Material take offs have been a long standing topic for me. Directly associating materials with calculations would be a huge step forward, however it is still complicated and I think needs to be developed with the ability to adjust composite skins with a pet pallet. We need a simple way to attach data base descriptors. I think if this could be done directly in the composite dialogue via pull down menus for each skin, then it would simplify things a lot. (easy for me to say:) I am pasting something form the beta forum to make this point here...
>>>>
... For my use, I still would be served best with adjustable height skins within the composite structure. If I need cedar shingles on a wall up to the window sill, and siding above, this profile feature is no help (because I sell material list). If I could take the composite and make the adjustments with the skins, and right there, in that dialogue assign the property script.. or better data based components (etc).. that would work. Right now, it is difficult at best.
Another example is a roof composite. Now, to quantify accurately you have to split the overhangs from the roof over the structure in vaulted ceiling applications and assign 2 different property scripts. I have opted for less accuracy due to the pain that can be (lines in the surface fill in 3D, realigning fills.. etc). However, if you could adjust the skins somehow, then all would be simplified immensely. You can't show exposed rafter tails without a lot of work around. If we could place a roof, run the rafters within that roof, then adjust the skins and pull back to expose the rafters, imagine how nice that would be. If you have 5 skins - roofing, decking, air space, insulation and GWB - and at the overhang adjust back the bottom 3, you would actually model reality.. and quantify it... without all the work around, and necessary problems that come with the work around.
If we had control to split a skin after the composite is placed, then assign a different material as needed, take offs and modeling would be much easier, and in fact reflect real building assemblies. So, what good is the Profile for my practice... none really, unfortunally.
This does seem rather basic to me. I upgrade as the software evolves, but worry about new features that complicate my work day (migration), and a continued complete lack of attention to some fundamental modeling tools that are absolutely part of building a virtual building.