Why don't we deal with more solid and surface geometries?

In most AEC software s and in their plug-ins, we need to build geometries from scratch like get some points or curves then build a shape or surface and extrude or loft them to a solid in most massing environments.

Let say, I like to build an elliptical surface in dynamo. We need to first draw an ellipse then patch or loft. But what I want is to draw that elliptical surface based on a certain area value, let say 20 sqm. I will feed this value in a custom node for elliptical surface creation and it will ask me or would have another input node for long axis length. It will then automatically calculate the short axis length of that ellipse based on its formula of area and from my input values and will draw that ellipse.

Same for any solid…so actually, I want the “Surface by area” and “Solid by volume” nodes.

What’s the benefits of such nodes? Actually, architects need to deal with mostly areas and volumes to get a nice building form in massing environment while having its area and volume data to cope with building codes as well will help in conceptual energy, lighting etc. analysis.

Further advancement could be that, if I tweak or change the shape of those surface area or volume of solids, those will be transformed into desired forms but will sustain their same area or volume. If I change that 20 sqm ellipse into a rectangle, the rectangular surface area also would be of 20 sqm while this"Change shapes" or “Change forms” nodes would have many shapes and form data or formulas and respective input nodes to make this happen.

I like to request package builders to create such nodes and if there any, please drop a link or name.

Advance thanks for your time.!

I at last created one on my own, available online by name-CircularSurface.

“I think X should work differently, please do the work for me and inform me. Thank you.”


I think you can do the same with a square or oval/ellipse, you just need more variables and a code block