I think there are some amazing possibilities if the tool could be expanded to define complete room assemblies.
If floors, ceilings and wall finishes could be associated with zones and thus fitted automatically to the enclosing walls it could be quite wonderful. The possibilities boggle the mind. Perhaps most of our relational wishes could simply be functions of the zone tool.
An intelligent zone could include the trim package, fittings and finishes, etc. I imagine a washroom type zone that can automatically place the partitions, toilets, urinals sinks etc. either according to the available space or sized to the load requirements.
The same could apply to conference rooms, classrooms, bedrooms, and so on. It would be like a live module where the whole unit can be moved around together and the internal components remain associated but freely editable.
That is certainly interesting Matthew and a good idea athough possibly sounds a bit like design by the software. I know you like the big picture but I would be happy if the zone tool could have materials assigned to each face to facilitate creating room and finishes schedules and take offs. I voted essential just to see the zone tool expanded from its current limited usage.
John Hyland : ARINA : www.arina.biz
User ver 4 to 12 - Jumped to v22 - so many options and settings!!!
OSX 10.15.6 [Catalina] : Archicad 22 : 15" MacBook Pro 2019 [/size]
Yeah, it's definitely a long term wish. I would also be very happy to see a few features like wall finishes and intelligence in section come along sooner on the way to the more full featured set down the road.
BTW, I don't see this as design by computer at all. The idea is that the room assemblies provide a reasonable starting point, giving you all (or most of ) the bits you need to properly set up the room. Besides I imagine that they would be set up by the end user (or clever guys like Tom or Link or me) according to the standards of the particular practice. Of course rooms such as public lavatories are so rigidly defined by code and zoning requirements that the more they can be predefined the better.
That is a neat idea . You design a single room package, then apply it throughout. It would be great when you switch from one to another and see all the interior elevations and schedules change.
I think an enhancement would be a heirarchical system that allows you to have a set of rooms, say "meeting" that all has a set of options but maybe one room within that is the executive meeting room and has one or two upgrades without losing all the other information.
This is a continuation of the SuperZone concept that emerged when I was thinking of better ways to manage finished floor and ceiling slabs (modeled separately from structural floor plates). Matthew is correct in identifying that the placement and editing of many other finishes, furnishings and fixtures (the 3Fs) will likewise benefit from the same connectedness.
I'm voting essential not because we "need" any of this to do good work today but because this space orientation is a good counterpoint to the solid (structural) orientation that modeling typically emphasizes, and because it represents an alternative, more design minded, approach to Revit's linear linking methodology.
The key is scalability and flexibility. In early design phases these SZs need to work as space planning tools that can automatically place and move interior walls as well as adjacent zones. Later the 3Fs could be associated. I love Tom's idea that entire schemes could be substituted.
A hard look at the limitations of the concept is also needed. It seems to me that SZ's influence on other elements should probably be limited to their X, Y location along horizontal planes established and edited with other tools. For example editing the zone polygon in plan, or it's vertical face in 3D, would move the walls, 3Fs and adjacent zones, but that raising the ceiling would be controlled by a hybridization of stories and the floor plan cut plane. Similarly, while the vertical edges of finished floor and ceiling slabs could be linked to the zone, their horizontal surfaces should be fastened to the structural floor plate such that the entire assembly could be elevated as one. It is critical that managing these relationships not be onerous (e.g. the current FPCP).
Regards, Geoff Briggs I & I Design, Seattle, USA AC7-27, M1 Mac, OS 13.x