Referenced Viewport Classes as Worksheet Criteria?

[Pat Stanford]

Help!

 

I hope I am just being forgetful this morning, but I can't find a way to use the class of objects in a referenced viewport part of the database criteria.

 

I have four drawings each containing a number of symbols. I need to count all of those symbols to be able to order the parts.

 

A worksheet pulls all the information and I get the count of parts and can even display/sort by class in a column. But I would really like to be able to break the database into separate sections by class so I can more easily break out parts from different vendors.

 

Suggestions on how to use the classes that are hidden inside Referenced Design Layer Viewports as criteria for a database. Or a different way of accomplishing the breakout of parts by class.

 

Thanks,

Pat

[thinkingpencil]

Hi Pat, I found your post whilst trying to solve a problem. That may be related to your question...I am trying to report values in a worksheet from objects in a referenced design layer viewport. I have set the database criteria to include design layer referenced viewports, by checking the right box. The DLRVP is up to date. I can see the objects. The worksheet shows identical objects in the worksheet file. But not from the referenced one...Ive also set criteria by layer, class etc. But the worksheet remains blind to the DLRVP.

[thinkingpencil]

From another thread this seems to be a known issue. I am using a record format to pull the information into the worksheet.

[patrickbellll]

I do have the same issue as you @thinkingpencil It hasn't been solved i think. 

What is your workaround exactly ? 

[thinkingpencil]

Hi Patrick. My workaround is rough! I  pasted the objects from the referenced file into the file containing the worksheet. Then added the record format to those objects. Both files are attached The referenced (source file) is "proposed". The worksheet file is "existing". Fortunately the worksheet is simple, and the objects reported in it are few. I hope this helps! Kind regards, Mark

201110 GA 100 Existing 17.39 v2021.vwx 201110 GA 101_2 GA Proposed 18.50 v2021.vwx