Specific modeling tools commands for Revit: specifically what do you want?

[dbaldacchino]

Not the "only" way...you can always build an in-place family roof using a profile swept along any plane, or an extrusion in any plane. You do not have to build the mass and use pick face.

Thanks for the correction Scott. If you use an In-Place family, you cannot use a roof assembly though, which will not represent your roof structure properly in section and you'd have to rectify by adding detail components instead.

[janunson]

a parametric 3D Chamfer would be great.
I think a 3D sweep (same as now, but path isn't restricted to a single work plane) is pretty essential.
a smooth 3D helix (for ramps, etc.) would be excellent.
a 2-path sweep would be very nice. (profile has 2 origins, scales parametrically based on location of 2 paths instead of 1 path.
a sweep/Blend as wes described would be really, really cool.

I think the ultimate would be a modeling tool that would allow me to mathmatically define any shape. This would be really sweet, and open up the possiblity for all of us to develop our own modeling algorithms using the API. I think that's the best way for AutoDesk to give us all what we need.

Most important is that these tools create objects like roofs and floors that still trim and join with other objects as we've grown to expect them to do in simple 3D forms. Having the ability to do these things but only in masses, and then having to generate specialized versions of walls and curtain systems that don't match all current behaviors isn't really any better than doing the modeling in Form Z and importing as a mass... so to me the most critical element is that these modeling tools work with the native components of revit.

Along those lines, i could see the possibility of not needing any new modeling tools if 3D imports were improved so that - parametrics could be applied to imported shapes, object styles could be applied to imported layers, and visibility and boolean operations would work together and on imported objects.

[robmorfin]

Obviously Nurbs is a needed tool as part of the modeling capabilities of Revit, only one person called it nurbs, almost everybody else asked for something (not nurbs) that can be created with nurbs in seconds and without any problem (blend/sweep, 3D path, rotate along path, helix, extrude along spline, morphing through path, 3D curves, blend to non-parallel & non planar profiles, 2 path sweep), why ask for all these individual specific tools if you can create them all with any modeling tool by using nurbs with them?

[Scott D Davis]

Obviously Nurbs is a needed tool as part of the modeling capabilities of Revit, only one person called it nurbs, almost everybody else asked for something (not nurbs) that can be created with nurbs in seconds and without any problem (blend/sweep, 3D path, rotate along path, helix, extrude along spline, morphing through path, 3D curves, blend to non-parallel & non planar profiles, 2 path sweep), why ask for all these individual specific tools if you can create them all with any modeling tool by using nurbs with them?

It's much tougher to parametrically control nurbs. With a loft, you have some values you can control through parameters. With nurbs, you've got individual points floating in space, and each point must be defined individually.

[DanielleAnderson]

All the stuff Wes and Scott asked for plus...

another sketch option in the floor creation tool that would allow 'floor by point'. Essentially allowing you to pick points and assign elevations to them relative to the base floor level.
A secondary control would allow the floor to have a level underside or a consistent thickness. Basically a topo tool to build floors as in place families rather than planes. This would allow complex sloped floors with drainage slopes built in. Way easier than the carve and join method or using blends.
As an intermediate solution, the ability to define floor by face on a surface that isn't level.

Ditto on the "floor by point" idea--good one, by the way.
Also, ditto on the 3d sweep (or loft) and the non-parallel planar blending.

[robmorfin]

It's much tougher to parametrically control nurbs. With a loft, you have some values you can control through parameters. With nurbs, you've got individual points floating in space, and each point must be defined individually.

Sorry, Scott, I think you are talking about AutoCAD meshes not nurb surfaces, nurbs are way more parametric than any other object either being a nurb curve or a nurb surface, they can be controlled and modified in many ways either through vertex (points), shape (curves) and once it is a surface you can modify its vertex individually, by rows, by lines conforming the grid in any direction, also its scale, its length, its rotation, all this keeping its parametricity to be modified or reseted at any time and all the history of the modifications applied to is kept to be modified at any time. If you Google "nurbs parametric" you will get 79,800 results as today, there you can find out what they are, how they work, their math, their parametricity capabilities, how to program them (some of the places even give you the code for free for you to use in your programs) and anything you want to know about them, I don't think is fair for anybody to say that is much tougher to parametrically control nurbs, it is in fact easier.

[Chad Smith]

I listed what I wanted for Site modeling tools nearly 2 years ago.

Wow , did I say 2 years. That's a long time.

[AP23]

There is a difference between the lofting tools in rhino and 3ds max.. 3ds max has a lofting tool that could be compared to Revit's sweep tool. Only difference is that you can ad in 3ds max more profiles along the path and the path is not restricted to a plane (see attachments 5). The lofting tool in Rhino is completely different. You can compare it to the blend tool in Revit. However, here you can draw unlimited nurb curves and put a surface on it. (see attechment 5) We should get both.

[Arnel Aguel]

It's much tougher to parametrically control nurbs. With a loft, you have some values you can control through parameters. With nurbs, you've got individual points floating in space, and each point must be defined individually.

I do agree with Scott here although we aspire for more fluid modeling tools in revit but let us be realistic that Revit is not intended to be a free form modeler software. So we have to wait what the development team could come up I guess they are listening quite well and try their best what can they do to improve Revit.

[Wes Macaulay]

Let's not kid ourselves: the geometry guys at Revit are the best out there. This wish is one of many, so I've wanted people to give details as to how a new modeling tool would work, and why you need it. Hopefully there's enough people who need a combined sweep/blend to let development add the new capability to Revit.