Non-vertical walls

[cliff collins]

Please vote in poll:

Subject: Have the ability to make non-vertical walls WITHOUT having to create
a Mass, and then convert face to wall.

The angle from vertical could be specified in Properties of the wall.

I think this subject has been posted quite a bit and deserves a vote!

cheers.....

[AP23]

Would be nice, but it should also have the ability to select (and ad) the vertices and/or edges of the wall and move them so tha wall slants. You can graphically see what you're doing instead of just having to deal with a dialog box.

[cliff collins]

Agreed-multiple grip/edit points would be even better! ( did you do the example in Max? )

However, for this poll--just trying to start with a basic request--with the angle/slope tool as a minimum.

Visibility---also agreed---You should be able to see the wall tilt onscreen as you type in the angle in the dialog box.

Revit already allows control of angles of walls in Plan.
Roofs, Ceilings and Slabs can have slopes defined. Beams can have angles--varying "z" heights, angles in plan, etc.

But Walls are stuck in "plumb" mode. This is
needlessly limiting--and only in one of the x, y and z axes! The "building maker"
mass conversion is just too cumbersome for a simple non-vertical wall.

BTW--the "vertical wall angle tool" would include Curtainwalls and Storefronts--as they are host walls as well.

As once was so famously stated: "ask and you shall receive......" LOL!!

cheers.......

[dpasa]

I think the only solution was, is and always will be a full set of modeling commands in Revit, like every other modeler has... So, you can make whatever you want with the right tool and name it a wall.... or a floor.... or a roof... and then use boolean ops for attachment... Everything else is not enough for today's architecture and 3d modeling.

[dimitri]

I think the only solution was, is and always will be a full set of modeling commands in Revit, like every other modeler has... So, you can make whatever you want with the right tool and name it a wall.... or a floor.... or a roof... and then use boolean ops for attachment... Everything else is not enough for today's architecture and 3d modeling.
I agree with dpasa here. If there's one thing Google Sketchup (only other modeling programme i used to use) has over Revit, it's the ability to pretty much model whatever you wanted. Some things are naturally more difficult in Sketchup than they are in Revit, but the fact is you CAN do them with basic knowledge of Sketchup.

[cliff collins]

*bump back to top*

[clog boy]

So what you're all asking is an inplace extrusion kind of family, which would inherit the parameters for certain instance families such as walls, floors and roofs.
The difference between a wall and a floor is that a wall typically has a length, and a floor has an area. Walls are very much 'onedimensional' (linebased) while floors and roofs are more 2D/3D.
It's a good point very well made and I agree that not all walls are vertical. The biggest 'if' I see here is the autojoin function with other family types (which we, as probably many contractors, disable by default) and how doors and windows would behave.

This request would IMO create a new set of issues, with probably more pain than gain. But I'd like to see them pull it off.

[twiceroadsfool]

What the original poster and AP suggest actually has some merit, and it could definetely be useful. I dont mind the Massing/Wall by Face tool for large shapes of buildings... But for a single wall here and there, its just not efficient, or... streamlined.

For the Push/Pull/Sketchup-can-do-everything-crew, im really curious about HOW you see this "new set of tools" working. And i dont mean in rhetoric, i mean REALLY.

In sketchup, we can "pull" something up, then "sketch" on one side, and "push or pull" it in or out, then delete faces of it.

Okay, well in Revit that "thing" that we pulled up has a definition, sometimes with layers of certain thicknesses. So we would have to define A layer to vary, right? Or multiple? And how does it wrap all the layers as you deform it? And when you delete a face, what does it delete, since Revit isnt a face-based modeler?

"Do whatever you want and call it a floor...' makes me nervous. Im not saying all the tools in Revit work as they need to, certainly there is TONS of room for improvement. But id really like to hear how this would work. It sounds like some people would be happy if the entire program was a giant in-place-family-fest. Yikes..

[cliff collins]

bump back to top................

[Alex Page]

Please vote in poll:

Subject: Have the ability to make non-vertical walls WITHOUT having to create
a Mass, and then convert face to wall.


cheers.....

A small point, but I use the create tool, not the Massing tool

[doe]

they have this in archicad, and i've been asking for this in revit since about version 6 or 7...

[William Troeak]

This would be great! It would save me a lot of time and effort in creating the Revit models that I work on.

This topic needs to be beat like a drum until Autodesk gets tired of hearing about it and just gives us what we want.

Great post cliff collins!

[cliff collins]

*bump to top*.............

Oh--and anyone who voted NO--please explain.

cheers..............

[twiceroadsfool]

I havent voted, because there are too many variables in the mix.

Sure, MORE options would always be great... But simply saying *i would use it* or *i wouldnt* isnt possible until i know more about how (theroetically) they would behave.

1. How would the react to location lines, would location lines be at the base or at some specified height?

2. How will Stacked walls and Curtain walls behave with such a thing?

3. What happens at the tops and bottoms of the walls? Perpendicular to the face, or flat against the ground? What happens when the walls are attached to other objects?

4. (Terrified) Wall joins? Against vertical walls or walls that arent complimentary to the wall in question?

5. The ongoing question of hosted elements. How will THEY behave on these new walls?

I dont ask to be difficult, but all of these would SERIOUSLY affect if id use the new tool. Liken it to Legend Views. So the tool is there, but its undeveloped enough that i dont use them at all.

Its hard to say id use it without knowing how it would work. Those factors above might mitigate that wall by face is still a better option, or not...

[cliff collins]

Aaron,

I agree--there are real technical problems which will need to be addressed
before this tool can be REAL.

That said--when you step away and look at the wholistic state of the industry and BIM--
we all claim to have these incredibly powerful new tools--but when asked a basic question like "how do I make a wall non-verticle" and the rhetoric is a reply such as yours---the average new or even advanced user will say " hmmmm....I don't care WHY it can't do that--I just want to be able to do it because it is required in my daily workflow.
I'll just go do it in SU ( or other modeling program where such tasks are simple and direct. ) But this exactly what we DON"T want!!

I am very tired of having to revert to "bandaid solutions" for very simple tasks such as this.

To be fair, I'll try to suggest some solutions to your concerns:

1. How would the react to location lines, would location lines be at the base or at some specified height?

Location lines would remain the same--Interior, Center, Exterior etc.

2. How will Stacked walls and Curtain walls behave with such a thing?

They would tilt--just like we want them to!!!!!!!!!! Imagine that!!!

3. What happens at the tops and bottoms of the walls? Perpendicular to the face, or flat against the ground? What happens when the walls are attached to other objects?

The geometry would join/miter--just like to angled walls in PLAN do. You could even have a tool like "edit wall joins" for Butt, Miter, etc. ( like we already have for PLANS.)

4. (Terrified) Wall joins? Against vertical walls or walls that arent complimentary to the wall in question?

The geometry would join with the aid of new tools like the above.
Let's face it---how we do this now is a joke--"make a generic model,
with some voids, and cut/join geometry"" blah blah--or "Make a Mass, then convert the face to a wall""---then what? Now I have my sloped wall--but I still have the same joinery issues you raise!!

5. The ongoing question of hosted elements. How will THEY behave on these new walls?

Hmm... some New Family tools for making hosted objects attach correctly to a sloped host, perhaps?? Attach extrusions to sloped reference planes/lines, where an angle to host can be specified, or automatically attached.

I don't have all the answers--I am not a programmer, and never will be.
I'm an architect who is paying for the world's best software--and I just want it to WORK!!
I think most users would agree.

I think the Factory needs to invent NEW tools/methods to be able to accomplish things such as this. Instead of falling back on the status quo state of the programming....
( sounds like we may just be getting some "free-form modelling tools" in an upcoming release--don't be "terrified"--embrace the exciting brave new world!!!!!!!!! )

Cheers..................................

[twiceroadsfool]

Well, we fundamentally disagree on the issue, i suppose. Its not a big deal.

I wholheartedly discount the "I can do it in SU crew" because SU is nothing. Its fluff. Make believe. Its a planer-no-information-modeler, so (in my humble opinion) i dont care WHAT it can do.

And to be direct- Im NOT disagreeing with you. Maybe i would use the tool, maybe i wouldnt. But i DONT want them to waste development time on a tool that ends up like Legends, where most of us defeat them anyway because its useless.

Ive been told (by many people at autodesk) that the best way for us to get what we want, is to be articulate in explaining what we want. To simply say " i want to slant walls" isnt going to do it for me,and though you tried to address my concerns, you did so with answers that dont really address the concerns. Youre not a programmer, and either am i. But programmers arent architects. So without us knowing what we really want, how can we possibly get it?

1. Location lines- I didnt mean where would they be. Are they at the ground level? Or top? Or specified height? You draw a wall THEN change its base constraint, but its slanted. Does it shift? Or move the location line?

2. Stacked and CW's dont behave normally, and you know that. Stacked with sweeps embedded... What happens where it mitres to the ground? CW's- so all mullions are perpendicular besides the ones at the top and bottom? And how does that panel work in between?

3&4- Ill admit, probably easily solvable. Though, with how intense the processing gets with wall joins, im fearful of complex joins of complex walls and angles, and bringing computers to a halt. BUT, here i DO agree its a non-issue. Thats life. :)

5. Youre solution here sounds awesome... But thats the thing: Getting this tool alone wont be enough, we'll need a host of tools (no pun intended) to deal with it. But here too, i concede this is an issue regardless.

BTW, dont mistake me as being conservative or *terrified* of new things (well, besides ribbons... shudder). I just dont believe in blanket-requests that get us more stuff we cant use. FWIW, i dont consider Wall by face a *workaround*. Its clunky, but it works as intended. If we dont like the way it works, wed better KNOW what we want... Or we'll get more clunk.

And seriously, Skecthup is a WEAK comparison, until it actually has some reality to its modeling.

[cliff collins]

YES--37

NO--5 ( anyone care to explain WHY they voted NO?


cheers...................................................

[dpasa]

The reason CAD products exist, is to help architects with what they want to design and build... It is never ment to make an architect think like a CAD application and design what the app can make... Thinking how to "translate" a solid as a layered wall (which btw is not so difficult imo for most cases) is exactly the wrong way of thinking... After all, I would prefer to loose the accuracy of my schedules (which happens anyway sometimes) and be able to make what I need and want.

[cliff collins]

Bump....again.

Gee, think I want this to get some attention?!

[twiceroadsfool]

I voted no.... But i explained why above. ;)

[saeborne]

they have this in archicad, and i've been asking for this in revit since about version 6 or 7...

When I was using ArchiCAD, I was very happy when Graphisoft introduced this parameter... And then, several months down the road, I realized that I hadn't used it a single time in a real project situation.

Now that I've been using Revit, I have encountered a couple scenarios where I needed a canted wall. But, that wall did so much more than simply lean... It curved at the top to blend with a ceiling pad. It folded at the base, to integrate with some millwork. The profile was neither simple nor orthogonal. I ended up modeling it as an in-place family. That worked fine.

Here's the issue... Even if Revit Walls had a "Slant" parameter, it still would not have satisfied this particular design situation. The in-place family editor gave me much more control than trying to create it in ArchiCAD (that does have a "Slant" parameter).

[cliff collins]

YES=40
NO=6 ( Again--anyone care to explain WHY?)

cheers...................

[dpasa]

When I was using ArchiCAD, I was very happy when Graphisoft introduced this parameter... And then, several months down the road, I realized that I hadn't used it a single time in a real project situation.

Now that I've been using Revit, I have encountered a couple scenarios where I needed a canted wall. But, that wall did so much more than simply lean... It curved at the top to blend with a ceiling pad. It folded at the base, to integrate with some millwork. The profile was neither simple nor orthogonal. I ended up modeling it as an in-place family. That worked fine.

Here's the issue... Even if Revit Walls had a "Slant" parameter, it still would not have satisfied this particular design situation. The in-place family editor gave me much more control than trying to create it in ArchiCAD (that does have a "Slant" parameter).

That's why we should be able to have tools for all these params... Another solution could be some import/export options so that we could use other modelers...
I don't think that being able to read the 3dm or obj file of the attached image is difficult... Also it is quite easy to turn it to a multilayered wall...A shell command with some params would do it... Sorry for not being able to justify my opinion, I am not a programmer, but I think it is possible

[cliff collins]

dpasa,

I agree!

cheers...........

[dpasa]

dpasa,

I agree!

cheers...........

Good to hear,thanks

[jeffh]

I don't think that being able to read the 3dm or obj file of the attached image is difficult... Also it is quite easy to turn it to a multilayered wall...A shell command with some params would do it... Sorry for not being able to justify my opinion, I am not a programmer, but I think it is possible

I am not sure I understand the difficulty. I made the attached form in Revit with not much trouble. Made it into a multi layered wall. It is not an exact match for your shape but it is as close as I could get quickly looking at the images. Modeled all in Revit, no need for a file import from another modeler.

[cliff collins]

The subject of the thread is:

Plain and simple--a tool to "tilt" a wall--to make it "non-vertical".

Some of the posts have been expanding this basic concept to more complex
modeling abilities--which are great also--but over and above the basic issue
in the thread.

So--let's keep on the main subject--and anyone who has voted NO
PLEASE EXPLAIN!!

cheers....

[3dway]

We do various tapered surfaces in our designs. In keeping with the BIM idea, those tapered surfaces are never as simple as a tapered wall surface when considered from a detailing point of view.

Example, tapered cultured stone. We often acheive the taper by putting tapered furring within the wall construction.

I'd like to be able to go into the wall type "modify" section view and pick the line between layers, and say "shows in plan/doesn't show in plan" and rotate one of the wall layers from the bottom, or give a top and bottom dimension... then any layers on top of that one are tapered.

[twiceroadsfool]

The subject of the thread is:

Plain and simple--a tool to "tilt" a wall--to make it "non-vertical".

Some of the posts have been expanding this basic concept to more complex
modeling abilities--which are great also--but over and above the basic issue
in the thread.

So--let's keep on the main subject--and anyone who has voted NO
PLEASE EXPLAIN!!

cheers....


Im really not trying to be argumentative, but let me make sure i have this straight:

1. The post is about tilting walls.
2. If you chime in asking for MORE than that, wonderful.
3. If you chime in questioning why you NEED that, youre not welcomed in the post.

Besides, i still have questions about this *dream tool* that i posted above that no one seems to have an answer for... besides "Sketchup could do it..."

:)

[cliff collins]

Im really not trying to be argumentative, but let me make sure i have this straight:

1. The post is about tilting walls.
2. If you chime in asking for MORE than that, wonderful.
3. If you chime in questioning why you NEED that, youre not welcomed in the post.

Besides, i still have questions about this *dream tool* that i posted above that no one seems to have an answer for... besides "Sketchup could do it..."

:)

1. Yes
2. No, actually--just trying to keep the thread on subject--the simple "tilt-wall" tool.
The more complex issues would be for another discussion.
3. I'm asking for those who answered NO to explain WHY they would never use the tool
given that it works (not long dissertations on current software limitations/programming issues, etc.)

PS--my orig. comment about SU was to point out that since Revit can not tilt a simple wall easily--some users will fall back to simpler modeling tools--which we DO NOT
want them to do. No praise for SU intended--quite the contrary!
No one has the technical programming answers for the "dream tool" that is the Factory's job, and why us users should be asking for new, useful tools.

cheers.............

[AP23]

3. I'm asking for those who answered NO to explain WHY they would never use the tool
given that it works (not long dissertations on current software limitations/programming issues, etc.)

Revit is extremely limited in its modeling tools (even compared to AutoCAD). Most firms worldwide don't use Revit for that reason. Those who do, generally don't need more advance modeling tool like a wall tilt parameter, simply because their projects don't require that. I don't even remember the last time I’ve seen a tilted wall or non-orthogonal building in the image gallery. So, in Autodesk defense, they are more likely to give us a text editor that has more requests, than a tool that tilts walls on the fly.

[jeffh]

3. I'm asking for those who answered NO to explain WHY they would never use the tool
given that it works (not long dissertations on current software limitations/programming issues, etc.)


If we are just to assume the tool would work flawlessly then I suppose NOBODY could truthfully answer NO to this poll.

Now if there was perhaps another option to the poll you might get better responses. I would say there could be another option about the tools working OK as of now.

For Example:

In the few (3) "real" projects I have put together in the last year or so, I would say without really doing any in depth analysis, 98% of the walls I drew in the project were handled flawlessly with the current tools and were 90 deg to the floor. I had one wall that was sloped and I need to draw it using the, mass, by face method, and the other had a retaining wall and some other walls with a sloped face. I did these by adding a prifile sweep to represent the sloping face to the wall definition.

So for those 2% which were not 90 deg I had to resort to other tools, but it was by no means impossible. So I had to spend a few extra minutes/clicks on 2% (at best) of the walls I drew.

So would I use these kinds of tools if they were part of Revit and worked flawlessly as you have described? Yes.

Are these tools REQUIRED to draw the small percentage of sloping walls I had in projects in the last year? No.

[cliff collins]

Jeff,

As an Architect using Revit since its first release, and doing "real world" projects
every day for the last 20 years, and especially in the Hotel/resort/casino market--
I would say that EVERY project we do has sloping walls--and much more complicated
geometry! Take a look around--not all buildings are boxes!!

So--again, the plain and simple question:

Would you like a tool, which GIVES YOU THE OPTION to tilt a wall?

Cut to the chase---almost 90% of the voters say YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

cheers........................

[dpasa]

OK, we want that tool, I guess Adesk already knows it also!!!
But it is important to say that this is just the simplest version of what we need....

[jeffh]

Jeff,

As an Architect using Revit since its first release, and doing "real world" projects
every day for the last 20 years, and especially in the Hotel/resort/casino market--
I would say that EVERY project we do has sloping walls--and much more complicated
geometry! Take a look around--not all buildings are boxes!!

So--again, the plain and simple question:

Would you like a tool, which GIVES YOU THE OPTION to tilt a wall?

Cut to the chase---almost 90% of the voters say YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

cheers........................

I also worked on plenty of "real world" projects while I was working everyday as an architect for 8 years. During those 8 years I think I can probably count the number of sloping walls I did on 1 hand.

[cliff collins]

Jeff,

"How often" will vary from firm to firm, project to project. It frankly does not matter.
The point is, when we need a sloping wall, give us a simple, easy to use
tool. Period.

And all this is just about simple, non-vertical walls!
(Lest I even start a similar poll
for free-form/organic/NURBS modelling !!!! )

Think how silly this post would be on a 3dsMax forum. It is not even a relevant topic.

And, as a side bar: If the modeling tools allow freedom in design--you just might see
a few more interesting buildings sprouting up around the world!

cheers........................

[twiceroadsfool]

Its a silly post here as well, no offense.

What is it youre trying to achieve? If you want the tool why not put it on the wishlish forum?

What, if you keep bumping it to the top do you think Adsk will just suddenly put it in to mute the masses? hehe

[cliff collins]

It is in the Wishlist LOL

Here's what I'm trying to accomplish:
To inform the Factory that a lot of Revit users would use, and benefit from,
a simple tool to give them a choice of modelling walls with the Wall tool
that are non-vertical. That's it. It shouldn't be so difficult.


cheers...

[cliff collins]

This just in

YES: 53
NO: 8

The masses have spoken.

cheers....

[SupremeTaco]

Should we then start a topic on creating a vertical roof...? :D or talk about why when you create a roof at a steep slope you see that it is NOT its original thickness, but that it is horribly skewed... why can't it STAY it's correct thickness? *sigh* the limits of these "uber powerful" BIM programs are very annoying. There are plenty of work-arounds, but those typically take away the "BIM" usefulness and you might have well have made the wall and imported it from Max. You'd all be VERY surprised at how useful Max can be when used correctly. Anyway......

[cliff collins]

Bill,

Agreed! (thus my Max reference in the thread above).

We use 3dsMax Design 2009 and Revit Architecture 2009
in our daily workflow.

We model almost completely in Revit, export FBX, import into Max for rendering/animation.

The reason we model in Revit is to use the power of BIM for our overall project workflow.

I'm hoping we'll get some more powerful/flexible modelling tools in Revit 2010.

cheers...

[Scott Womack]

Cliff,

I agree that we need some more tools. Personally, a higher priority is to fix some of the tools in the package to work better. Also, Adesk changed the renderer in 09, and not much functionality was fixed, or added. They have already shown they are going to revamp the interface in 2010 (wheter it is needed or not), so personally, I doubt much functionality will be added changed in the next release, especially since the large scale lay-offs Adesk had recently.

[cliff collins]

Its amazing to that there is such resistance and post-justification to such a simple, good idea!

Tilt Wall Tool= GOOD

Workaround/bandaid solution= BAD

cheers...

[Wes Macaulay]

Bill -- what situation are you talking about? Even if I make a roof at 1000:12, it maintains its specified thickness.

There are mathematical problems with shape edited roofs/floors on high slopes, and I imagine the Factory is working on that when they have time...

[dpasa]

Its amazing to that there is such resistance and post-justification to such a simple, good idea!

Tilt Wall Tool= GOOD

Workaround/bandaid solution= BAD

cheers...

I think the meaning is that the Tilt wall tool is not enough...

[SupremeTaco]

Bill -- what situation are you talking about? Even if I make a roof at 1000:12, it maintains its specified thickness.

There are mathematical problems with shape edited roofs/floors on high slopes, and I imagine the Factory is working on that when they have time...

Ah, sorry I was thinking the problem was doing something different... it's not the thickness that is incorrect, it's the way it makes the edges of it stick out really far like this picture... can that be stopped?

Thanks, and sorry for hijacking your thread

[cliff collins]

Yes--the amazing "Saw Tool" which I suggested a few years ago...

We already have a "hammer" for demolishing, right?

So, why not a "Saw Tool" which will slice thru any model component
via a reference plane or face of geometry?

Great for snipping off the bottom of your errant roof, or slicing thru an entire project
to cut it up into chunks.....

Oh no--I feel another Poll coming on.................................

cheers...................

PS--all threads are good--just try to stay on the subject of Orig. Post

[cliff collins]

Back on the original subject:

YES= 59
NO= 8

cheers...............

[cliff collins]

See attached image: (from another BIM platform)

cheers...........

[twiceroadsfool]

Ugh, ArchiCAD.... Have fun with that.

Three replies in a row buddy? Youre really going to keep bumping this up until they build the tool? I see this thread getting 60 pages long.... :)

[cliff collins]

Aaron,
Quote: (By you)
"What the original poster and AP suggest actually has some merit, and it could definetely be useful. I don't mind the Massing/Wall by Face tool for large shapes of buildings... But for a single wall here and there, its just not efficient, or... streamlined."
Remember that? But you still voted NO?

Yep. 3 posts in a row.
The 1st one was one an "off-topic" subject--"The Saw Tool".
Watch out or I might start a new thread about that!
Or how about slanted COLUMNS?!!

The Archicad screenshot is just to show that a competing BIM platform
has provided the user with a tool, so that when needed the function can be performed quickly and easily--without "workarounds". ( We do not advocate or use Archicad.)

Why is there so much resistance to new, creative ideas for tools?

The reason I am making this so belaboured is that I am very passionate about BIM
and I would like to affect change in the way ideas are implemented, so that all users
can benefit from useful, valuable tools. That's it. And I will keep on doing it.

The reason it is 6 pages long is apparently there are a lot of users who share these views.

Cheers............

[twiceroadsfool]

LOL, yes, i voted no. And i explained why, several pages ago.Blindly saying "id use a tool" that stands to end up just like LEGENDS is not something i would do.

Im not RESISTING new tools, as you imply. Thats just silly and immature. What im resisting, is people demanding things, and not THINKING THROUGH what theyre asking for.

I want more USEFUL stuff. I DONT want more garbage in the program that only half works. So CURRENTLY, since no one seems to be able to delineate HOW this tool would actually work (and dont even say it, you didnt answer a LOT of my issues), then NO... I wouldnt use it. :::shrug:::

And knock yourself out posting whatever you want. But make no mistake about it: This thread only is 6 pages because you keep beating a dead horse. We all know archicad has it, im sure most of us have even seen the dialogue box. But im sure if we count, you are singhandledly 3 pages of the six. :)

FWIW, im not even really disagreeing with you. I just think this is a silly venue for trying to get what youre after, and the way youre only accepting or tolerant of people who take *your side* is, well... fairly unprofessional.

Just my two cents, you can have change back. :)

[cliff collins]

This just in:

62 to 8.

4 more days left in the Poll.

We know who ( 1 ) of the 8 is.

The other 7 who voted NO have not replied and explained WHY.

If they reply and explain why, with rational / intellligent / informed reasoning--then we can have a professional dialogue. That is all I ask for, expect in return and strive to follow as a guiding principle myself. No disrespect intended.

I do not claim to be able to explain HOW the tool would work from a software point of view--because I don't work at the Factory as an expert programmer who's job it is to be creative and invent new technologies! I have offered a few thoughtful suggestions how to help implement it.

I am just a Revit user asking for a simple tool which would be extremely helpful in our daily workflow.

It appears the Wishlist Manager has read the thread? The Wishlist is how to get new ideas implemented. Any thoughts?

cheers.....................................

[twiceroadsfool]

LOL, there really cant be a dialogue. Because If and WHEN we (the naysayers) post our concerns and why we WOULDNT use the tool, you wash your hands of the discussion with a simple "Im not a programmer."

Guess what? Im not one either, but working in ARCHITECTURE i have concerns for how such a tool would work, that you seem to broadly dismiss. Id like a new tool that would ENHANCE our workflow as well.

One thing ive learned working in architecture (in my short career so far), is that it ISNT about simply drawing something. We have to engineer the PROCESS, so that we can do BETTER by our clients. That applies for EVERY avenue in life, and this is one of them.

*WE* need to tell the factory how it SHOULD work, or YOUR workflow WONT be enhanced. But if you dont care i dont care either. :)

Status quo works for me, after all. :)

But ill merrily help you enhance the post count with a fraudulent discussion. :)

[cliff collins]

This just in:

YES=63
NO=8

Only 3 more days to vote!!!!!!!!!!!

cheers..........................

[cliff collins]

The votes are in.

After 6 long pages,

75 voters

Final tally:

66 YES
9 NO


The masses have spoken. Sloped wall tool would be a very good addition to Revit.

cheers.

[eas]

I have been missing this function for a long time and it's close to a disaster they have not solved it even in 2011 ! Walls by face is not a substitute since they don't work well together with ordinary walls. And walls by face is not exported through IFC witch is a huge problem in collaboration with other consultants.
We also need windows that follows the slope of the wall. I know I can use roof windows but that is not a good substitute.
haveaniceday