An limitation i have been trying myself with over the last few days. Datagroup walls and how you edit and change them. Firstly, we make parts, define all their properties, then have to create a corresponding datagroup object. Fine. the problem arises when editing or amending what you have placed. Regularly, we have to edit walls, whether that is in changing the spec/type or changing the geometry. Alot of the time it is in adjusting the placed wall to fit around something or connect to something etc etc. Anyway, the problem is this. My walls are placed using the DG, they are scheduled using the DG, yet what happens if i need to change some of the walls or add an extra layer into that compound wall? I use either the build wall assembly tool to attach another layer onto my basic wall, or if it is a material change, I use the apply part tool to change said part from say brick to block, applying default thickness etc etc..Neither of these methods are linked to the datagroup, so therfore my DG readout of these walls is going to be inaccurate. The Build Wall Assembly tool needs to be part of the datagroup and the compound walls tool needs to also be linked into the datagroup so that changes to walls or wall leafs can be read from the same location. I would suggest that there should be different classes of wall objects. Individual parts, wall leafs or combination parts and also full compound wall assemblies. Assemblies would be made up from a combination of single parts and wall leafs(each which could be designated outer leaf/ inner leaf/ext/int finish, wall leafs would be made from individual parts, allowing parts to be swapped in and out if required, whilst still maintaining the DG link. This could also allow removing the annoying dotted line that holds all the DG info as the info will be held by each element within the wall PS. If you could also then designate whether a wall leaf, or compound wall could extract(cut) as either the full assembly ie full thickness 2 lines, possibly filled, or wall leafs or individual parts that would be fantastic
↧