This really depends on location, N-S-E-W-U-D... There are a few ways...the first is to change your work plane to a vertical work plane such as a grid or reference plane. Then when you copy you are moving up and down. An other way you can do this is to Ctrl+C then paste Aligned to Selected Levels.

You also may be having issues with this if your lockers you are trying to place are level based...if you do not have a level where you are trying to place them you may not be able to do it with out either adding a level or preferably changing the family to allow an offset.

Interesting question. Some objects, like walls, beams, floors, can be copied vertically by indicating a base point and an end point, like in ACA, so long as the "constrain" option is not activated.

However, some other objects, like casework and furniture, are stuck to reference levels. Therefore, one solution is to create some "black levels". These are levels created without the "make plan view" option. So they are like auxiliary levels that don't create floor plans. Do one of these levels at the top of the first locker, then, copy the level as many times as required. Then, either from a 2D view or 3D view, try again to use Copy (uncheck "Constrain") and indicate a base point and an end point. Since now there is a level for the casework to sit on, now the vertical copy will work. You can also use Copy to Clipboard > Paste > Aligned to selected levels > and select the auxiliary levels.

I see.. That does answer my question..... Its not like AA 2011 when it comes to 3D.. Thats 1 thing I miss then since starting in Revit (the list isnt long at the moment.... ;-) )

I am trying to copy the lockers onto each other, the lockers are 300mm high, and want them to stack 4 high, within the same level.

OK.. I will investigate further.. Cheers for the ideas..

The thing I really dislike about making a ton of levels like this is when you go in and make a wall and you want it to go from one level to another, you have to browse through all the levels you made to get to an actual level. I think it is usually much better to only have levels that host floors and such and make families either with an offset option from the level or make it facebased or just a regular non-hosted family.

You should really consider making a new family, nest in the current locker, stack them (and maybe share them) and then reload and use your new family.

The stacking could even be done with an instance based array, so that you can choose how many lockers will be stacked for each instance. :beer:

Hey Alfredo,

Replied just as you did..!

Yes, that is also something I will try. What I have done for the time being, is inserted 1 locker, copied it and offest it from the base level, 300, 600 and 900, so I have my stack, then created a group of the 4 stacked lockers, copied it etc etc..

I must admit, I do love the freedom to draw that you get in AA 2011.. I can draw anything anywhere. But of course, that does somethimes cause problems if you are unsure of working in 3D..

Cheers guys.

Alf, your suggestion raises al kind off problems later on so I wouldn't do this (ceiling plan views, wall heights when placing, room boundaries). I'm with Munkholm and gdoherty: recreate your family so that it's no longer floor based (I'm guessing this is the problem).
Another option is that the family is workplane based. Try selecting it. If in the Ribbon Panel the button "Select Work Plane" appears you can also use reference planes.
If this is the case, go to your section view, place the refplanes at the desired heights (refplanes being the bottom of the locker), NAME them, select the lockers you wish to copy, push cntrl-c and cntrl-v. After this (and disregarding the warning about elements being in the same place) tap the "Change Workplane" button and select one of the named refplanes.

As for ACA: No, Revit doesn't work the same. That's because ACA is merely a cad-software in 3 directions instead of 2. In Revit you have rules for elements used which give an added intelligence, but also constrains some actions. In my book, that's not a bad thing.

I must stop replying just as someone else replies....!

That does make sense munkholm, but I am a little hazy on the instance based array. Can I array in the "Z" coord as well..? I did think about making a new family, but wondered if there was a z coord in Revit...

Martijn, yes.. agreed on that. Will check that out as well..

Arrarys in familes are difficult because it breaks as soon as you just need one instance, so you have to do some work around to make it so there is always 2 even if only 1 is visible. This being said you could have two arrays...one vertical and one horizontal. I am not sure though if the arrays would communicate.