topic Re: Problems with 3D DWG import - broken meshes in Libraries & objects

Problems with 3D DWG import - broken meshes

Mike96 — Mon, 26 Jan 2026 14:38:51 GMT

Hello,
I'm trying to import 3D DWG meshes to Archicad, fiddling with various DWG translation methods. My best bet is using following settings under "Open options":
+ "GDL script" in "3D data in created library parts",
+ "convert 3D solids, regions and bodies into GDL objects" checked.
Other combinations won't even import a 3D mesh from DWG.
The meshes get imported as library objects and they look fine, until I convert them to morphs for editing. Then, they get randomly split into separate parts that are no longer solid.
Here's an example:

You can see black edges where the meshes break. I set edge type to Hidden to see that.

Attached zipped DWG as well (I think it didn't come through the first time). It doesn't matter that the 6 meshes visually intersect. Same happens even when they are apart and when I convert them to morphs one by one.

Those morphs can be glued back manually by applying Union, and yeah, it works, they even got checked as solid, but with large number of imported meshes this gets tedious. And the more complex the mesh, the more likely it would split into more parts.
Do you think there's a way to fix this?
I am also aware of the ModelPort plugin, which allegedly imports all kinds of 3D objects seamlessly, but I'm not going to invest in it right now.

Operating system used: Windows 10

Re: Problems with 3D DWG import - broken meshes

Mike96 — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 23:12:24 GMT

Not a very popular topic, heh

Re: Problems with 3D DWG import - broken meshes

Barry Kelly — Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:32:33 GMT

You mentioned your own solutions.

If they are splitting when you convert them to morphs, then you can 'union' the morphs back together.

If that doesn't hide the joins, you can select the solid edges (sub-element selection) and change the edge to a hidden line.

That will work so long as the 2 adjoining planes share that common edge.

Other than that ModelPort does look very good.

It is just extra cost.

I guess it depends on how much you will use it as to whether it is economical or not.

There is a free trial.

Barry.

Re: Problems with 3D DWG import - broken meshes

Mike96 — Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:55:00 GMT

Yes, there are workarounds.

I still opt this should be considered a bug, subject to fixing.

I don't expect GS to introduce any new feature, just fix one that's broken, instead of making me rely on external tools.

But that's just me.

Re: Problems with 3D DWG import - broken meshes

Patrick M — Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:57:03 GMT

TBH, from your screen shot, I'd actually call that import a win.
unfortunately, most of the asset import requires a "well I guess that'll be good enough" attitude, or a complete rebuild.
I do wonder though, if you ran the screen shot through an AI asset developer, like Meshy, if you'd get better results?

Re: Problems with 3D DWG import - broken meshes

Mike96 — Fri, 20 Feb 2026 01:00:10 GMT

Patrick, how is AI supposed to help me in this situation? I don't think we understand each other. I'd make a crappy AI model, which by no means retained topology, scale, proportions, anything, and then would import it with exactly the same issues.

Betreff: Problems with 3D DWG import - broken meshes

runxel — Fri, 20 Feb 2026 15:10:13 GMT

Most of the time the meshes are borked up to begin with in my experience. Have you checked that?

Anyway, the quality is almost never good so that rebuilding it with a few GDL commands is not only quicker than any doctoring, it also yields better results.

Here arises the other question: What's your goal tho? What do you want to achieve? Why do you need these pipes?

Re: Problems with 3D DWG import - broken meshes

Mike96 — Sat, 21 Feb 2026 08:43:15 GMT

Had to look up what "borked up" means, haha

What I showed is just a small fragment, an example of large and complex piping systems we model, using different software, based on point clouds. This could technically be done in Archicad, using MEP elements, but Archicad totally sucks with point clouds. I could literally write an essay of arguments. That's why we turn to other software, including Blender. I assure you those meshes were not originally broken. I checked them in multiple ways, including import to Autocad, which goes smooth as butter (yes, Blender does support DXF and IFC exports with dedicated addons), reimporting to Blender through FBX, DXF, even checking SketchUp. Only Archicad makes a mess.

The reason I'm importing these do Archicad is that I need to make comprehensive documentation (plans, sections), including both MEP and architectural elements, adding comments, dimensions etc. We do all this stuff in Archicad in my company, besides, I can't think of a better documentation tool than Archicad.

Also, I don't think "a few GDL commands" would build me a complex MEP system.

Re: Problems with 3D DWG import - broken meshes

runxel — Sat, 21 Feb 2026 21:42:58 GMT

Yeah, the quality of the meshes Archicad can achieve also sometimes is not great. I have no clue as to why, tho. Sometimes it's fine, but often enough a mess comes out.

I was about to say that AC can import FBX these days, but your signature says you're on 25, so that's a no-no then for you.

From a bystanders perspective it looks like convoluted set-up, what you are doing, but I understand that working with (potentially huge) pointclouds in Archicad is no fun.

@Mike96 schrieb:
Also, I don't think "a few GDL commands" would build me a complex MEP system.

Again, it depends on what you are trying to achieve. Especially with MEP systems people are used to really bad plans 😜

I'm not sure that visual fidelity is really the main selling point here. The other point is: usually MEP consists always out of the same few standard parts, give or take. A few different sizes, sure, but that's exactly what parametric modeling (scripting) can achieve easily.

The other big advantage of GDL is that you can get proper floor plan representation. Right now I don't think you get nice plans out of this workflow. (But your local requirements in display might differ much from what I'm used to)