Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
Thanks for your submission and votes on this idea! We are evaluating where this request falls into our roadmap and will provide an update when we have made a decision.
In addition to 3D visibility for grids: Given the nature of buildings is departing from strictly rectangular in favor of angular and irregular designs, it would be extremely helpful to have 3D grids-- Grids that can slope in elevation. Tirangulated frame structures would rejoice at this!
Yes, please add the ability to see grids and levels in 3D views. Allow the visibility to be controlled, probably in Visibility/Graphics (maybe Grids and Levels move to the Model tab from the Annotations tab?). Hopefully, this shouldn't be hard to figure out, since it is already implemented in the conceptual massing environment, and once upon a time in a thing called Vasari.
Speaking of Vasari, reminds me of how modeling in perspective worked there, and was just a toggle to turn perspective on or off (did't require placing cameras or anything). But that's a topic for a different idea.
Allowing 3-dimensional Gridlines would be very powerful. Seems like inclusion of REFERENCE LINES at the Project Level would be a start. After that, allowing Reference Lines to be NAMED would be even better (as well as allowing access to a reference line's workplanes, both along its length and perpendicular planes at its ends, by Name). Then, add the rest of grid functionality (category assignment, grid bubble tagging options, breaks in grid per view, as well as structural member association).
In addition, after POLYLINES have been implemented in Revit, Multi-segmented grids could be made on the fly by joining grid segments-- this could work for 2D AND 3D grids. I know what you're thinking: how can we implement Reference Lines or 3D grids, which would likely be driven by end points that are sometimes shared among separate lines/grids and would want to be controlled by a shared POINT, if Reference POINTS aren't accessible at the Project Level? Answer: Reference POINTS should be accessible at Project Level, be namable, and be autonomous to move independent of Reference Planes. (This functionality is already somewhat possible using Adaptive point families).
Given the increase in parametric processes and structural integration, and that these workflows rely heavily on points, lines/arcs/curves, polylines/polycurves, and Nurbs curves, Revit should make a real and strategic effort to maintain and Improve these functionalities on its end, even if only to talk better with Dynamo, and hopefully in a way that is also useful without it.
I want to see Structural Column Tags carry 3D text labels. Reason is, when I tag all the structural columns, I want the column grid to get exported into Navisworks. This way I don't have to deal with looking at gridlines. I will only see the 3D grid intersection at each column.
Why we don't have the ability to see grids / levels in Revit Project model in 3D is a mystery to me...but certainly a MUST. Autodesk should have this at the top of the list.
Congrats! We love this idea as we are always looking for better ways to let you edit in 3D, so we are marking it as Accepted. Because implementing visualization for Grids in 3D requires separate development time, we have split this idea in two. We are accepting Levels in 3D only at this time.
If you would also like to see Grids in 3D please vote on that idea here:
Makarov_d, that work around you shared is unfortunately just that, a work around, and misses the point of this idea. We're looking for a dynamic 3D representation in Revit for levels (and grids - please go vote on that idea!).
For my 2 cents, I think it should work like the 3D levels/grids/reference planes from old Vasari (and the Revit conceptual modeling environment) - see saltsmans post above. Also has the benefit that it should be easier to implement, since they've already done it at least once before...
@lionel.kai The grids and levels are almost the same object, they had to be realized together! We voted for your idea only for "3d grids". When the idea gained a lot of votes and was "accepted" - it was renamed, "grids" was removed. Fine. Another idea looks completely wrong, and it is "not accepted." And Autodesk developers understood you literally - 3d levels are already implemented (and well done), 3d grids is not. So it goes.
@Extraneous There are a lot of communication issues between Autodesk and its customers, including (but not limited to) how much we're supposed to keep ideas separate. I've had to repost multiple ideas when a single (combined) idea was archived, but recently I've also seen ideas being combined that were related, but not quite the same...
That said, I understand why they're treating these as two separate ideas. Also, I get the impression that Grids in 3D Views is "accepted" (even if it doesn't officially have that status). While I could be wrong, I think they just need a separate idea voted on to justify their development time. I also understand them starting with Levels, as they're "simpler" (can only be one plane) and any issues they solve (with controls & visibility) can also be applied to Grids, when they implement them (though they'll also have to deal with multi-segment issues).
@lionel.kai yes, all this is understandable, but all the same "acceptance", "combining" of ideas raises big questions. One of my ideas, too, was combined with non-similar idea; "ideas" are accepted with few voices, and popular ones are ignored. There is a suspicion, this whole portal is a splurge. We all need to be more attentive to our ideas.
Perhaps, 3d-grids will indeed be realized later due to "multisegmentation". I track progress on the beta portal and I hope for the best.
