topic Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling in Modeling

Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Anonymous — Tue, 23 May 2023 13:12:36 GMT

Why isn't there a 3d modelling method that allows the user to model complex objects in a simple way? (like in sketchup). Archicad is much too literal in the way its library parts are set up, it lacks simplicity! Modelling a complex roof form is a nightmare (mesh to roof is in no way up to standard!), sloping a beam always seems to be tricky (if anyone knows how to model a sloped RHS, please let me know, thanks) - these should be basic fundamentals of an architectural modelling program!!!

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Link — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:56:49 GMT

Olivia wrote:
(if anyone knows how to model a sloped RHS, please let me know, thanks)

Use a complex profile with your beam.

Most of these things just take a little know-how and advice.

Cheers,
Link.

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

TomWaltz — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:14:04 GMT

not to mention, Archicad is made for making Construction Documents, which really need to be exact!

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:16:12 GMT

Thanks link, I'd already used the complex profile tool, but found limitations. I was able to model the beam in elevation and then extrude it to give the right width, but in cross section, is it possible to show the profile of an RHS? (rather than a solid rectangle)

As I said, this should be a very simple task, you shouldn't need advice or know-how to model such a basic object.

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Dwight — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:18:28 GMT

Olivia wrote:
- these should be basic fundamentals of an architectural modelling program!!!

Yes. It is a basic fundamental that users learn how to do these things with the sometimes sorry workarounds that exist. I sympathize with you that not all functions are fingertip functions and that many things can be improved.

Archicad is literal because it deals with the back end of creating basic architecture, not the kid stuff.

I wish architecture was all malleable plastic like in SketchUp but buildings are sticks and users must invest time learning and building elements.

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:38:56 GMT

not arguing with that, but Link is right, if you are using a custom profile for the beam, it will look as a steel profile in the section- not just as a rectangle

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Link — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:45:10 GMT

Olivia wrote:
Thanks link, I'd already used the complex profile tool, but found limitations. I was able to model the beam in elevation and then extrude it to give the right width, but in cross section, is it possible to show the profile of an RHS? (rather than a solid rectangle)

As I said, this should be a very simple task, you shouldn't need advice or know-how to model such a basic object.

It is very simple, you just need to learn how it's done in ArchiCAD. You wouldn't expect to drive an 18 wheeler, just because you know how to drive a car would you?

A beam like the one shown will cut it's profiled shape in section. And it's a 3D element, so it doesn' matter where you cut it!

Cheers,
Link.

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:56:01 GMT

Sorry, I don't know what you mean by 'not the kid stuff'.

I don't think that a sloped RHS can really be put in the same category as 'malleable plastic architecture'. What I'm trying to achieve here is not up with the fairy's, it's just a sloped RHS, which should be a very simple task.

It would just be nice to be able to have more flexibility to create editable 3d elements.

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:57:20 GMT

Dwight wrote:
users must invest time learning and building elements.

although, arguably Sketchup shows how easy it is to make objects and Archicad IMO will have to incorporate this style of modelling components eventually.

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:59:04 GMT

Just as an alternative, you could use the RHS library part (Under steel structures) which gives you greater control of the cutting angle at the ends.

It also has all the standard sizes built-in, so you don't need to reset all the parameters if you change the size for example.

Don't forget if you do use a custom profile, to make it appear hollow you will need to cut a hole in the fill which will then show in 3D also.

Hope that helps!

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 01:36:19 GMT

That's the problem Link, it's not very simple.

It might be easy for a user like yourself who has obviously used archicad for a long time and is accustomed to its convoluted processes. I've only been using the program for a year, and from my viewpoint, I think that it could be simplified a great deal. Modelling certain components just takes too long, and it's incredibly frustrating and slows down productivity. There is not always time to stop work, and go onto the forum, ask your question, and then wait for a reply.

When designing and documenting a building, there is a need to be able to manipulate shapes with great flexibility. Not everything is an off the shelf library part. You need to have the ability to be able to 'notch out' or extrude parts, or twist sections, or what ever!! Archicad certainly does not allow this flexibility. It seems like its only geared up for brick veneer kit homes, unless it is assisted by plugin programs, adding yet another step to the drawn out process.

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 01:58:55 GMT

Forgive me for wading in on this discussion, Olivia. Rather than arguing how easy/difficult modelling some hypothetical building structure is, perhaps post up or describe exactly what you are struggling with. Many people would be more than happy to talk you through it, to get you started. (Or at least point out if it can be done or not, and maybe point out where you are going wrong.)

ArchiCAD has its quirks and limitations, I agree, but take advantage of Link/Dwight et al who are the masters of complex profiles! They know what they are talking about!

(Supposedly)

I promise, it's really not that difficult to learn!

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:42:00 GMT

Use Objective and set your self free
http://www.encina.co.uk/objective.html
Joseph

Re: Lack of simplicity in 3d modelling

Djordje — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:47:26 GMT

Olivia wrote:
Sorry, I don't know what you mean by 'not the kid stuff'.

I don't think that a sloped RHS can really be put in the same category as 'malleable plastic architecture'. What I'm trying to achieve here is not up with the fairy's, it's just a sloped RHS, which should be a very simple task.

It would just be nice to be able to have more flexibility to create editable 3d elements.

Yes it would.

But then, people start complaining before they check the library and what all the parameters do.

Do check the steel sections library. All the standard sections are there, incline angles are available, cutting angles at the ends too. There is no need to separately model any of the standard steel profiles.