Stacking views on sheets to negate single cut pattern per element

[ekkonap]

In the olden days, we used to differentiate existing and new building elements with a line-based hatch to denote the material and a solid hatch in the to indicate new elements.

I think revit cannot achieve this in one view, a cut element either gets a pattern by material or by some view, phase or category override. Am I right so far?

Solution then is to stack views on a sheet, with the cut pattern by material in one and the cut pattern by some override in the other. The top view needs to be transparent.

Turns out that a standard solid pattern does not show if the element is set as transparent (or the view to wireframe). No problem if all your material cut patterns are line based. Even solid patterns can be simulated with a hatch pattern that draws very short lines (test your printer settings and lineweights though!). Transparent line based cut patterns by material on top, solid overrides on the bottom. Or is it?

Yes it is. Transparency shows surface patterns in cut elements, families can have deviating settings and field regions with solid hatches need to be moved to the bottom view. In the end your drawing elements are spread out over 2 different views, and what belongs where is not immediately apparent.

I'd rather have as many drawing elements as possible in one view, with as few view overrides a possible in that view, allowing me to edit my model and annotation there, and have one view containing the overrides. Ergo, this last view needs to contain the transparancy and the solid cut patterns. 2 solutions;

1: Use forementioned point hatch pattern in top view with a transparency override/wireframe. Issues: interference with similar patterns in bottom view, newly introduced categories will not have the overrides.
2: Use a thin 3D view. 3D views allow transparency by material. Issues: not all overrides can override with another material (I think only phase overrides), you need to remember to save the 3D view after creating the slice.

In short: your opinions on best practices for using stacked views?

Credits to MdR for pointing out the transparency by category override (Dutch forum).

Edit: none of this prints correctly with vector settings by the way.

[Alfredo Medina]

I think you could achieve this by setting up materials for Phase: New and Phase: existing, using "Use render appearance for shading" in the Materials dialog box, and a Cut pattern, so that you can see both the line pattern and the at the same time. Then use a Shaded visual style for these views. Since the shading might affect other objects, you will need to turn some categories as transparent, such as floors.

Can you provide an image of the desired results?

[Twiceroadsfool]

Personally, id let go of the old graphical tradition, and use Lineweights/Linestyles OR hatch for Existing. And if its hatch, forget the Material Hatch for it. Ive never had a problem on a complex renovation project doing it that way.

Stacking views = a bunch of effort without much ROI.

[ekkonap]

tnx for the input, let me clarify.

Aaron, just call me oldfashioned, but I'm not about to let any software dictate what I draw. If I can find a viable workaround. Jury still out on this one.

Alfredo, the result i'm trying to achieve is a differentiation of how an object looks solely based on that elements phase parameter (no different types), without sacrificing the standard 'by material' cut pattern, with the least amount of hassle. Don't have any images available, might post on tuesday.

[Scott D Davis]

Aaron, just call me oldfashioned, but I'm not about to let any software dictate what I draw.

So instead let old outdated hand drafting standards dictate what you draw? ;-) In the end, it's about providing a clear concise set of instructions in the fastest way possible. If it's clear in the way Aaron mentions and contractors can understand it, why go through the time and effort of creating a work around that in itself seems to consume a lot of time?

[ekkonap]

Humor appreciated. Anyone for a philosophical discussion on the nature of freedom?

Clear and concise, that's just it: this denotation is as clear and concise as it gets. What is it, and when did it get there? Arguably the 2 most important properties of any construction drawing element. That's probably why it got to be a drafting standard (over here at least) in the first place. And if you have view templates in place, it does not need to consume much time at all.

I imagine that this process might be usefull for all sorts of things, basically it graphically differentiates elements by a parameter value. Sort of what happened for worksets in 2012.

Now there's a thought... That's what I like about software updates: always something new to abuse.

[Twiceroadsfool]

Humor appreciated. Anyone for a philosophical discussion on the nature of freedom?

We have this debate internally all the time amongst our staff. So do what you will, but ill leave you with this: I want my architects freedoms to be to design wonderful buildings, not to dictate how to slow themselves down with the tool. But to each their own.

Clear and concise, that's just it: this denotation is as clear and concise as it gets. What is it, and when did it get there? Arguably the 2 most important properties of any construction drawing element. That's probably why it got to be a drafting standard (over here at least) in the first place. And if you have view templates in place, it does not need to consume much time at all.

100% disagree. I mean, yes: Clear and concise is paramount, but here is the thing: Ive been using Revit since 2006, and the MAJORITY of my wor has been retrofit, and renovation and alteration. More often than not, all intermixed as well. Not just *adding a wing to a building.* Ive been using JUST the Graphic Overrides my Phase Filter to address Existing conditions, and in 5 years ive never had an RFI over "whats new, and whats existing." Evidently, clear and concise is possible without your offices "graphical traditions."

As for it not taking much time? Well, so far youve discovered draw order of viewports on top of each other matters, which im sure means youve discovered order of placement on the sheet matters, which means if using two sets of VT's, stacking order, having to tab select to different viewports to get in them, etc, isnt slowing you down.... Then no offense, i dont think you were very fast to begin with.

Im not about bowing down to software when it affects the ARCHITECTURE. And in that regard, i agree. But silly old hat traditions that arent actually value adding? Thats on dragon youre chasing without me, lol.

I imagine that this process might be usefull for all sorts of things, basically it graphically differentiates elements by a parameter value. Sort of what happened for worksets in 2012.

Now there's a thought... That's what I like about software updates: always something new to abuse.

Something new to abuse is always good... As long as you dont mind losing some of the benefits of the software itself.

Good luck with it!

[ekkonap]

As for it not taking much time? Well, so far youve discovered draw order of viewports on top of each other matters, which im sure means youve discovered order of placement on the sheet matters, which means if using two sets of VT's, stacking order, having to tab select to different viewports to get in them, etc, isnt slowing you down.... Then no offense, i dont think you were very fast to begin with.

LOL maybe I'm so fast playing around with stuff like this prevents me from embarassing coworkers ;-) I'm just trying to push the envelope here. I've been fiddling with this for some time and thought to do some crowdsourcing. Who knows what crazy ideas someone might come up with using this stuff? As far as I'm concerned, Zach Kron's http://buildz.blogspot.com/2010/03/d...manifesto.html applies.

A thought comes to mind: would this post have generated different reactions if I posted in the 'out there' folder?

[Twiceroadsfool]

Huh? Im entirely not sure what you are getting at with any of that last post.

For me, pushing the envelope is trying to do new and innovative things, be it new ways to detail something architecturally, new ways to quantify and estimate for the different trades and subs, new ways to fabricate, whatever. Trying to bend a newer tool to an older standard isnt pushing, for me. Its pulling.

But at this point, it seems like you just want to debate. Zach's blog is great, and hes pretty much a certifiable genius. What all that rhetoric has to do with getting productive work done in an efficient process, however, is of exactly a quantity of zero.

Besides, as fast as you may be, youre still faster doing it my way and giving up the tradition, than doing it your way. You may be faster than your coworkers, but you arent faster than yourself using a better workflow.

As for the forum? Id advise against using Revit in a lousy fashion in any forum, this, Out There, or AUGI.

[ekkonap]

Must be a language thing. Point was to doodle, and steer away from debate (my steering obviously needs practice). Your way is best (tnx for the input), my way is different. Question is, where might it go?