Anuncios
Welcome to the Revit Ideas Board! Before posting, please read the helpful tips here. Thank you for your Ideas!
Comentario
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Hi @samuelsanf,

Thanks for your comment! I agree, the idea you posted years ago is related. It is good to see that there are more users who don't get why there's no smarter way of defining finishes within a Revit model. When I started thinking about a solution (also years ago), my first idea was similar to yours. However, I discovered that some technical difficulties will probably stop Autodesk to implement it, so I kept looking for an alternative. As a result I came up with a different approach, keeping away from linking Room Parameters to Wall Layers. I'll explain why I think this approach is more likely to be implemented.

 

  1. To link the Room's Finish parameters to Wall Layers seems logical. The thing is, Room Boundaries aren't always defined by Walls. Sometimes it's Columns, sometimes it's a Curtain Wall, sometimes it's a slanted Roof or Ceiling. I can imagine that most of them - like a Curtain Wall - do not need to be fitted with the finishes, but Concrete Columns often will. But some users use (abuse) Curtain Walls for situations that do need finishing. If the solution for Room Finishes is linked to Wall Layers, it is evident that it is limited to Walls only, sidelining all other Room Bounding Elements.
  2. Splitting Walls at all intersections might be doable, splitting Columns, however, is complicated. Splitting Floors at all Room Boundaries, both above and below the floor, is virtually impossible and, moreover, undesirable.
  3. In many cases, the Room Bounding Elements are incorporated in Linked Models. It is impossible to add Room Finish properties to these linked Elements.
  4. Revit already comes with an engine that determines the circumference of Rooms. This engine could be used for the generation of the finishes too (Wall, Floor as well as Ceiling Finishes).
  5. This approach has been proven to work by using Dynamo. In fact, that's the solution we implemented in our company. However, that's a one time only process. Once the script has run, the generated finishes have no connection to the Room's parameters at all. And when the Room Bounding Walls Move, you have to think about moving the Finishing Walls too (which aren't visible in all views, so that's easily forgotten).
  6. A native implementation opens the possibility to also implement easier ways to assign exceptions (including pinning/unpinning finishes and the panel for Match Properties I described at the bottom of my idea).

Please comment if you think I'm overlooking something (or if you agree). I'm open for feedback and additional arguments to strengthen our position as power users in our attempt to get Autodesk moving in the right direction.