SheetTitle01

Current State: 
Rejected
GUID: 
4eff87af-bf2c-448e-bf54-cec4c363c6ce
Data Type: 
TEXT
Visible: 
1
Description: 
Parameter to add as labels in a title-block family for filling-in drawing name information. (Propose there are at least 4: SheetTitle02, SheetTitle03, and SheetTitle04)
User Modifiable: 
1

Comments

Thanks for joining and proposing these parameters. Question, shouldn't this be a family parameter within the titleblock family? Or is there some use for this as a shared parameter?

This questions applies to the other parameters that you proposed as well:

Thanks again and please keep the suggestions coming!

Hi J,

Unfortunately the title-block families do not allow labels to use family type parameters, hence shared parameters are used so that you can input the title text directly into sheet properties and it will appear in the title-block and schedule.

I believe it is industry standard to use the built-in parameters for Sheet Title rather than create shared parameters for titleblock families.

When you need to build a titleblock schedule? Do you mean a drawing list? If so, why wouldn't you just build a schedule of sheets and use the built-in sheet parameters?

It's true there is a built-in parameter for 'Sheet Name', however this often proves inadequate for a large documentation sets, where you want a structured breakdown to describe what is drawn on the sheet. Example below:

Sheet Name 1: Building X

Sheet Name 2: Eighty-Sixth Floor

Sheet Name 3: Penthouse Level

Sheet Name 4: Fire Plan

This would appear in the box on bottom right of sheet and each line would need to be editable from within the project per sheet (i.e. cannot be text within the title-block family, and needs to visually appear on the sheet so cannot be a family parameter). Then when one creates a drawing schedule (sheet list) it will generate a column for each line of the drawing title (making it more legible and easier to organise). For all of the projects I can remember the title-blocks have been set-up this way. I'd struggle to use the standard single parameter Revit provides on projects with hundreds of drawings. I'm open to renaming the parameters to 'SheetName2', 'SheetName3', SheetName4'?

 

Great point, Andy. What are your thoughts on changing this school of thought a little, though? For example:

  • Building Name: Building X
  • Floor: Eighty-Sixth Floor
  • Level: Penthouse Level
  • Discipline (possibly call this "Sub-discipline", or "Trade"): Fire Plan

This way, we are using parameters in a less generic sense and the parameters can be used elsewhere other than sheets? For example, a building engineer could use the "Building Name" parameter and assign it to equipment if they wish.

Keep the ideas coming, these are great conversations!

Sorry the example I gave was just an example of how you might fill out the four title lines - but not necessarily constrained to that format. For example this would work for general arrangment plans, but parameters named 'Floor' and 'Level' would not suit sheets showing sections or elevations. 'Fire Plan' was also referring to the plans that an architect produces showing different colours/dashes on walls, door tags, and room fills to indicate fire ratings - not necessarily another discipline (i.e. this fourth line might be filled in as "reference plan" or "Reflected ceiling plan" or "typical detail" etc. on other sheets). Keeping it generic allows more flexibility for the user to fill out sheet names according to the system in place for each project.

I'm curious how others are organising sheet titles on large projects?

On large projects, I use parameters in a similar fashion, except with very specific parameter names. For example, I have a "View Category" parameter which I use on sheets. That parameter can have values like "Schedules", "Floor Plans", or "Sections". I also use parameters such as "Discipline" to even further organize the sheets and views. You can continue to add parameters as needed, but I would highly recommend we stay away from parameter names like "SheetName01" because it will be hard to remember what info your team should input into each.

I think that even for your use, storing your information with parameter names that more clearly describe what values you will input is a better solution. This will make building your drawing lists more intuitive and you can also use these same parameters to organize your Project Browser. 

Thoughts?

Yes, we also use a parameter called "ViewCategory" to organise our project browsers (although this is typically a project parameter since it doesn't need to appear on the titleblock).

To test the suggestion given by OpenRFA a few days ago, I've assessed the title-blocks from three recent projects to see if each line of the sheet title can use a parameter with a less generic name (see attached image)

Drawing Titles

From this I determined that we could use parameters as follows:

- "BuildingName" - TEXT - to describe if the sheet is looking at Building A, B, C etc. within the same project

- "Discipline" - TEXT - To show on titleblock from which discipline the drawing originates

- "DrawingType" - TEXT - To describe whether it's a plan, section, schedule

There is however typically a fourth needed to describe in more detail to which part of the building the drawing is referring (and sometimes left blank i.e. when the drawing type is 'reference sections' there is no need to zone-in further). For this, the parameter could use a word menaing 'Area of Focus' (open to suggestion on this). We prefer not to use the in-built parameter "Sheet Name" on the title-block as this is linked to the project browser.

This is great, Andy. Thanks for the putting in the effort to properly plan this out.

  • It looks like we already have a BuildingName parameter: http://openrfa.org/cdef336a-70f3-4aaa-b100-127bb986acbd
  • Since we have discipline as a system parameter in Revit, can we talk about naming this something else? It might cause confusion when users see two parameters called Discipline in their models. I would vote for sub-discipline, but Revit templates come with a project parameter called Sub-discipline and it might also cause confusion. I can put more thought into this today.
  • I created the DrawingType parameter - I think it actually is more clear than what I typically use which is "View Category", so I will change my standard and start using this: http://openrfa.org/1c0792c7-75dd-4118-9833-ce3ae8402990
  • For the ones you are asking for suggestions on, what if we call this BuildingSector or something along those lines? Many times, we use that term to seperate a building using matchlines and this might be useful for that as well as any specific areas of a building. Would that work for your intended use? I could also see this same parameter used by contractors to specify what area of a building a piece of euipment lives in. Thoughts?

Hope this helps!

Hi J. Sure, 'BuildingSector' is a good suggestion. As for discipline, I agree it could cause a bit of confusion - maybe a synonym such as trade/field/classification?

I second adding the  "BuildingSector" parameter too.  And we should plan on having a deeper discussion for these types of location parameters.  I've had to use location identity data for rooms, rooms areas, floors, building areas, data halls, sections of data halls, campuses, buildings, building groups, etc.  Maybe its just one of those things that has to customized on a per project basis; with a few common parameters such as BuildingName and BuildingSector.  Or maybe there's enough typical patterns that would warrant us flushing out all of the required location parameters.  No time pressure from my end, but I'm available if you all would like to do a gotomeeting or something.

As for the "Discipline" and "Sub-Discipline" parameters, my vote would be to use "Discipline" and "Sub-Discipline" despite the confusion that'll occur with the Revit baked in properties.  If somebody is to the point where they need the additional flexibility of our shared parameters, then they're gonna be smart enough to know difference with the baked in properties version.  Also I feel like that while Trade/Field/Classification are techniquely correct...folks are still going to first look for and try to use "Discipline" b/c that's the dominant terminology.

Thanks, Aryn. The new parameter has been added: http://openrfa.org/d23d093a-23d6-4e6d-adc8-0c12acf315cf

Let's talk continue the Discipline/Sub-discipline discussion under a new thread: http://openrfa.org/62cea86d-b795-445e-900b-bf5680983aac

Introducing collaborative shared parameters.

Join OpenRFA to help build the new master shared parameters for Revit.