topic Re: Door threshold credibility gap in Modeling

Door threshold credibility gap

Anonymous — Wed, 24 May 2023 06:58:42 GMT

Let me first explain how this project is set up;

Finished floor level is set at '0'. Slabs of 15mm thickness are used to create various floor coverings such as wood, carpet etc. In 2D 'cover fills' generate our floor finishes drawing, and in 3D we get an accurate visual representation of floor finishes from room to room using this method.
Another slab is used for an entire floor area to indicate a structural slab in section. The top of the structural slab is set at -15mm.
The walls are set at -15mm up to ceiling height. This however means that when you place a door, I get this problem of not being able to 'see' my floor coverings meeting in the doorway. Why?
Lifting the door up to +15mm means I can see wall. Am I meant to be using this combination of elements in a different way to eliminate this problem?

This is in AC18. Thanks in advance.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Anonymous — Fri, 27 Jun 2014 14:40:50 GMT

Second picture without floor covering selected.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

DGSketcher — Sat, 28 Jun 2014 08:30:58 GMT

I don't have access to my AC just now. Just a thought can you modify the threshold element of the door component and match your finishes? It may require the door opening size to be increased, which could affect schedules. Can be a catch-22 some of these problems.

Other option if door dimensions are critical would be to create a threshold slab and SEO subtract it from the wall.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

David Maudlin — Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:21:41 GMT

dan_g:

I cannot tell from your screen shots: does the floor coverings Slab go into the door opening, under the Wall, or stop at the face of Wall. Also check the Building Material's Intersection Priority of the Wall and floor coverings Slab, the Wall may be cutting the Slab.

You should add a Signature to your Profile (click the Profile button near the top of this page) with your ArchiCAD version and operating system (see mine for an example) for more accurate help in this forum.

David

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Laszlo Nagy — Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:47:53 GMT

Try to increase the Intersection Priority number of the Building Material of the Floor Covering Slab so it is stronger than that of the Wall. Right now Wall skins are stronger than that at the threshold, this is why you see that and not the Slab.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Ernest Atanasiu — Sat, 28 Jun 2014 18:35:52 GMT

Why do you use 2 slabs (one for finish and another one for structure)?
Is there a problem with composites?

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

alemanda — Sun, 29 Jun 2014 13:58:03 GMT

I always model my building as dan_g did.
I think it is the more correct way to do BIM, at least when you have to manage all the disciplines (structures, block works, finishings, etc). So we model our project according the way it is built.
So we model a slab for structural purpose, and slabs for floor finishings. The same for block works and wall finishings.
Usually we model the thresholds. In fact We put the door at 10cm above the structural slab and increase the hole of the door downward so that we need to model the threshold. This helps us also for quantity take off. We don't use the thresholds included in the doors

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Ernest Atanasiu — Sun, 29 Jun 2014 16:29:48 GMT

It's true that you should model the way it's built, but there is no reason why you shouldn't use the composites. Two slabs on top of each other must be a pita to model / modify / update. The same with wall finishings. How do you insert a window or a door in multiple walls?

http://helpcenter.graphisoft.com/guides/archicad-18-int-reference-guide/configuration/attributes/composite-structures/

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Anonymous — Sun, 29 Jun 2014 20:23:10 GMT

Why not have the Structural slab at 0 elevation, with the base of walls at 0, and thin finishes slabs above that? Undercut doors by 20mm and take finishes into openings, as it would be done in reality.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

alemanda — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 05:30:27 GMT

uisanata wrote:
It's true that you should model the way it's built, but there is no reason why you shouldn't use the composites. Two slabs on top of each other must be a pita to model / modify / update. The same with wall finishings. How do you insert a window or a door in multiple walls?

Reality is usually much more complicated than composites possibilities.

Multiple walls = multiple doors. For example when we model stone cladding we insert a door in the block work and an empty door(I mean just the hole)in the cladding (which isusually done with a double wall parallel to the main block work wall)

In this way we can control the model in a perfect way. Of course we have an addintional amount of work. But usually we do this when we have to produce construction drawings.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

alemanda — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 05:41:32 GMT

s2art wrote:
Why not have the Structural slab at 0 elevation, with the base of walls at 0, and thin finishes slabs above that? Undercut doors by 20mm and take finishes into openings, as it would be done in reality.

This is the way we do.
We usually have the top of structural slab at 10cm below the finished floor level. We undercut the doors by 10 cm and model the threshold.

In this way we can have a live floor finishing floor-plan.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Anonymous — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 07:51:06 GMT

Hi everyone. Really appreciate all of your responses. Sorry I haven't been back sooner, for some reason I had not received any notifications to say there had been replies.

I am feeling somewhat sheepish now, @laszlonagy, you were of course right on the money. Which is totally obvious now that someone has pointed it out! Higher intersection priority of floor covering fixes it.
Thank you.

With regards story heights and whether you chose your structural slab level or FFL as '0', to me it seems like a preference thing? We have found that it is generally less confusing (particularly for the rest of the consultants on a project) if FFL is the point of reference between stories.

We do make use of composites, infact on this project the structural slab shows a rib deck in section/in 3D. All of the walls are composites. A composite that includes the floor finish has never made any sense to us unless your entire floor has the same type of floor finish. Otherwise how do you deal with changes in covering from room to room? Answer: You have a tonne of fragmented structural elements. Confusing if your looking to BIM/IFC the project outside of your office.

Bit baffled about my signature, someone pointed this out before and I added one - but sure enough it isn't there now. Will get that sorted.
Thanks again all.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Barry Kelly — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 08:35:18 GMT

dan_g wrote:
Bit baffled about my signature, someone pointed this out before and I added one - but sure enough it isn't there now. Will get that sorted.
Thanks again all.

Seems like you have logged on as a new user (you now have a total of 3 posts with this login).
You previously logged in as "Dan G" instead of "dan_g".
So your signature was fixed up in your other login and not this new one.

As for the reply notification you either have that turned of in your profile settings (can't remember what the default is for a new user) or you accidently hit the "Stop watching this post" button at the bottom of this thread.

Barry.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Anonymous — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:10:33 GMT

Thanks Barry Kelly.

I had no idea that was even possible, woops! Should I look to close one of the profiles (if that's even possible).

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

alemanda — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:20:00 GMT

dan_g wrote:
... Confusing if your looking to BIM/IFC the project outside of your office.

Yes you are right.
I think there have to be BIM MODELING STANDARDS
For example,
BIM type 1 ... basic modeling for visualization purpose
BIM type 2 ... andvanced modeling for architectural only purpose
BIM type 3 ... advanced modeling for archicatural and structural purpose
etc. etc.

Moreover BIM-models' detail level should depend on the people involved ... I mean, if the contractor has to see in the model you need more details ...

But I think that there should be standards to follow

Do they (these standards) already exist?

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Anonymous — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:26:45 GMT

Hot topic! I imagine most aren't following it to the letter of the law, we certainly aren't, but; BS 1192:2007

For the time being, to the best of my knowledge on most projects it is really just down to the wider project team to decide on a level of detail at the start of the project.

However, it's worth looking at this too;

http://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/about-bsi/media-centre/press-releases/2013/3/new-standard-for-bim-to-help-meet-2016-government-savings-target/#.U7EsJfldV8E

http://bimtalk.co.uk/standards

Obviously this isn't necessarily going to be mandatory in Italy come 2016 as it's a British Standard. I don't know what the equivalent body would be in Italy or elsewhere in the world?

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Barry Kelly — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:26:54 GMT

I'm not sure if Laszlo (the administrator) can transfer your 'dan_g' posts to 'Dan G' (or the other way around).
I'm not sure I would even bother - just try to log in as one and forget about the other.
Except if you are using more than one machine you may have it set to auto-login differently on each.

Either way all of you posts will still be there - and you will still get notification if that is turned on in each profile because you are using the same e-mail address.

Barry.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Laszlo Nagy — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 14:14:56 GMT

Barry wrote:
I'm not sure if Laszlo (the administrator) can transfer your 'dan_g' posts to 'Dan G' (or the other way around).

Unfortunately this is not possible to do.
I would continue to use the "Dan G" profile since it has a greater number of posts.
Dan, if by any chance you forgot your password for that profile, let me know and I generate a new one for you.

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Ernest Atanasiu — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 21:18:30 GMT

alemanda wrote:
uisanata wrote:
It's true that you should model the way it's built, but there is no reason why you shouldn't use the composites. Two slabs on top of each other must be a pita to model / modify / update. The same with wall finishings. How do you insert a window or a door in multiple walls?
Reality is usually much more complicated than composites possibilities.

Multiple walls = multiple doors. For example when we model stone cladding we insert a door in the block work and an empty door(I mean just the hole)in the cladding (which isusually done with a double wall parallel to the main block work wall)

In this way we can control the model in a perfect way. Of course we have an addintional amount of work. But usually we do this when we have to produce construction drawings.

That's blasphemy!
Just kidding 😉
I am currently working on a project with 8000 doors. Imagine modelling another 8000 ! and documenting all those slabs and walls in 5000+ construction details....
I must contradict you, composites are working just fine, if you know what to use them for. I don't think that GS guys created such a great tool if slabs were better. How do you manage the line between 2 slabs in section view? Which line is visible and which is not? How do you intersect slabs wth walls and roofs? Don't you use the priorities?

Try it, it will grow on you...!

Re: Door threshold credibility gap

Laszlo Nagy — Tue, 01 Jul 2014 00:09:48 GMT

uisanata wrote:
I am currently working on a project with 8000 doors. Imagine modelling another 8000 ! and documenting all those slabs and walls in 5000+ construction details....

Just out of curiosity: how large is that project in terms of square meters?