topic Stack Levels? in Modeling

Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Fri, 26 May 2023 07:02:07 GMT

I have read, and understand how the stacking within archicad works, but I am running in to problems. Currently I am designing a trellis that is part of a deck. Elements of the trellis are integral to the structure of the deck and much of the trellis occurs on one story. I created the trellis with wall since I am using a stock size wood and it works better than slabs.

So here is my problem, the stacking it totaly arbitrary as if the 3-D elements were 2-D (the smaller elements that are lower in the trellis are view on top etc.) Why do elements not view/stack based on their elevation? When I try to sort things out by either sending to back or bringing to front I run out of stacking levels, and if I edit on of the elements it brings it up in the display order which makes it so I have to go back and redo the whole stack. I have had this problems in many other parts of the model where I am 2-D drafting over 3-d to get more detail.

Any ideas?

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:46:19 GMT

Why not post a picture of what you are trying to do?

Woody

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:12:19 GMT

woodster wrote:
Why not post a picture of what you are trying to do?

Woody

Attached you will see a screen capture of the 3-D as well as a photo of how it appears in 2-S.

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:13:24 GMT

woodster wrote:
Why not post a picture of what you are trying to do?

Woody

Here is the 2-D

Re: Stack Levels?

Karl Ottenstein — Thu, 30 Dec 2004 17:17:33 GMT

Geoff wrote:
Why do elements not view/stack based on their elevation?

AFAIK, Graphisoft is aware of this wish for more sensible stacking order.

Right now, there are a limited number of stacking levels, and elements go to particular levels by default. You have to manually use the bring forward / send backward commands to adjust them to the way you want them.

You end up getting comfortable with the F5, F6 and shift-F5, shift-F6 shortcuts if you do a lot of this stuff...

Karl

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:09:51 GMT

Karl wrote:
Geoff wrote:
Why do elements not view/stack based on their elevation?
AFAIK, Graphisoft is aware of this wish for more sensible stacking order.

Right now, there are a limited number of stacking levels, and elements go to particular levels by default. You have to manually use the bring forward / send backward commands to adjust them to the way you want them.

You end up getting comfortable with the F5, F6 and shift-F5, shift-F6 shortcuts if you do a lot of this stuff...

Karl

The send forward/send back (which for me is command/shift/] and command shift [ like illustrator and photoshop) but in the case of the trelles there are 20 or so pieces so I run out of stacking slots, not to mention the fact that the stacking level does not remain the same if one of the elements are edited.

Re: Stack Levels?

Djordje — Fri, 31 Dec 2004 04:38:19 GMT

Geoff wrote:
Karl wrote:
Geoff wrote:
Why do elements not view/stack based on their elevation?
AFAIK, Graphisoft is aware of this wish for more sensible stacking order. ///
Karl
The send forward/send back (which for me is command/shift/] and command shift [ like illustrator and photoshop) but in the case of the trelles there are 20 or so pieces so I run out of stacking slots, not to mention the fact that the stacking level does not remain the same if one of the elements are edited.

You might want to try an age old trick:

Select all the elements at the lowest stacking order, and drag in place - isse a drag command, but don't actually move anything, just click on the same plase for the start ad end point. Repeat with upper levels.

The stacking order should be reset previously.

The problem here is that all the elements that you are stacking are of the same type; stacking within types can only be done by send to front/back or manually ...

More luck in 2005! Happy New Year!

HTH,

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:10:46 GMT

One thing we've done (on occasion) in the past to 'get round' the ANNOYING limitations of AC stacking (as Geoff has discovered) is save a 'plan 3d view' as 2d elements.

This is a messy workaround, but it works.

HTH - Stuart

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:19:20 GMT

StuartJames wrote:
One thing we've done (on occasion) in the past to 'get round' the ANNOYING limitations of AC stacking (as Geoff has discovered) is save a 'plan 3d view' as 2d elements.

You're right it is annoying but a quick way to do it rather than to save a plan would be to use the patch tool.

Woody

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:31:07 GMT

Woody;

Using the patch tool to create a (correct) 2d from a complicated 'pile' of 3d elements requires a lot of thought

... Using a 'hidden line 'plan' 3d view' just means less thought - as long as you physically have the correct relation between the objects in 3d they show up correctly 'in plan'.

- Use of this (.2dl) is pretty much the same as the patch tool.

There are many ways to toast a marshmellow

- Stuart

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:38:23 GMT

Another trick is to save the trellis as a library part. Keep the original components on a library parts template layer (normally hidden) so that you can easily edit and resave for revisions.

You could get the trellis to work with the stacking levels, but it is a bit tedious. Since you have eight layers of slats you will need to place each group (find and select by elevation) on a different stacking level. The quickest way to do this would probably be:

1. Group the slats by elevation
2. Bring all to front
3. Lock the top group
4. Select all the slats
5. Send backward (the locked slats will be unaffected)
6. Lock the next group down
7. Repeat for the rest of them

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:16:53 GMT

StuartJames wrote:
... Using a 'hidden line 'plan' 3d view' just means less thought - as long as you physically have the correct relation between the objects in 3d they show up correctly 'in plan'.

- Use of this (.2dl) is pretty much the same as the patch tool.

Hey... why didn't I think of that!

Woody

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Tue, 04 Jan 2005 00:31:43 GMT

StuartJames wrote:
One thing we've done (on occasion) in the past to 'get round' the ANNOYING limitations of AC stacking (as Geoff has discovered) is save a 'plan 3d view' as 2d elements.

This is a messy workaround, but it works.

HTH - Stuart

Is there a way to hack some level of parametric linking out of this technique?

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:11:20 GMT

geoff

the hack i use which keeps everything 'live'

select the elements that you want a 'true' 3d view of in plan

open 3d window. set to top view (internal engine. hidden line or shaded. vectorial hatching if reqd)

save the view to a view set as a pmk (the view will remember your selection set)

(in ac8 you now have to publish the pmk as live linking in plotmaker to 3d views will only give you a useless bitmap. i think this is fixed in ac9)

now in plotmaker import the plan and then overlay the 3d view on to it

(put a hotspot on the plan and add one to the pmk for accurate registration)

done

i think it's quite a neat technique. using a similar method it also works to correctly show lower levels of multistorey buildings (without worrying about 'show on one storey up' etc.). you can get vectorial hatching on slabs and roofs. also parapet walls will show correctly on upper levels (impossible otherwise without workarounds)

also, using a horizontal cutting plane, complex multistorey objects (eg raking trusses in an atrium) will appear correctly in plan

a little fiddly to set up but once done you can forget about it

any use?

bill

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:54:06 GMT

I'm revisiting this age-old problem. I haven't tested 16 yet, I don't see it on the list of new features and in 15 this is a most annoying problem.

Really, manually re-ordering the stack level, every time a slab in an overlapping-slabs-situation is edited, is a ridiculous 'arrangement' (pun intended).

All the above workarounds are for an object. Simply dealing with a proper BIM and having things display according to the reality - a plan shows things at a higher elevation being displayed in front of things of a lower elevation. Think of how you'd draw stepped basement slabs or stepped strip foundations. This should be shown as you'd see looking down from above - after all, that's what a plan IS.... Or a vanity basin showing on ArchiCAD below the ground floor slab - I mean, that's absurd!

Please GS - can we have a hotfix for this? We can't spend so much time reordering things when they're undergoing changes regulary, it double the work already required by the changes in order for team members and management to understand what is going on.

Re: Stack Levels?

Erika Epstein — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 13:21:54 GMT

kimfromzim wrote:

Really, manually re-ordering the stack level, every time a slab in an overlapping-slabs-situation is edited, is a ridiculous 'arrangement' (pun intended).

All the above workarounds are for an object. Simply dealing with a proper BIM and having things display according to the reality - a plan shows things at a higher elevation being displayed in front of things of a lower elevation..

Kim, great that you bring this up, can you make a new wish?

Re: Stack Levels?

jakubc — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 13:52:36 GMT

I sign this request with my hands and feets and whatever you want too. I've just spent 2 hours trying to hide part of stairs, that should be covered with a slab, but are still visible. Even if I try to use worksheet to edit this detail in 2D its impossible, cause stairs are made of fill, which makes this object almost impossible to edit/trim. Moving them back does nothing =p
Am I doing something wrong or its common issue?

Re: Stack Levels?

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Aug 2012 08:38:48 GMT

Okay - new poll has been started here.