ugly side rather than push Autodesk to change it. Seriously if Autodesk gave us just a little bit more flexibility on that one family type, the same as they have on all their other family types than Revit would be nearly perfect.

[STHRevit]

Interesting thred.
I have attahced an image of the issue I was first referring to.
Again, is there any way to get rid of this, or at least hide it some way?

[Rick Houle]

The only way i can think to hide that little dash would be to blot it out with a "symbol" that contains a white fill...
But i would think there was another way to achieve what you are ultimately trying to accomplish with the tool, not sure what your motive is for hiding the little placeholder.

[Andre Carvalho]

Interesting thred.
I have attahced an image of the issue I was first referring to.
Again, is there any way to get rid of this, or at least hide it some way?

Go to Settings > View tags > Elevation tags > Make sure the type is Circle > Change text position to "Inside".

Andre Carvalho

[STHRevit]

Thanks Andre,

As i feared, by adjusting this setting, the text is still visible.
What I really want to do is turn it off completely.
It seems I will have to make a new marker.

Thanks again.

[Andre Carvalho]

Thanks Andre,

As i feared, by adjusting this setting, the text is still visible.
What I really want to do is turn it off completely.
It seems I will have to make a new marker.

Thanks again.

That's weird. I just tried again and adjusting the settings I've mentioned, the text goes away.

See attached image.

Andre Carvalho

[chodosh]

It's most likely occulded if set to Inside. If you change the settings to be not filled, it will display it's location.

[STHRevit]

Yeah, Thats the issue we are having.
It seems to vanish, but does not really. It's ok fir some numbers, it hides completely, but others show, like number 2 and 3.

Why can't we make our own elevation markers!!!!!!

[sgoodmansen]

While I completely understand and appreciate your perspective and how hard it is to sell a product that cannot match your company standards, it is important to note that the symbols in Revit are based on National CAD Standards, so while not graphically 'stylistic' or unique, ADSK has intentionally made them follow this standard in order to be more universally acceptable.

[Edit: <gulp> yes, I've sat in front of managers and said that verbatim and watched eyes roll and man, I've squirmed in my seat a lot defending that statement... as true as it is, it ain't well received!]

-LC


Sorry to dig up an old thread, but I just got a copy of the NationalCAD Standard 4.0 and that ugly elevation tag is definitely not from the NCS.

When is Autodesk going to make Revit be able to conform to the National Cad Standard? you'd think that would be a high priority for them. Until then I'm forced to use a section mark for Exterior Elevation symbols.

[kathy71046]

So, now that it's been concluded that the elevation tag in revit is definately incorrect, how many years till we can actually get the elevation number inside the marker, and the page it's going to being a reference rather than the focus of the tag?

I was rather shocked at not being able to change the tag.

[clog boy]

There's yet another question: while Revit will be mainly used to create CD's, when are drafters going to realise that CAD as we know it is not going to last for the greater part of this century?

As it is today, we as an office do not show the Elevation symbol on documents. Rather we use clear view titles for the elevation views themselves. We do show and have adapted the Section head and tail where applicable.

So in my opinion the proper counter question should be: how long before CAD standards catch up with reality or go the way of the dodo?

This is not to say we wouldn't like or haven't liked to change certain symbols, such as dimension arrows. We do realise that conforming to standards for standard's sake blocks progress. Clearly the Adesk devvies have realised that too, and are easing us into a new era I hope of efficient design and reliable communication standards.

[sgoodmansen]

So, now that it's been concluded that the elevation tag in revit is definately incorrect, how many years till we can actually get the elevation number inside the marker, and the page it's going to being a reference rather than the focus of the tag?

I was rather shocked at not being able to change the tag.

I just submitted a wishlist item for this, however I tried to submit a similar wishlist request for this during the past submission cycle and it never got added. If it doesn't show up this time I'd like to know why not. This is a valid wish that should have a chance of being viewed by Autodesk employees.

[saeborne]

Really that ugly thing is part of the NCS? I've never seen that symbol in use before.

NCS or not, Autodesk should be supporting local standards before cramming National standards down our throats. I'm surprised this issue wasn't on the top of the wishlist submission.

Yes. The Round Revit Elevation Tag is definitely in the US National CAD Standards. At least I'm sure it's in Version 3.1.

The elevation tag with "side points" is also in the NCS.

Edit...

Sorry to dig up an old thread, but I just got a copy of the NationalCAD Standard 4.0 and that ugly elevation tag is definitely not from the NCS.

When is Autodesk going to make Revit be able to conform to the National Cad Standard? you'd think that would be a high priority for them. Until then I'm forced to use a section mark for Exterior Elevation symbols.


That's interesting. Because it used to be in NCS V3.1. I'll scan and post in a few.
So if I understand correctly, it's NCS that has deviated, not Autodesk.

[sgoodmansen]

Yes. The Round Revit Elevation Tag is definitely in the US National CAD Standards. At least I'm sure it's in Version 3.1.

The elevation tag with "side points" is also in the NCS.

Edit...



That's interesting. Because it used to be in NCS V3.1. I'll scan and post in a few.
So if I understand correctly, it's NCS that has deviated, not Autodesk.

Interesting, I don't have a copy of NCS version 3.1. I'd love to see it.

[Scott Womack]

I just submitted a wishlist item for this, however I tried to submit a similar wishlist request for this during the past submission cycle and it never got added. If it doesn't show up this time I'd like to know why not. This is a valid wish that should have a chance of being viewed by Autodesk employees.

It is possible that in one of the last couple of voting cycles, there already was a wish similar. If it does not make the cut to the final voting cycle before AU next year, it might have to wait a year to get voted on again. Technically, there will end up being a "Top Ten" wishlist via the voting, that gets turned over to Autodesk Officially.

[kathy71046]

I just submitted a wishlist item for this, however I tried to submit a similar wishlist request for this during the past submission cycle and it never got added. If it doesn't show up this time I'd like to know why not. This is a valid wish that should have a chance of being viewed by Autodesk employees.

My wishlist items took 6-8 months to be approved, so maybe they just dropped the ones that hadn't gotten through submission when the new cycle started.

Clog Boy: I appreciate your position, and while it works with architectural drawings, with structurals you really do need the to/from references in the elevation tags.

Elevation on Grid X still needs a direction, wheras the arrow gives that without any confusion.

[STHRevit]

The to/from function of elevation markers are fairly important on architectural drawings and yes you can work artound it but why take the risk?

We take the positon of making things as simple and clear as possible, not all people who read our drawings on site have a full knowledge of the project, although they should, reality dictates that they simply don't.

Standards or not, the priority should be that we are able to create our own or modify the suplied one. Such a large part of Revit is outstanding however it's the little things that bring it back to the pack, like elevation markers, stairs, rails etc etc

[saeborne]

Ok... This attachment shows the Elevation Tags as illustrated in NCS 3.1. It appears that I was slightly mistaken.

The "Interior, Multiple View" elevation tag (4th one down) is pretty darn close to Revit's out-of-the-box standards.

The "Interior, Single View" tag (top one) is similar, but not exactly the same... The drawing number is in the circle, not out of the circle. Plus it's specifically for interior elevations, not exterior.

---


While I completely understand and appreciate your perspective and how hard it is to sell a product that cannot match your company standards, it is important to note that the symbols in Revit are based on National CAD Standards, so while not graphically 'stylistic' or unique, ADSK has intentionally made them follow this standard in order to be more universally acceptable.

[Edit: <gulp> yes, I've sat in front of managers and said that verbatim and watched eyes roll and man, I've squirmed in my seat a lot defending that statement... as true as it is, it ain't well received!]

I've been in similar conversations about the elevation tag. Whenever people give me flack about it, I simply remind them that they are welcome to go back to manually coordinating all drawing tags in a project. Have at it. Go nuts. It usually quiets them down.

[greg.mcdowell]

Not only is the symbol in the NCS (as you discovered) but it's bigger than what is included OTB in Revit. I know I'm odd man out on this but I actually like the symbol larger. The NCS sheet numbers fit a lot better.

[jeff.young]

From a structural perspective, most symbols in RS are too large and hard to fit on plans. I would be ok with the elevation tag if the detail number was inside with the sheet number. Autodesk should allow all of all of these to be changed - not sure why this is such a problem for them.