Elevation Tag Revit 2009

[Richard Lopez]

This is real Basic .I am having a brain freeze. I what to have a Elevation tag that Reference another view and I what one that read SIM and the other to Read OPP. I have attached image and a revit file .

[patricks]

For some reason it will only say Sim, even if you change the label to be something else.

Yet another bug, and this time it's on a non-editable system family so there's not a thing we can do about it.

I would just type Opp in a matching size and font and place it next to the Sim label on one tag.

[Richard Lopez]

That is a bummer but I am glad to here it is not me. I new I was going threw the correct procedures in setting this up.

Thanks

[sgoodmansen]

that uneditable system family is very big pain point for me at the moment. When is Autodesk going to give us the ability to edit the tag?

[patricks]

I don't care about editing the tag. We do not have the need to "match" any other sort of elevation tag convention. I just chalk it up to "doing it the Revit way" instead of forcing it to work a different way.

But we really do need to be able to have tags with different text beside the view number.

[cdatechguy]

Yeah, we have the same issue with the elevation tags, both interior and exterior ones....

[Scott Womack]

For some reason it will only say Sim, even if you change the label to be something else.

Yet another bug, and this time it's on a non-editable system family so there's not a thing we can do about it.

I would just type Opp in a matching size and font and place it next to the Sim label on one tag.

The SIM, or other text is stored in the View information it self. You'll have to make another elevation "category" to get this to change. A single view can only have one "piece" of text, or be blank. You cannot have both sim, and Opp Hand without having two different views.

[patricks]

It's still ridiculous because there are so many times when you have multiple instances referring back to a similar view. Some are similar, some are opposite, etc.

[Scott Womack]

It's still ridiculous because there are so many times when you have multiple instances referring back to a similar view. Some are similar, some are opposite, etc.

Agreed, I was taught to use those designations, back in the dark ages when we drew projects by hand on vellum. But just to play devil's advocate, is'nt Opposite Hand also Similar to the view shown? I realize opposite hand is "reversed", and that information has some value, but when it is similar, but not exact, we don't necessarrily descibe those differences. If the contractor/supplier can't tell that "SIM" can also mean opposite hand, that will be the least of the problems you'll have on that job.

[patricks]

I suppose... but with the labor we have around here, I still like to put OPP text beside or below the SIM on an elevation tag if it is referring to a mirror image of the referenced view. At least just to cover my rear. :)

[Mike Sealander]

Sim is misleading when the a drafting detail is not simply similar, but accurate. In which case, "sim" just begs the question, what are the differences between the "sim' detail and its referent?
I'd like to see "Typ", as well as "Sim" and "Opp hand".

[greg.mcdowell]

It is possible to have other words (or no words) but it requires seperate definitions of the elevation tag family - totally doable

[mthurnauer]

I do use the Sim and Opp Hand often as well, but I also find with the ease of generating views in Revit, why not just make more real views rather than using the Sim or Opp? I say that because maybe the views are opposite hand and then at some point one elevation changes slightly and they are no longer truly mirror images. When you don't have to hand draft it or draw it in 2d and we are moving toward being paperless, why screw around with tricks that are related to what we used to do to conserve paper space?

[Steve_Stafford]

This used to work nicely and someone at the "factory" determined is should be the way it is today, "wrong". It should be an instance parameter so we can provide the appropriate term.

I find that some firms remove the value and add text. This bothers me because once upon a time we could trust every last annotation for views in the project to be correct. When Revit added the ability to simply reference a view that was already done or a drafting view it introduced the possibility of user error while selecting the view to reference from the potentially very long list of views.

The views that show SIM, OPP or TYP etc are views that cannot be trusted implicitly because the user could choose a door jamb detail as the reference when they meant to select a wall section. The only views we can completely trust are those that don't have those designations. If they are turned off/removed then we cannot trust ANY of the annotation because ANY of them could be a reference annotation versus a real one.

We've been telling them this for some time now...not sure what it will take to get them to fix it.

[nsinha73]

Why not Just DRAFT it like you used to? Revit does allow us edit system Families because there is a reason called 'Coordination'.

[ameave]

Bringing this old thread back to life.

Sim is partially overlapping the view number. Is there a way to move it?

Currently using Revit Arch 2009

Thanks.