Associate any object with Storey Level

[shorter]

Despite some inherent limitations in the way storeys and storey levels work, it would be really useful to be able to associate any object to a storey level, not just symbols or certain PIOs.

 

For example, rather than add an edge beam as an extrusion or extrude along path to a slab, the extrusion could exist separately but be associated to the same 'SSL' storey level as the slab itself.

 

Of course, if objects could 'see' storey levels outside a 'container' like a solid addition or subtraction, or symbol this would be the sugary white substance on the proverbial flour and egg based confection.

[zoomer]

5 hours ago, shorter said:

or "certain" PIOs.

 

Unfortunately.

[zoomer]

5 hours ago, shorter said:

not just symbols

 

That sounds like a solution ...

we just pack everything we want to control by a story Level - into a Symbol

😉

[shorter]

16 hours ago, zoomer said:

 

That sounds like a solution ...

we just pack everything we want to control by a story Level - into a Symbol

😉

 

As do we.  However, in this instance, I wanted to test the idea of associating a coping, which would not normally be converted to a symbol, to a storey level.

[zoomer]

Any Elements Z value in OIP should have a dropdown to select

if it applies to its Layer height or as an offset to a Story Level (?)

 

(At least to those Story Levels that relate to its Layer ....

when bound to a Story that contains Levels ?)

 

Oh wait, then when every Element belongs to a Story and Level ....

why do we still need Layers ?

 

It gets complicated for me here.

 

 

At least all PIOs should have a general Level binding

(As most do, like Walls or Stairs, but so far e.g. Doors and Windows don't)

AND PIOs should have Component bindings.

(As most do, like Walls or Stairs)

E.g. Windows should derive their overall height from Sill and top Level.

 

Standard non-PIO Elements or Symbols may only need a general overall Level binding.

Or do we need e.g. Extrudes defined by top and bottom Levels (?)

 

 

 

7 hours ago, shorter said:

I wanted to test the idea of associating a coping

 

I am not sure if a coping could/should be already part of a Wall Style

(Like a control over a Wall End appearance when not connected ?

controlled by Wall Closure Settings ??)

[shorter]

17 hours ago, zoomer said:

Any Elements Z value in OIP should have a dropdown to select

if it applies to its Layer height or as an offset to a Story Level (?)

 

(At least to those Story Levels that relate to its Layer ....

when bound to a Story that contains Levels ?)

 

Oh wait, then when every Element belongs to a Story and Level ....

why do we still need Layers ?

 

It gets complicated for me here.

 

 

At least all PIOs should have a general Level binding

(As most do, like Walls or Stairs, but so far e.g. Doors and Windows don't)

AND PIOs should have Component bindings.

(As most do, like Walls or Stairs)

E.g. Windows should derive their overall height from Sill and top Level.

 

Standard non-PIO Elements or Symbols may only need a general overall Level binding.

Or do we need e.g. Extrudes defined by top and bottom Levels (?)

 

 

 

 

I am not sure if a coping could/should be already part of a Wall Style

(Like a control over a Wall End appearance when not connected ?

controlled by Wall Closure Settings ??)

 

The problem we have is that we get involved in projects that require non-standard details, and tends to mean we cannot use standard PIOs.  It is why we never use the stair tool, for example.  Even doors have to be placed inside symbols to provide the required 2D representation at the jambs, etc, or when combined with windows or none standard openings.

 

Other than the joy of 'thinking through modelling' this way, we get exactly what we want.

 

The coping options would need to be far greater than the frankly embarrassing array of window cill options currently available.