topic Re: Concrete floor deck in Libraries & objects

Concrete floor deck

Anonymous — Mon, 08 Jan 2007 22:06:18 GMT

In using the Roof Accessory tool to generate a concrete floor slab that has a unique shape.....has anyone been able to SEO the deck from the concrete 'roof' so that in section it appears properly? Right now the SEO doesn't want to work (particulary for the holes that I have in the concrete slab)

The corrugated deck tool within the steel library doesn't allow for unique shapes (it's only rectangular )

Re: Concrete floor deck

__archiben — Mon, 08 Jan 2007 22:32:47 GMT

Jason wrote:
In using the Roof Accessory tool to generate a concrete floor slab that has a unique shape.....has anyone been able to SEO the deck from the concrete 'roof' so that in section it appears properly? Right now the SEO doesn't want to work (particulary for the holes that I have in the concrete slab)

i know what you're trying to achieve . . . and because no-one has yet written a slab accessory that emulates crinkly-tin permanent formwork i can understand why you're having to fool around with roofs/roof accessories and such workarounds. i'm just not sure which combination of objects and tools you think will let you achieve it . . .

The corrugated deck tool within the steel library doesn't allow for unique shapes (it's only rectangular )

are you talking about the metal cladding profiles in the 'claddings' library folder? if so they aren't applied as accessory elements and therefore cannot automatically inherit the properties (size and shape for example) of other elements. if you have a completely different steel library there, please share!

a profiled permanent formwork slab accessory is something that i've often hoped for . . . and unfortunately my GDL skills are so dire that there is no chance of me producing one myself . . .

~/archiben

Re: Concrete floor deck

Anonymous — Mon, 08 Jan 2007 22:45:09 GMT

The Roof Accessory slab works the best far what I'm doing, but it doesn't allow me to boolean down the concrete that 'pokes' below the corrugate fluting of the deck. I surprised that this tool hasn't been better implimented into Archicad since around 90% of commercial buildings in North America are built with this metal deck/concrete fill method.

Re: Concrete floor deck

__archiben — Mon, 08 Jan 2007 23:18:26 GMT

Jason wrote:
The Roof Accessory slab works the best far what I'm doing, but it doesn't allow me to boolean down the concrete that 'pokes' below the corrugate fluting of the deck.

i reported a bug a little while ago that concerned accessory elements and boolean operations: if i recall correctly it was something to do with the target and operator being co-planar and parallel to the 'subtraction direction'. try pulling the edges of your accessory out beyond the slab edge by a few mm . . . any good?

I surprised that this tool hasn't been better implimented into Archicad since around 90% of commercial buildings in North America are built with this metal deck/concrete fill method.

i'm with you . . .

~/archiben

Re: Concrete floor deck

Anonymous — Mon, 08 Jan 2007 23:33:33 GMT

Nope...didn't allow the boolean operation. Thanks for the input though

The ideal would be to have a metal deck tool with concrete topping (that could be turned off it wanted) that functions like the roof tool (so that it can be sloped if desired)

Re: Concrete floor deck

__archiben — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 02:05:34 GMT

Jason wrote:
Nope...didn't allow the boolean operation. Thanks for the input though

what about in it's height plane . . . try raising or lowering the accessory slightly . . ? this is the feedback i received from the developers regarding my issue, but it also explains a little more about the technical workings of an SEO and why they might fail:

GS wrote:
The two Foundation Builder elements have planes with similar coordinates. When the SEO is applied to these elements and the mesh then self-tangent bodies are created. There is a regularization algorithm which only steps into action only when such situation occurs. This time the regularization algorithm fails, it is unable to eliminate the self-tangent bodies and thus the SEO operation cannot be performed.

The workaround is to move these elements relative to each other so that they have no planes with identical coordinates. In this particular case one of the Foundation Builder element has an L shape, which means that the smaller Foundation Builder Element should be moved a tiny bit in both x and y direction. The amount of the movement can be very small, important is that there is a movement. (#56756)

Jason wrote:
The ideal would be to have a metal deck tool with concrete topping (that could be turned off it wanted) that functions like the roof tool (so that it can be sloped if desired)

no - the ideal would be true parametric assemblies: kind of like accessory elements but on steroids . . . do a search - it's been talked about on this forum on several occasions . . .

~/archiben

Re: Concrete floor deck

Anonymous — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 03:07:03 GMT

Hello,
I looked at the 3D scripts for the roof surfacer macro
that is called by the roof surfacer library part and
found that, though the EXTRUDE command is used,
the code makes a surface and not a solid.
This is undoubtedly to reduce the polygon count
but it also causes the object to be unable to
participate in an SEO as an operator.

One could make a very large complex profile beam
with its upper surface undulating like corrugated decking
and use it to cut the under side of a slab or roof using SEO.
Peter Devlin

Re: Concrete floor deck

__archiben — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 03:20:05 GMT

Peter wrote:
... the code makes a surface and not a solid.

ah. that'll be it then.

One could make a very large complex profile beam with its upper surface undulating like corrugated decking and use it to cut the under side of a slab or roof using SEO.

in which case, you would probably make the entire floor make-up as a complex beam profile: the key is in having the section generate well in my opinion, (tin deck thickness included!), rather than for illustrative purposes . . .

how easy is it to turn an extruded surface into a solid peter? does it require generating a return path offset to the original 'polyline'? and because this is an accessory object, i would imagine a whole host of FOR/NEXT loops and hoops to jump through . . . argh!

ben

Re: Concrete floor deck

Anonymous — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 03:41:38 GMT

Hello Ben,
I don't think you could make the floor itself a complex profile beam
because the only floor you could make would be a floor as wide
as the complex profile and rectangular in shape unless the profile
width was small and you put a bunch of them together to form
a floor.

The EXTRUDE command is a solid and in this context it would
not be hard to make the "trapezoid sheet" into a solid but
changing the code for the "corrugated sheet" to make it a solid
is a bit daunting. If you open the macro called "corrugated sheet.gsm"
you will see what I mean.

Peter Devlin

Re: Concrete floor deck

__archiben — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 04:17:43 GMT

If you open the macro called "corrugated sheet.gsm" you will see what I mean.

logically working through the macro it seems that the FOR/NEXT loops simply need running in reverse after a dropping down by the thickness of the sheet?

(i inadvertently deleted this post, so am trying to reconstruct it so that it makes sense for the next one! oops!)

i am waaaay out of my depth here!!!!

ben

Re: Concrete floor deck

__archiben — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 04:36:54 GMT

I wrote:
logically working through the macro it seems that the FOR/NEXT loops simply need running in reverse after a dropping down by the thickness of the sheet?

ah. i see that this is the first big problem . . . having no idea where the polyline has got to in order to determine the drop down node.

on a plus, i see in the manual that the EXTRUDE command doesn't actually need a closed polygon in order to work. that's a relief, eh?!

ben

Re: Concrete floor deck

Anonymous — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:28:16 GMT

Hello Ben,
You are right. You have to run the buffer values in reverse
with a subtraction value in the Y parameters.
This involves writing another set of put statements.

You can tell where the polyline has got to easily enough.
It is the last calculated set of X and Y parameters in the buffer.

Peter Devlin

Re: Concrete floor deck

SeaGeoff — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 08:11:53 GMT

This topic may be of some help:

http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=4449&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=pan+deck&&start=0

Re: Concrete floor deck

Anonymous — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 22:45:23 GMT

Hello,
Just for fun, I edited a copy of the macro
"Trapezoid Sheet.gsm" so that it was a solid
and named it "Trapezoid Sheet Solid.gsm".
I made the surfacer object call this new
macro rather than Trapezoid Sheet.
I can get this object to subtract with
upwards extrusion but if I try to
subtract with downward extrusion
it just subtracts. No downward extrusion.
The object is solid and it has a thickness of
3/64", a little over a millimeter
and it is participating in the SEO
so I don't think this is a problem
with the object.
Anyone run into this ?
Peter Devlin

Re: Concrete floor deck

Anonymous — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 05:22:11 GMT

Maybe this inability to subtract with downward extrusion
has something to do with the fact that the object is a macro
called by the roof surfacer accessory.
I saved the macro "Trapezoid Sheet Solid.gsm"
as an ordinary placable model element under
a different name and placed it at the underside
of a roof and it did the subtract with downward
extrusion with no problem.
To bad I can't get this to work
so that the shape of the roof and all holes
in the roof are drawn by the accessory.
As it is, the object can be placed, stretched
to the dimensions of the roof,
the SEO performed, and the object
put on a hidden layer.
Peter Devlin