Shell tool, keep initial profile plane for detailed extrusion

[thesleepofreason]

Currently when creating an extruded shell with the detailed method a profile plane is defined onto which the profile polygon is drawn. After creation the profile plane is removed and the profile polygon is instead moved to a plane placed at the midpoint of the extrusion vector. 

Often, the position of the initial plane is of significance and loosing it then makes viewing and editing the geometry harder than it should be. It should be possible to keep the profile polygon in the initially defined plane making it easier to use the initial reference when viewing and editing the geometry.

[DGSketcher]

Just had this with a gable profile that is the launch point for an inclined ridge roof. Changing the profile to work with a changed gable would have been a lot easier if it retained its location.

[mthd]

Hi @thesleepofreason can you please provide a picture or a diagram of what you are proposing above ? Most of us think in pictures and are not as good with descriptive language. By using pictures and diagrams we communicate more clearly and hopefully our wishes might be easier understood and implemented.

At least that’s what we hope for in the long run ?

[thesleepofreason]

The issue is quite clear when working with shells but here is a short example to illustrate it.

Lets say that there is a geometry with a hole for which a lining is modelled using the shell tool.  

When creating the shell the top plane is the natural reference and chosen as profile plane onto which the profile polygon is drawn.

But after creation the highlighted profile polygon is moved to the midpoint of extrusion vector loosing any connection to reference plane chosen by the user. This puts cognitive load on the user when editing as the lines and nodes isn't where expected - gets worse when they are out of view which they often end up being. 

So what am I proposing? It should be possible to keep the profile plane chosen initially as a reference plane onto which the profile polygon is projected making editing look something like below where the polygon is where the users expects it to be given the definition of the geometry and by the same token gives other users information of how the geometry is defined (i.e. in relation to a specific plane rather than the extrusion midpoint).

It should be noted that the last illustration is created using an opening coinciding with the shell geometry which isn't that surprising since openings and closed polygon extrusions are fundamentally the same thing. But while openings now can be parametrically defined with dimensions and offset/length - shells are experiencing arrested development as yet another casualty of GSs dated skeuomorphic approach to modelling. As a modeller/designer I simply don't care about how developers think a shell, opening, beam, column, wall, slab or morph should be defined or which tool they happen to give some love this decade. All I care about is having intuitive, efficient and consistent method of creating geometries as I see fit. The ubiquitousness of extrusions makes the detailed extruded shell tool rival most other tool in this regard - yet we are not even close to benefit fully from it...

[DGSketcher]

This idea isn't a million miles from the current workflow with the roof tool pivot line. In that case you set the pivot line & then stretch out the roof plan. So why not follow that same concept - The profile is drawn as current and the user extrudes, but if required the detailed profile / polygon plane can be moved along the extrusion path rather than it jumping to the midpoint.

Sorry, getting ideas above my humble user status... I'm sure the Product Managers are all super aware of what needs to be done with their market leading software.

(If I hadn't spent the morning restarting AC27 after multiple 3D window hangs I might not be feeling so sarcastic)

[mthd]

Excellent description @thesleepofreason and I hope GS can clearly see what you are proposing here. I hope that other users making wishes can also use diagrams and clearly explain what they would like AC to do for us in the future.

I was able to pick up, that it would be nice to have more exact 3D snapping points or planes in the 3D work environment. Is this one of the things you are asking for ? I am hesitant to work in the 3D window at times because of this situation of things not being exact as they are in plan and elevation 2D. Except to click on an element in 3D and change its parameters in the dialogue because you know that will make exact edits.

[thesleepofreason]

There is certainly a lot that can be done to make it easier to model in 3D and this would be one thing - but it is not specifically about snapping points or editing planes. It is about the currently strange  behavior where a plane defined while creating a geometry is moved for later editing. Giving the user control of the planes position would not only make it easier to model in 3D but also open up to new parametric ways to define shell extrusions as offsets from the plane.

[mthd]

I sort of understand what you are saying but if you have time down the track. You could possibly create a short video demonstration ? In fact that would be good for all us if we could possibly start using more diagrams and short video demonstrations of our problems and wishes. It helps everyone especially the developers of the software. Thanks.

Edit: Here is a video of the Vectorworks 2024 3D dragger. I think you might be referring to having something like this in Archicad ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6_X7-WoO2M&list=PLiLCoe7DU1HYgbDUzHMuigQW99FLjJ7OI&index=17&pp=iAQB

[jl_lt]

Just look at vectoworks2024 new features list. Wow

[mthd]

For sure ! I watched all of them and they have certainly made some great progress recently. If GS need some inspiration just look at VW for some hints on what we need too.