Additional window panel types required

[Christiaan 503]

1. Fixed insulated panels

(as a substitute for glazing, direct into frame (i.e. sashless) or into sash).

 

2. Frameless panels

(this is similar to a fixed insulation panel except that the window frame is hidden behind the panel, so all you see is a monolithic panel). We often use these to form spandrel panels between levels of a building where a window spans several levels.

 

3. Louvre vents

 

4. Louvre windows

 

5. Glass block

(Maybe as a window panel type as well as a Wall Style?)

Edited May 17, 2017 by Christiaan

[line-weight 469]

Agree with all the above. I think we need a way of making custom panel types too, ideally. The only way to reliably cover all possibilities. We define a frame sectional geometry, and panel geometry, as we wish. Somehow.

[zoomer 684]

100 % agree.

 

I also would mostly need the Curtain Wall Tool as a Window Tool in a Wall instead of being a Wall.

Edited May 17, 2017 by zoomer

[line-weight 469]

The general message here should be that parametric tools are only any good if they can cover (within reason) all possibilities.

 

For me, window, door and stair tools are the three potentially most useful ones, because in each case they can save a *lot* of drawing time.

 

I do use them a bit but they all have too many limitations, and too often I have to revert to drawing a window or stair manually because the tools can't produce what I need. And then things like schedule automation start to break down.

 

Make doors, windows, stairs work really well. Then, and only then, move onto developing new parametric objects.

[Christiaan 503]

Bump, please vote up.

Edited July 2 by Christiaan

[line-weight 469]

Currently doing a project where we have some louvre panels.

 

Windows modelled entirely from scratch as there's no hope of the window tool doing this.

 

 

(PS as an aside note the annoying tendency of OpenGL render to do something weird with transparent materials so that the glass appears to be in the wrong place relative to the frames even though it's not)

[Matt Overton 230]

On 7/15/2019 at 11:51 PM, line-weight said:

Currently doing a project where we have some louvre panels.

 

Windows modelled entirely from scratch as there's no hope of the window tool doing this.

 

 

(PS as an aside note the annoying tendency of OpenGL render to do something weird with transparent materials so that the glass appears to be in the wrong place relative to the frames even though it's not)

Why build from scratch?

 

Why not build as much with the current tools as you can then bind them in symbol to build project-specific parts or things the tool can't handle?

To me it's a best of both world  Plugin doesn't have to deal with to much scope by still should get common stuff right.

Like well, the option you show should be handled by a decent tool.

 

 

[Christiaan 503]

8 hours ago, Matt Overton said:

Why not build as much with the current tools as you can then bind them in symbol to build project-specific parts or things the tool can't handle?

 

Agreed (we've used this method extensively in the past). The problem with each of these approaches—both of which use Symbols—is that you then need to use an entirely different method for scheduling.

Edited July 17 by Christiaan

[Matt Overton 230]

13 hours ago, Christiaan said:

 

Agreed (we've used this method extensively in the past). The problem with each of these approaches—both of which use Symbols—is that you then need to use an entirely different method for scheduling.

 

Yes, annoying if you have one or two but workable. Painfully if you have lots. 

[line-weight 469]

On 7/17/2019 at 2:20 AM, Matt Overton said:

Why build from scratch?

 

Why not build as much with the current tools as you can then bind them in symbol to build project-specific parts or things the tool can't handle?

To me it's a best of both world  Plugin doesn't have to deal with to much scope by still should get common stuff right.

Like well, the option you show should be handled by a decent tool.

 

 

Largely because the thing the window tool builds is a mess in section.

 

In this case, my large scale interface details for the windows are taken directly from the model. So it has the correct frame size and profile for the specific window system that I'm using. Some might say this is crazy; I am finding that it's potentially less work than building a "near enough" model for GA plans, elevations and so on, and then drawing the large scale details in 2D.

 

This is for a small project with just 3 windows (each different) though. If it were a large building with 100s of windows of a few basic variant types, then it would be a different matter.

Edited July 19 by line-weight