Equipment Tag Visibility Parameters

[oskyaqui]

Hello,

I am creating a Specialty Equipment Tag, the tag will show the EQUIPMENT NAME and EQUIPMENT NUMBER, but we also need to identify who supplies and install the equipment.

The way we do it in AutoCAD is enclosing the EQUIPMENT NUMBER in a box, this box can have 3 different shapes depending on who supplies and install the equipment.
Please see PDF attached for better understanding.

In the equipment family we have a parameter named Provision / Installation that defines who supply-install the equipment.

Can I link my tag to the equipment and make the box in the tag to show the correct shape depending on who supplies-install the equipment?

My equipment families parameters are shared parameters but in the tag family does not allow to add shared parameters… I can not link the visibility parameter in the family to the equipment family…

Thanks a lot,

Oscar

[twiceroadsfool]

In the tag you can give the different shapes visibility parameters, but you wont be able to have them *automatically* read the information in the family to discern which tag to use (becuase you would need different tag Types for the different shapes... unless it was all instance).

My option: Switch to having one tag, the same shape, and let a text letter or other parameter describe who is providing/installing what. Then it can stay fully automated. (IE Use a square tag with a (C/C, O/C, or O/O) value in a description parameter, or something...

[saeborne]

Interesting question...

Aaron, we do things similar to what you are suggesting. Our equipment tags are very simple, and they only show a simple hexagon, with the type mark.

In the equipment schedule, we have two columns that read, "Purchased By" and "Installed By." So yes, the schedule defines equipment responsibility.

--

Here's a thought... Can you link the visibility of elements in a tag, to a shared yes/no parameter?

This is worth a try...

Bryan

[twiceroadsfool]

Yes, you can... To a yes/no parameter, anyway. But as i mentioned, you cant CONTROL that yes/no by information filled out in the project... So he would have to have different Tag Types in the drop down, to manually select them. Plus, there is little point in it being shared, since youre not scheudling the information in the TAG, so much as the family.

By and large, thats why i would keep the tag consistant in graphics, and simply put the parameter in there, It could be a square, divide in half vertically, with the bottom half also divided horizontally.

The top half could show the Equipment mark or tyoe mark.
Bottom left is Purchased by.
Bottom right is installed by.

No multiple tags to deal with, no inconsistancies when users forget to check which tag they used. It just looks different.

[saeborne]

I believe I understand what you are saying...

Yes, you can control the appearance of a tag, with Yes/No parameters within a the Annotation Tag family. Then creating different tag families. I agree it's silly if you have to manually select the tag based on other information.

But... I was suggesting pushing it one step further... What if the Yes/No parameter was a shared parameter that was part of the equipment family.

So a user can select the equipment component, hit a check box for "Installed by Contractor" and another for "Purchased by Contractor." This shared parameter could be passed through to the tag, and thus automatically control the visibility of the tag.

So you would have one tag, that changes shape as required.

--

Perhaps not worth the effort. We currently do it with simple parameters as stated above.

But it's definitely an interesting puzzle. Always curious to see how far we can push the "smart" features in Revit.

[oskyaqui]

Thanks Aaron, I was trying to maintain our office CAD standards and at the same time avoid inconsistencies between the info in the equipment families and the tags because people could choose the wrong tags. Thanks a lot for your help.

Oscar

[twiceroadsfool]

Im not misunderstanding what youre saying... Im saying you cant do it. :)

The "Shared" in shared parameters simply allows those values to be scheduled or tagged. You cant get a value for a Y/N in a tag, to be dependant on the value of a parameter in the Equipment family, which is basically what youre suggesting.

That check box would be a Y/N in the Equip family, which you want to drive a Y/N in the tag family... It cant be done.

All the more emphasis: Give up the graphical tag difference.

[saeborne]

Eh... I just tried a quick test. I can get the shared parameter into a label, but I can't get that same parameter to drive the visibility of line work.

[twiceroadsfool]

lol.... Im not trying to be discouraging. Plenty of us have already barked up the tree. It will always seem like you can get >.< that close. I assure you, in the final hour... It will not *automatically* do what youre thinking. Not without some manual type selector or external function to manage...

It would be nice, but the connection just isnt there between the parts and pieces.

[oskyaqui]

Yes, I go it, I understand it can't be done, now we have to decide if we change the standards to revise the tags or have three tags and take the risk of making mistakes at the time of equipment tagging,

Thanks a lot,

Oscar

[dbaldacchino]

....because people could choose the wrong tags.

I struggled with this issue myself when I started using Revit and I'm by no means saying this isn't something that should be available to us. But in your case, let me help you think about it differently. You're wanting to let the user take a decision what visibility parameter to check/uncheck, but are afraid of letting your user choose what tag to use/not use? Doesn't that seem a bit contradictory? ;) A decision HAS to be taken, whether choosing between A or B, or Yes/No. However, we should be able to drive the visibility of parts of tags based on the parameter values of the object driving them. Otherwise we have to resort to nested detail components within the family itself to achieve that, such as in lighting fixtures for example (emergency vs. non-emergency fixture). Having that capability in tags would be sweet. But somehow you're going to add that information in some fashion. So instead of taking the decision and embedding it as a parameter in the equipment, you can take that decision and embed it in the tag through selecting a tag with the shape you want. Obviously if you want to tag the same equipment in various views, then this suggestion would be totally ludicrous and very anti-BIM!

[twiceroadsfool]

In my opinion its nuts anyway. it SHOULD be controlled by the equipment, not the tag. that way if there is also a schedule, or another view (as you said Dave), it doesnt have to be manually managed.

I do get that were USED to having different graphics (my old office used to do different shapes for different types of Fire Extinguisher cabinets on the walls), but using something as simple as a type mark parameter in the tag, while it wont show a different GRAPHIC, it still conveys the same information...