|
Forums >> Revit Building >> Technical Support >> Adding Text Below Dimensions
|
|
|
active
Joined: Fri, Nov 26, 2004
26 Posts
No Rating |
How do I add a Text below a Dimension?
When I add Dimensions to the plan and I want to add a Text below some of the dimensions like I can with AutoCAD by using Text Override in Properties.
Do anyone know how to do it?
Thanks
|
This user is offline |
|
 |
|
|
|
site moderator|||
Joined: Mon, Jan 12, 2004
2889 Posts
 |
Currently you can only add text after or before (suffix/prefix) in a dimension.
To add text below the line you would need to insert it as normal text.
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Thu, Jan 26, 2006
118 Posts
 |
i have also 'forced' certain dimensions by creating an opaque text type, and typing overtop of the displayed dimension (for window schedules where i dont want to show the true finish floor line)
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Wed, Feb 8, 2006
13 Posts
 |
the problem with putting in 'forced' dimension i.e. opaque text to hide the original revit dimension is that when u export it to autocad, the text loses its opacity and shows the revit dimension below.
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Sun, Mar 27, 2005
208 Posts
 |
this type of question arises so often on this forum, and mr spot has to keep telling everyone that revit dimensions are exact and your model should do the same. i have a suggestion for the autocad users who need to 'force' dimensions and also create text only notes. (i am ex autocad btw). make a very simple 'group' of lines and text, copy as needed, adjust as needed, and you have a non dimension note. mr spot gave us all the clue some time ago - 'build' the building with revit building, do not cheat, and write text to your heart's content!
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
active
Joined: Mon, Jun 27, 2005
67 Posts
 |
I have not found placing an overriding text over the dimension to be a huge problem. I simply move the dimension to the center of the extention line with the grips and type a simple text and place it over the dimension, this masks the dimension and only displays the text when printing.
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Thu, Oct 13, 2005
91 Posts
 |
Good idea gdroon with the opaque text...what ive been doing is using a dimesion style with a very small text size, like 1/64" or something like that, so its always small enough to be covered by a text box...I like the idea of opaque text though so its all white and you cant see it...
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Mon, Mar 20, 2006
219 Posts
|
I can build my Revit building EXACTLY correct and precise with no cheating/fudging and STILL have the need for this feature. You don't have to be in architecture too long before you need a door frame elevation that "VARIES" (by schedule) or a low/no-slope roof detail in which the iso-board thickness "VARIES" (by point on slope). This is similar to how Revit has deemed the "EQ." acceptable. I'm not "forcing" a dimension, I need Revit to allow me to draw it accurately. To flippantly belittle those looking for this ability as cheaters just makes yourself look bad.
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Mon, Jun 27, 2005
67 Posts
|
I totally agree with the last comment. I often do millwork shop drawings and the shop drawings are done using the Architectural drawings. The building is rairly built exactly as shown. I put a text on the overall dim. verify or site dim. required, this lets everyone know the room has not been field measured, when that is done I replace the text with a dimension and adjust the millwork to suit. If there is not a fixed dimension it lets everyone know the casework can not be produced. Having a text option would be a big help and I would not consider this cheating.
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Sun, Mar 27, 2005
208 Posts
|
to those users concerned about some of us mentioning 'cheating'. just clarifying - people like myself respond to revit's inherent accuracy of modelling by being accurate with everything, so that dimensioning reflects that. where i need to describe rather than dimension, i use detail lines. a user does not need to be completely accurate if that user sees no need for it. because revit 'builds' buildings, rather than purely represent them, i have learnt to use such wonderful technology to be even better at documenting. whatever suits you!
|
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
|
|
active
Joined: Mon, Mar 20, 2006
219 Posts
|
"HEY! Why are you using a bridge to play your guitar?!" "Well, it's because of the chords in this song." "I can play those chords without the bridge. You're cheating!" "No, see...I can play them without it too, but there is no need for the full fret in every song, this makes a cleaner sound and isn't as tiring during long playing sessions. I mean, I can do it if I had to..." "Well, you should make the same sound for just as long no matter what. It's how the guitar's made. But hey, if you're not as good at playing it as me that's fine. "
|
This user is offline |
|
|
|
active
Joined: Sun, Nov 27, 2005
298 Posts
|
WOW this is out of hand... I think the big issue is that the old method of documenting is going out the window. When you feel the need to "cheat" or "fudge" or "use a bridge" in Revit think about what you are doing. Why are you doing it. What are you trying to tell the person using the created document. I don't think it is a questions of right and wrong but a questions of how to convey the information in the most appropriate way. Creating a dimension that makes the viewer of the drawing think the dimension is accurate is cheating. If you need to have a fudge factor then add a note +/- or just add a note to verify in field. It's the same as the guitar analogy. If I can use the bridge the whole song then use the bridge. If I have to remove the bridge half way through use cords. No one is going to jump back and forth using a bridge and not in the same song. Don't jump back a forth using dimensions to reflect inaccurate information when the point of a dimension is to display the distance between two items. THINK ABOUT IT.
-----------------------------------
BallewDesigns.com |
This user is offline |
View Website
|
|
|
Search