Thursday, April 12, 2007

THE WARNING DIALOGUE....

Tools > review warnings. Its big. For model performance, its huge. This may be ar aguable point with everyone, but numbers dont lie. I had three models i was overseeing, and when i did a Compact Central File, they werent shrinking down like normal. Then i went on a weeklong Warning Dialogue Cleanout (resolving the issues), and the results are below:

RVT BEFORE AFTER
"Model 1": 253MB 104MB
"Model 2": 269MB 113MB
"Model 3": 214MB 121MB

Mind you, they were much larger before, becuase they didnt seem to compact. BUT, maybe there is a correlation? Do outstanding issues being checked for resolution by the program keep it from compressing itself? Anyway, the team of 6 people unanimously felt a performance increase after the fact.

This got me to thinking... The review warnings dialogue is obviously important, but is cumbersome to use. Its a pain to get in and out of. I had some thoughts on this, and submitted them using the link http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=1109794 to autodesk.

I was about to post the message here, with my ideas, since it took awhile to type. Then i realized (just now) that by copying and pasting that link, i lost the contents of the message that i had copied from my communique to them. Nice. Maybe i can get it from the history, or maybe they will respond. Ill post back...

6 comments:

Melanie (Stone) Perry said...

You, my friend, need Ditto. :-)

http://ditto-cp.sourceforge.net/

Free clipboard extension. I couldn't work without it.

MONTEALEGRE BEACH ARQUITECTOS said...

Very, very, very interesting Mr. Maller.

Muchas gracias,

mmhs said...

I'm not sure if this is similar to what you've been thinking about, but i've had some thougts about this myself: most importantly i think REVIT should, if applicable, offer to resolve collision issues by joining geometry just as it does when a newly constructed floor overlaps existing walls.

Malleristic-Revitation said...

MMHS, Good point, but from an efficiency point of view, i can see why it does no more than give you warnings. We have a tool already, where Revit tries to guess your intent and adjust for you...

Wall Joins.

And a lot of people complain that it tries too hard to guess, or not hard enough. I could see Revit sucking power out of the computer, it it tried to auto-join-geo when walls overlapped. How would it decide? Core to Core? Placement hierarchy on a timeline? Phase? Which parts would schedule? Partial thickness of a stud layer gets joined to another wall, how do we account for that?

In the end, im always left with the same thought: For the program, it is safest for it to only give us the Warning. My wish is more that i wish there was a method of clearing out the warning dialogue that was more user friendly, and less laborious, in terms of hunting elements down.

Navisworks Jetstreams Clash detection has one: When you click the link for a clash, it takes you to a 3D view where the elements are automatically visible. Revits does something similar with the "Show" button, but most of the time other geometrey is in the way. Plus, if the warning dialogue is active, you cant edit elements properly...

DBaldacchino said...

How about a dialog that doesn't close for each darn warning you fix?! It needs to stay open as you go through one by one. This is the main reason users don't clean out these warnings....it's too time consuming.

Malleristic-Revitation said...

Dbald- EXACTLY! When i have to do it, it makes me want to cry for that reason. It should be like the Copy Monitor review, where you can resolve them one by one, then hit the "OKAY" button and be done...