|
Forums >> Revit Building >> Technical Support >> Question for Revit Masters - Basics of Flex and Constraints - Diagonal Lines
|
|
|
active
Joined: Mon, Oct 3, 2005
31 Posts
 |
OK, Check this scenario out that has been driving me crazy... Here is a basic bunch of 2D lines locked to some reference planes: 
See how everything flexes nicely when I drag the Right reference plane: 
Now I'll add some diagonal lines and lock them to the outer reference planes as well: 
See how I the constraints cannot be maintained for the diagonal lines:  My question is... WHY!!!?
Edited on: Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 8:33:50 AM
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
 |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Tue, Jan 16, 2007
1009 Posts
|
Hank, I have done this before, I drew 1 single diagnol line to the intersection and constrained it. once I verify that single line would flex i then mirror it around and voila, it worked. see attached
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Mon, Oct 3, 2005
31 Posts
|
Thanks alabaster. i guess my question now is why? I've been using these kinds of workarounds with Revit more and more and I think it indicates my lack of understanding what Revit is looking for and/or a poor explanation of the logic by AutoDesk itself. Most people probably don't care why but it bothers me that a program this sophisticated has to be handled with guesses and hacks. So does anyone know if this happens because the existence of the constrained rectangle somehow prevents newer constraints. Are constraints prioritized by the order in which objects are created? Thanks in advance - this seems like it may be unanswerable without getting a Revit programmer on here.
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
site moderator|||
Joined: Fri, Feb 10, 2006
1874 Posts
 |
if you add the diagonal lines and lock them, then you are telling Revit to keep them at that angle. So Revit is correct in telling you that "constrains are not satisfied". because it would be impossible to keep the lines at that angle without changing the witdth and height as you flex the the shape.
-----------------------------------
best regards, coreed,aia bmpArchitects,Inc. "Revit has to be implemented, Not installed." Long Live Revit |
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Mon, Oct 3, 2005
31 Posts
|
Hey coreed. yeah, but it DOES work sometimes as alabaster mentioned.
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Wed, Aug 22, 2007
19 Posts
No Rating |
Here you do not want to lock to the plane of the line. In this instance you want to lock to the end point of the line. When ready to lock the diagonal line to the plane (at a mid point plane also) click on the plane and then tab over the model line and find the point, when you have that point highlighted click on it. Cheers,
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
site moderator|||
Joined: Tue, May 16, 2006
13079 Posts
|
hank - I like your challenge - this is a tough one, I've not run across this .... working on it. Maybe Mr Spot will have an answer alabaster & chanus ... you should try your answer out.... doesn't work for me
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Wed, Aug 22, 2007
19 Posts
No Rating |
It works, I pinky promise. Send me the file and I will prove it.... 
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Thu, Dec 16, 2004
792 Posts
|
My first suggestion would be to look at the out of the box door families. In elevation, many of them have swing lines that are diagonal lines that flex with the door width/height. Take a look at those and see if you can decipher them. I think you'll find the key is not constraining (actually locking the lines) but letting Revit use it's "smart" constraints for the diagonal lines. Good luck!
-----------------------------------
-//------------------------
Carl - rkitecsure[at]gmail.com
Need help? I'm probably in my chat room!
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is never get involved in a land war in asia, but only slightly less well known is this! Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line! |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Thu, Dec 16, 2004
792 Posts
|
Also, instead of "Dragging" the right ref plane, try making it parametric. Meaning link a dimension parameter to it (make it instance instead of type if you wan tto drag it in the project) and change the dimension via family types dialogue instead of dragging it. See if that works better.
-----------------------------------
-//------------------------
Carl - rkitecsure[at]gmail.com
Need help? I'm probably in my chat room!
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is never get involved in a land war in asia, but only slightly less well known is this! Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line! |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
|
|
active
Joined: Thu, Dec 16, 2004
792 Posts
|
See if this video explains what you are asking: http://gibsonhh.info/revit/video/lineConstraints.swf
-----------------------------------
-//------------------------
Carl - rkitecsure[at]gmail.com
Need help? I'm probably in my chat room!
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is never get involved in a land war in asia, but only slightly less well known is this! Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line! |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Wed, Aug 22, 2007
19 Posts
No Rating |
Hank, Please see the attached file, Flexing the parameters in the types window works. Cheers,
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
site moderator|||
Joined: Tue, May 16, 2006
13079 Posts
|
thanks rkitect ... I was being stupid and trying to lock ... This is proof that locks can get you into trouble. REVIT assumes some associations on its own and you don't have to lock everything ... and in this case, if you notice, Carl doesn't use any locks at all.
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
site moderator|||
Joined: Fri, Feb 10, 2006
1874 Posts
|
but rkitect is doing exactly what i said, he's changing the witdth and the height so that they are equal.
-----------------------------------
best regards, coreed,aia bmpArchitects,Inc. "Revit has to be implemented, Not installed." Long Live Revit |
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Tue, Jan 16, 2007
1009 Posts
|
Hank, I think your main problem is your associating the four lines of your diamond to each other and this is preventing the flexability your are trying to achieve. By first creating a single diagonal line that flexes both vertically and horizontally then mirroring this element you are creating 4 completely independant lines that are able to flex vertically and horizontally. That is how you are able to prevent all four lines from maintaining their original shape.
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
Search
60671_Family1.rfa