PADS CANT OVERLAP

[Anonymous]

It's the famous error that Pads cant overlap each other but can share edges. Actually architects are sometimes given drawings from Structural engineers when its necessary to overlap pads, i mean not in the same elevation but it possible and it happens in real building industry. It would be good if pads will be enabled to overlap. Thanks for attention

[Anonymous]

I think pads need to be done away with. What are they for, other than to tell  topo where to be or where not to be? I think this could easily be built into walls, floors, and foundations. If they serve some other function that I'm not aware of, could floors simply have a parameter of "is pad" (yes/no)?

[RPTHOMAS108]

Pads may be for piling platforms in construction models and other enabling works. This often does not equate to the same geometry as a final slab or foundation.

I think they can't overlap because of the way cut/fill is handled. You could say 'which is the highest' and that is the buildup when topo is lower or 'which is the lowest' and that is the cut when topo is higher but what if topo is in-between two overlapping pads (cut or fill)? It would be built up to one and cut down to the other but where falls the transition? You could probably decide that cut takes precedence.

[damjanuzelac]

I agree that pads are more hassle that useful.

They should be substituted by a floor property that says"cuts topography = yes/no". 

If this is too complex to implement, at least Revit should allow pads to overlap and give the lower one priority in cutting topography.

[ellison]

The OP issue extends to plan regions and topography subregions.  If they can't overlap, the user needs assistance from Revit in resolving the issue beyond signaling that the problem exists.