Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Schedule Existing and New Doors

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Schedule Existing and New Doors

    In renovation projects we typically tag all doors both new and existing so that it is crystal clear to contractor what is intended for all doors. I would like existing doors to only show "Existing to Remain" in the Comment column and not populate size, hardware, etc in the other columns; while the new doors indicate all this information.

    Is this possible?

    #2
    The short answer is No, and the longer answer would be: No, it's not possible. Sorry.
    Klaus Munkholm
    "Do. Or do not. There is no try."

    Comment


      #3
      Hmmm... Or MAYBE... Add a duplicate parameter for each existing parameter, and a "Is Existing" yes/no paramter. Then for the duplicates, i.e. "Scheduled Width", add a formula like this: if(Is Existing, Width, " ") - And use the duplicate parameters in the schedule....Not sure that Revit will allow the blank value " " when using lengths (works for text), in that case, you'd need to add a zero instead, i.e. if(Is Existing, Width, 0) but then the zero will show as the value for all existing doors...And that would be the even longer version...
      Klaus Munkholm
      "Do. Or do not. There is no try."

      Comment


        #4
        Do you place your schedules on sheets or export them to .xls ?

        If the former, can you not place two schedules? One filtered for existing (with no field-columns for parameters you don't want to show/would otherwise necessitate a workaround) and one filtered for proposed (with said field-columns).

        Personally, we do the latter, and (often) combine different schedule outputs altogether in a single "project schedule" (different categories/schedule-outputs under different tabs) and in doing so we can redefine field-information just as you're suggesting.

        Comment


          #5
          Keeping a seperate set of Existing Door Families that use different parameters than the ones in the schedule will keep the fields blank, and come with the added benefit of you can *hardcode* "Existing to Remain" in a comments field (not sure about *the* comments field, i dont recall. But i try not to use OOTB parameters, so...). But i wouldnt do it. It means manually tracking the Existing doors to make sure theyre a different type. Then again, so does using if/thens and a set of redundant parameters. (You cant return a null value length). So you would have to return it as zero, which is still confusing.

          If it were up to me? Id keep the sizes and panel information in there. If its existing to remain, its still relevant information, imvho.
          Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
          @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

          Comment


            #6
            Thanks for the input. I think the best approach is not to add duplicate parameters of additional family types but just add the "Existing to Remain" on a case by case basis. I can see value in reporting door size for all doors in schedule. Good practice dictates the we look at each door individually to see if it needs any changes to hardware, finish, etc so using the same family type makes the most sense and at the end of the day so does leaving the columns available for those "small" changes to existing doors.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by rboaz View Post
              but just add the "Existing to Remain" on a case by case basis.
              Which gives me another idea for scheduling; if you don't want to sort the schedule by those that are checked, and those that aren't (you may want them to list numerically by number, or by some other sort) then you could always use conditional formatting to highlight the doors that are/aren't - to add further visual clarity to the kind of schedule that all to often gets weighed down by too much data.

              Whether you could have the formatting colour the whole instance's row on the basis of a single field or not is another matter - and something I'm going to explore myself tomorrow.

              Comment


                #8
                Last time I checked you couldn't. And the CF doesn't print or show on sheet either...
                Martijn de Riet
                Professional Revit Consultant | Revit API Developer
                MdR Advies
                Planta1 Revit Online Consulting

                Comment

                Related Topics

                Collapse

                Working...
                X