Ceiling epiphany, and a question.

[gordonp147484]

So for the longest time I have struggled with how to deal with ceilings that are integral with a floor or roof. One option has been to not include the sheetrock layer in the floor or roof, and then add a compound ceiling of just the sheetrock. This becomes a problem when you are dealing with a rated assembly, and want to drop that assembly in a legend gracefully. Also, getting the ceiling to align is problematic. Even in a non-sloping condition you have to locate the ceiling offset buy it's thickness, and remember to synchronize again if you change the ceiling thickness or material.
Now we have not used Basic ceilings much, because even a simple t-bar ceiling is available as a compound ceiling. Indeed I had never even thought of a reason for Basic ceilings to exist until I had this epiphany. Add the sheetrock to the underside of the floor or roof so that assembly is complete, and then add a Basic Ceiling where you also need ceiling hosted items. The Basic ceiling has no real thickness, so it just sits coincident with the bottom surface of the roof or floor and hosts nicely. Indeed, it seems that this is the intent for Basic Ceilings, as they ignore the Cut lineweight setting. They seem to be more an "idea" than an "object" which is kinda what I wanted.
Anyway, not sure if there is some other rational use for a Basic Ceiling, but I like this one.

However, there is still the issue of aligning the ceiling with the roof in a sloping condition. As far as I can tell I can't even create a ref plane aligned to the bottom of the roof and associate the ceiling to that. I am stuck with manually coordinating the slope and height of the ceiling. Is this correct, or is there some trick for getting a ceiling to stick to a slope. Ideally I would want to be able to change the slope of the roof and have the ceiling and all ceiling hosted items follow. Crossed fingers.

Thanks,
Gordon

[Hogmodo]

There is a fundamental and significant difference between Autocad and Revit that this problem in Revit illustrates. Autocad began as a 2D drafting tool a long time ago and has always been focused on making it work very well and completely for the people actually doing the work. Therefore, there are lots of neat little features (hit space bar to repeat the last command, far more options when creating intelligent "spaces" in the latest rendition, etc.) and not many stupid moments where you wonder "why can't this basic function that real users encounter regularly not work better." Revit began as a 3D model with lots of intelligent 3D objects and there seems to be a lack of focus on the end user's needs for efficiency. The pathetic way that doors are created in Revit "out of the box" is a great example. The ongoing problems, particularly with stacked walls, when you attach those walls to a roof is another. Your problem is one more.

Autodesk Revit is extremely proud of the fact that you can take a mass or shape, created in Revit, Rhino, Sketchup, whatever, and you can "select" the top surface and any roof you want is created and shaped to that surface. I agree that is a very nice feature. But, since ceilings are almost identical in nature to roofs, why can't you also select the underside of that shape to create a ceiling that exactly follows the shape of THAT surface? Appears to be the same process using the same elements. All they would have to do is think more completely about their end users' needs. They don't do that. They get another "flashy" 3D sparkly thingy for their merit badge sash and then they skip away to look for more. Wouldn't that solve your problem. Here is another option. They kinda/sorta have stacked walls working; how about a "stacked roof/ceiling?"

The fact that Revit is really great in many ways makes me crazy when it is really stupid in others. Sorry about the rant. JMVHO.