2004-09-24 03:56 PM
2004-09-24 06:04 PM
oreopoulos wrote:This has improved significantly over the years and I expect will continue to do so. There is still much room for improvement and this is (obviously) a very important aspect of the program. (Unfortunately it is also very complex from a programming point of view.)
This are my top 10 wishes for walls:
Please post your if your list is different
1. Improve wall intersection clean up. In 2D AND 3D. Current Status just waist us too much time trying to clean those lines up.
2. 3D hotspots for walls. We should be able to change wall heightThis is an excellent idea! and should not be too difficult to implement, I imagine.
3. Different Section and Plan fillsI have never seen the need for this myself, but it seems to be a common wish. Perhaps if I had it I would suddenly realize all the things I could do that I hadn't thought of before. What do you need it for?
4. When two walls are collinear then there should be a join command to make them as one. (The inverse of a split command)Another good one. It also seems as though it should be easy enough to accomplish.
5. Adding a second type of wall movement. Till now moving a wall does not affects walls intersected with it and the wall retains its length. That is ok but another kind of wall move should be added. If we move a wall ALL other walls connected to the wall should extend (or shorten) to fall the wall. Its like they are glued to the wall and they fall the walls movement. That would save TONS of time especially when we are making changes to the plans.This would be GREAT, assuming it is optional and doesn't affect performance adversely. It also seems like a way to start selectively adopting the best of Revit without burdening the model with too many relationships to keep track of.
6. Corner Node points (wall intersections) should behave like a moveable hotspot. This is almost a logical follow up of the previous wishThis is already true if all the affected walls are selected. I'm not sure that this needs any improvement.
7. The wall should show up in selected stories (not only in current)Is there anyone who
8. The wall could have vertical zones of materials. So like wish 3 we have to define a stack of fills for section drawing and a stack of textures.This would be cool, but not on the top of my list. It is part of the holy grail of never having to stack and sandwich walls to accomplish things that are presently beyond the scope of the tool.
9. Walls should follow story height (of the user wants so)I would prefer that the walls can be told to extend up and/or down to the nearest floors and/or roofs. (speedikon had this capability when I worked on it back in 1997)
10. Last but not least. Free form walls. This could be done by graphically editing the inner and outer lines of the wall AND defining a wall profile.This is also a high priority (particularly looking at the feedback here) but it does have some potential to seriously complicate #1. And there is also the issue of doors and windows in these complex wall structures.
2004-09-24 06:40 PM
3. Different Section and Plan fillsI would want it to be able to use a "brick with coursing" or "CMU with coursing" hatch in sections, but not plans. Maybe even a "batt insulation," again, in section, not plan.
I have never seen the need for this myself, but it seems to be a common wish. Perhaps if I had it I would suddenly realize all the things I could do that I hadn't thought of before. What do you need it for?
2004-09-24 08:15 PM
2004-09-24 08:22 PM
2004-09-24 10:16 PM
TomWaltz wrote:I kind of figured that I just hadn't given it enough thought. Those would be really useful functions; especially with scale sensitivity in the fills and/or composites.
I would want it to be able to use a "brick with coursing" or "CMU with coursing" hatch in sections, but not plans. Maybe even a "batt insulation," again, in section, not plan.
I think this goes along with "vertically complex walls," which could have brick up to a height (maybe 4'), a concrete water table, then siding the rest of the height of the wall
2004-09-24 10:21 PM
Petros wrote:This is turning into a catalog of uses for the feature. I'm glad I asked. The problem of showing section fills in low walls has always bugged me. For parapets I usually mask them with the coping, but prior to 9 that meant adding fills if I used roofs and slabs for the purpose. Now wouldn't it be cool to be able to add a coping to the top as part of the walls?
Matthew,
the simplest example why we need the different fills in section elevation are parapet walls: empty fill on plan , solid on section.
This could be also achieved by implementing the "override horizontal section high" for walls as I wished in...
http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=3884&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=
2004-09-25 12:15 AM
2004-09-25 02:20 AM
Matthew wrote:or footings to the base
Now wouldn't it be cool to be able to add a coping to the top as part of the walls?
2004-09-25 02:41 AM