Height of Attached Walls (top)

[dbaldacchino]

I was wondering if this just bugs me or if I'm not alone :)

Say you have a 1' high wall and you attach it to a roof that is 20' above. The wall still reports at 1' Unconnected Height. Walls don't report their connected height and I don't like that. Yes, I can create a Quantity or Material schedule and divide the area by the length to get an average height, but shouldn't that be reported for me in the wall Properties?

[aaronrumple]

I was wondering if this just bugs me or if I'm not alone :)

Say you have a 1' high wall and you attach it to a roof that is 20' above. The wall still reports at 1' Unconnected Height. Walls don't report their connected height and I don't like that. Yes, I can create a Quantity or Material schedule and divide the area by the length to get an average height, but shouldn't that be reported for me in the wall Properties?
It should but I can understand why they didn't do it that way. The wall may be connected to a sloped surface - so the height would vary. Or the wall might be only under part of a floor - so one end is one height and the other end a different height.

[..shaner]

I was wondering if this just bugs me or if I'm not alone :)

Say you have a 1' high wall and you attach it to a roof that is 20' above. The wall still reports at 1' Unconnected Height. Walls don't report their connected height and I don't like that. Yes, I can create a Quantity or Material schedule and divide the area by the length to get an average height, but shouldn't that be reported for me in the wall Properties?


so when you do your quantity schedule it dosnt reflect the difference??? i ask becuase when i edit the profile of a wall to have some wacky shape (that exceeds either height or horizontal limits of the original box)
i found that it DID give me the correct wall area in the properties of the wall. but i never tested this in estimating material quantities, i just assumed it would work since it was giving me a proper readout from the properties tab

[dbaldacchino]

Thanks Aaron. I understand that issue. But at least an average height or some other message saying "varies" would be more useful than nothing. For a sloped wall, an average might be appropriate but for a candition where a wall is attached to two different roofs/slabs, then it becomes a problem. Perhaps the lowest and highest points of the wall should be reported. I know Revit is calculating the area properly at least, which is great.

EDIT: Yes Shane, the area is correct. You cannot report the height in a quantity schedule but you can compute an average height from the area and length.

[..shaner]

Perhaps the lowest and highest points of the wall should be reported.


agreed, i think a top and bottom extent whould be nice

[comhasse]

I think in this case Revit behaves very logically. The parameter "disconnected height" is just what it says, it's not necessarily the actual wall height. It's not a property of the physical wall but a property of the parametric model: it tells you for example what the wall height will be after you disconnect it from any slab or when you edit the profile. Does that make sense?

Michael

[dbaldacchino]

Yep, makes sense. But issue is not whether this information is correct or not. If I'm in a plan view and I look up the wall properties for a connected wall, the unconnected height is useless information. I want to know the actual height of that wall, whether it's an average height or the values of the lowest and highest points.