AC 17, Moving in 3D, Auto level assignement

[Anonymous]

Hi,
AC17 is great really, But it's really annoying, In 3D view when I move object (form, wall, slab...) in heigt AC auto change the level assignment. And it is not a good thing !!!

Is there a way to disable this auto-function?

[Barry Kelly]

This is a real problem isn't it?
Say you have a wall with a base that is 200mm below its home storey (i.e. it is on the ground floor but extends 200mm down into the basement - don't ask me why - just an example).
Now view this in elevation or 3D.
You want to move this wall sideways a bit.
Fine so long as you keep it constrained horizontally.
But if while you are dragging (by a base point) it you accidentally stray into the ground storey and then back into the basement storey to place it at the same level it was before but just a little to the side as you wanted it then it will change home stories.
NOT GOOD!

It is easier to control in elevation but in 3D who knows where your cursor is tracking while you move around as the X-Y pane may not be horizontal.

What we need is a key to hold to lock the storey while it is being dragged (like CTRL or SHIFT but obviously these can't be used).

Yes you can move your element then TAB through the tracker to change the home storey back to what you want but we shouldn't have to do this.
And if you don't use the tracker as some don't then you'll have to change the home storey in the settings dialogue and then change the height again. Don't try to change the height in the INFO box as you will need to change the top and bottom heights.

And if you need to change the heights in the settings dialogue then you may as well have done it there in the first place and the home storey would have stayed exactly as it was.

Not happy Jan!!!
Barry.

[Barry Kelly]

Barry.

[sinceV6]

I really understand everyone's point of view in this matter. I think it resolves on how each one uses AC. I've adapted workflows ♪♪♫through the years♫♪♪ to the constant changes in AC. For the most part, it has been good for me.

I also do big models, and parking lot structures are usually involved, with several multi-levels (multiple platforms) per story, but I don't see (yet) the problem with this.

I agree it shouldn't be that automatic, and I really think the "relink" command is nothing more of a shortcut for a feature that was not completed to get v.17 out. I do see the logic on how this now works, and I also see it doesn't fit everyone's needs.

The main problem I can think of is the same as Eduardo. The renovation feature was introduced because there were more and more projects of this kind, and AC was lacking in that area. The new way linking and stories work conflicts a lot with the renovation workflow.

I also agree with Barry that there should at least be an option to keep the same home story, like when using the elevate command (not dragging), there´s a check box to assign (or not) the home story based on elevation. The thing is, for the moment, that I know that if I drag/elevate across stories, I need to relink. No biggie for me.

Best regards everyone.

[Anonymous]

The auto linking Is a good thing, when you copy multiple Story, No problem about it.
But the real big issue is that if you move a little bit a wall vertically... And that you have to check That AC doesn't take over the story assignment.
Very annoying.
and if it does -> Instpector : TAB ,TAB, TAB ,change STORY, right arrow, select the story, Return Key.

AC16 -> Nothing special, and if you want to change the story -> Element property, Assign Story, return.

Evolution doesn't Mean Improvement

[Eduardo Rolon]

Real world sample. This project was started in 15, the owner wants some changes that causes the story levels to change. Prior to 16 I would edit the levels to match the new ones and keep working using the previous design as a reference for the new one.

[Eduardo Rolon]

and after adjusting the levels to the new ones that I have to match.

[sinceV6]

Nice example. I would expect this type of behavior now that things work differently. If you are migrating the file to 17 to change it, then I guess that before changing levels you should select all walls and set their top to "not linked"; or make the required connections for the walls that go to the next story, and the top ones set to "not linked", only then change levels.

If you are using it as a reference for a renovation work, you can load it as a hotlinked module and in the options choose to break the top-link for elements, so story heights of the host file shouldn't affect the model.

Of course... there might be some problems with the display of elements according to the story they fall and the settings for each.

In your case, what is the desired thing: walls should adjust to the new heights or they should stay like they are? How are you using the model? Anyway, slabs will get moved with the story level changes, so if walls are not linked you would still need to update them manually.

[Erich]

I set up a poll for this issue here: "Relink Poll"

[Eduardo Rolon]

sinceV6 wrote:
Nice example. I would expect this type of behavior now that things work differently. If you are migrating the file to 17 to change it, then I guess that before changing levels you should select all walls and set their top to "not linked"; or make the required connections for the walls that go to the next story, and the top ones set to "not linked", only then change levels.

If you are using it as a reference for a renovation work, you can load it as a hotlinked module and in the options choose to break the top-link for elements, so story heights of the host file shouldn't affect the model.

Of course... there might be some problems with the display of elements according to the story they fall and the settings for each.

In your case, what is the desired thing: walls should adjust to the new heights or they should stay like they are? How are you using the model? Anyway, slabs will get moved with the story level changes, so if walls are not linked you would still need to update them manually.

That is the whole issue. Prior to 17 stuff stayed put and the integrity of the model was maintained. Now editing "story settings" (which by the way is undoable) can wreak havoc if you don't prepare the model beforehand or if you don't design them from the start.

Just imagined if an intern decides to adjust the story levels by 1" on a 10 story tower and everything changes except for the stairs (which are not linked), then you building exceeds the maximum height for that lot and the A/C ducts do not fit when the added inch is removed. In the old way the model would not move by itself and you would catch the +1" error on 2D documentation, now the model will fix itself and who knows when you would catch it (if you make a section thru the stairs you might see it).

I know that we can get used to it but the flexibility we had is lost and we have to develop new workarounds when previously we didn't need them.

[Rick Thompson]

It seems like a perfect candidate for the "legacy" mode switch. (soon).

I have to admit that I am probably one of the slowest users to adopt a new feature, just due to the nature of my work... For the most part I am reusing pln's created a long time ago. I can't tell you how many times I have kicked myself for not adapting a new work flow option sooner than I finally did. It generally makes things easier in the long run for maintaining and modifying a plan started years ago.

With this new "feature" I have not yet seen any added value to my work flow, just a lot of cussing so far. Time will tell, but..... maybe not that big a deal in most circumstances and I just need to get use to a few ... extra ... steps. That was hard to type.

(I am glad I don't have Eduardo's issues though....