topic Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem in Modeling

composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Tue, 23 May 2023 14:48:31 GMT

Hi all,

There is same nonsense object behavior continues in AC 14 unfortunately.
Why don't they fix this?
I read something about this problem on forum. There are some ways to do it correctly. (SEO, complex profiles... etc). But should we play like this?

When you're creating the slab you can select the "core" but it doesn't work in section correctly. Also intersections are same.

There MUST be a fix or improvement! In my opinion this is a big shame of AC.

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Erika Epstein — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 12:53:33 GMT

This is a long outstanding wish.

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 13:23:36 GMT

Unfortunately it is.

So what should we do to tell them it must be fixed as soon as possible?

It is the simple drawing mistake which an architecture student learns it in 1st year

Graphisoft team! i love you ! pleeeeeeeeease fix it. ^_^

->And add "composite beams" property for drawing right concrete structural systems. ( for adding to beam plasters )

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:28:45 GMT

In the mean time, the solution is simple - extend the wall up until it hits the underside of the core in the slab, then use SEO to subtract the wall away from the slab.

Rather than just doing this one by one, it's even quicker to just model all the walls, select all of them at once, then SEO with them at the same time.

This should also display correctly if you use the partial structure display function.

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:54:54 GMT

This is not the correct way to showing the right drawing. There remains slab's horizontal line at the intersection after SEO. And working with this technique is very exhausting.
This may be correct for brick wall/concrete slab intersection but not true for shear wall/concrete slab intersection.

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 18:02:08 GMT

Can you show an example of the correct way? I don't understand what you mean.

Edited to add -

There remains slab's horizontal line at the intersection after SEO

Actually I see what you mean about this. I don't know how to overcome this shortcoming other than by using a complex profile with the concrete core extended up by a tiny amount.

I have to agree that this sort of detailing needs improving in ArchiCAD. You often get situations like this where things don't *quite* work as they should, both in section and plan.

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 11:37:19 GMT

This is what i mean. True representation is drawn in detail window.

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Durval — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:27:30 GMT

I'm an old user who was away from ArchiCAD world for some time. Now I am gradually returning, hoping that this issue would have been fixed by now.
Apparently, my old solution still applies.
I created the attached parametric 2D GDL object (AC9) to be placed above wall/slab/beam intersections in ArchiCAD sections.
It's specially useful for masonry walls and concrete slab buildings, but it can be adapted. It draws a 2d concrete beam inside the wall, correctly merging with slabs, if needed (then you don't necessarily need to create them in 3D, since they are totally inside the walls).
It has parameters for pens, fills, lines, thicknesses of core and one layer of covering for each element and each side (internal & external). If you know some GDL coding, it's not hard to add more layers if you need. The object could be further developed to have a parametric number of layers per element, instead of the current maximum of 3 layers.
You can turn on and off every element: internal/external slab, upper floor/lower floor walls, and beam. The script then manages the correct lines and fills to be showed.
These parameters are organized in pop-up menus containing the default values that I use most.
You can edit them if you modify the Master and Parameters scripts. Instructions for changing variables are provided in comments, but they are written in portuguese. You should use the same settings you have in your composite walls and slabs.
Once you have your defaults set, it is quite fast to spread it around in sections.
But my "Arremate_VLP" do not solve another problem related to these intersections: the 3D.
If you have walls with 2 different materials placed in the same slab, the vertical edges of slabs will match only one material, and the external perspectives will show a stripe dividing stories. The problem also occurs if you have holes in the slab and the internal material of your walls does not match the external.

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:22:38 GMT

Thank you Durval,

Your method works in Archicad for 2D in simple sections. If you have a big section with complex geometries you can't use your GSM file too.
And when you export your project with another CAD application like Autocad the problem continues.

Still hope that Graphisoft Team will solve this problem...

Is there any Graphisoft Team member hearing me?

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:51:30 GMT

silence ... will be a storm?

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Karl Ottenstein — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:21:29 GMT

ogabson wrote:
silence ... will be a storm?

People at Graphisoft read pretty much everything here, so anything said is always taken into consideration. Like most companies, they will almost never come here to make forward-looking comments about possible future features.

Cheers,
Karl

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 15:52:29 GMT

Karl wrote:
ogabson wrote:
silence ... will be a storm?

People at Graphisoft read pretty much everything here, so anything said is always taken into consideration. Like most companies, they will almost never come here to make forward-looking comments about possible future features.

Cheers,
Karl

It's nice to hear it.
Erika Epstain said that "This is a long outstanding wish."
Then i was thinking they don't read all carefully.
So hope to see these "long outstanding wishes" will be performed in the next "Hotfixes" or "Versions".

Thanks,
Ogabson.

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Bricklyne Clarence — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 01:34:29 GMT

Karl wrote:
ogabson wrote:
silence ... will be a storm?
People at Graphisoft read pretty much everything here, so anything said is always taken into consideration. Like most companies, they will almost never come here to make forward-looking comments about possible future features.

Cheers,
Karl

Actually this isn't true.
Not entirely anyway.

Most companies not only do engage their clients and users at their forums more frequently and proactively than they do here at GS, but a good number will be quite open about future versions of their software, sneak peeks into possible features in development, but also what can and cannot be achieved within their resources, and schedules.

Take a look at any one of the Chaosgroup (Vray), Pixologic (ZBrush), Luxology (Modo), NextLimit (Maxwell and RealFlow), McNeel (Rhino3D), or RandomControl (Fryrender and Arion) user forums, and consider the level of involvement and engagement of the developers of those software with their users.

Even the evil empire, Autodesk, openly and frequently engages their users in their various official and unofficial forums like the Area, AUGI, and user-moderated forums like Revitcity. Ken Pimental who is a significant character on the 3DS Max development team can be easily and frequently found on places like CGArchitect.com talking about things like XBR (Excalibur), their next generation CGviz application still in development that 3ds MAX is supposed to evolve do in about 5-10 years.

Even our 'sister' application Vectorworks has a higher degree of interaction and dialog between the users and not just the developers, but even the president, and about topics like the next generation 3D kernel of their program to allow them to evolve Vectorworks into more of a BIM application than it currently is.

In other words, in the world of software development, engaging and interacting with your customers is more the norm, and not the exception. In fact one could very well argue that it is a necessity in trying to remain competitive in a business that's fast becoming as much about public relations as it is about software development savvy.
Graphisoft's behavior and lack of participation in these forums (except when dispensing hotfixes) is the exception, not the norm.

Understandably most software firms will tend to be guarded when it comes to discussing features still in development which may or may not make it into future versions, or about release schedules and roadmaps, - and a lot of it could probably be chalked up to NextLimit's debacle with their infamous Maxwell beta program of a couple of years ago when they promised users the universe and instead delivered buggy release after buggy release - but even they learnt their lesson and eventually found the right balance between being able to talk to their users, without having to commit to too much, and as of now they do have a full time staff member whose duty it is just to liaise with the customers and make sure they are more or less kept in the loop in development an software issues.

And it's not even like this would be new to GS - a quick search of even the Wishlist sections here, will reveal that up until about 7 or 8 years ago, they frequently used to take part in these forums, and even guardedly discussed possibilities of future versions and possible features.

I don't know what changed in the firm to change this policy - whether it was Gallardo's depature (a former GS president who actually used to make an appearance in these forums and talk to people) or the Nemetschek acquisition (though, they don't seem to interfere much in the day-to-day running of their subsidiary firms,and Vetctorworks development and PR would confirm this), but whatever happened, it's been pretty dire since then. And it's not surprising nor coincidental (IMO) that that was right around the time when they began releasing versions with half-baked features (or no new features or productivity improvements at all) that catered less and less to their "bread-and-butter" smaller customers, as they seemingly sought to go after larger and more corporate clients.

Bottom line : GS have terrible PR and customer relations - and particularly in these forums and when considered in comparison to other firms and their direct competitors in particular.
To try to paint it as otherwise, just feels like it would be disingenuous.

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Bricklyne Clarence — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 02:04:57 GMT

And just so you don't think I'm on another long-winded rant against GS, here's some proof of a time not too long ago when they used to participate on these forums.

The specific post :

Posted: Fri Feb 20, 2004 10:37 am Post subject: Re: stair maker

Laci wrote:

Following the discussion I must admit you are right Stairmaker needs improvements. At its current state it serves more German, European (Continental) needs rather than the standards of Anglo-Saxon traditions.
Some of your quotes are really useful for us, but would be better if you could exactly highlight what you are missing. We have a good idea but there can never be enough examples. If you could enclose drawings, pictures of stairs that you are unable to do by stairmaker would be ideal!
Thanks a lot!
_________________
László Néda
Architect, Product Manager
Graphisoft R&D
Budapest, Hungary
tel: +36 1 437 3264

....and we all know how that turned out,............ or didn't (re: stairmaker improvements).

Now granted, László is no longer with the company (probably a massive loss to all involved since he really seemed genuinely interested in developing a quality product for users, but I digress), but the point remains that they have done it before.

Here is another one from 2005. Admittedly not their brightest moment, considering the outcome of that whole discussion, but still.....

Relevant quote:

Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2005 4:11 pm Post subject: Re: Maxon Freeform in ArchiCad

Akos wrote:

......Modeling freedom in ArchiCAD?
I have to emphasize that introducing MaxonForm does NOT mean that we stop developing ArchiCAD’s own modeling capabilities. MaxonForm was NOT developed to replace the freedom in modeling and editing ArchiCAD construction elements. MaxonForm is a tool to create free-form organic objects.
_________________
Akos
Bezegh

ArchiCAD
Product
Manager

GSHQ

...........and we all know how that turned out,...........or didn't (re: Maxonform and/or development and improvement of ArchiCAD's own native modeling tools)

I don't know if Akos is still with the firm or not, but I sure do miss those days (5 years ago) when Developers actually used to talk to customers.

I'm just saying, is all.....

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 10:50:21 GMT

Thank you Bricklyne,

This must be the storm what i mean

People at Graphisoft read pretty much everything here, so anything said is always taken into consideration

Actually when i read this sentence i suddenly remembered the stair maker tool
I've met with "Archicad 9" since that time i've seen many wishes about stairs. I'm getting exited when a new version AC is announced. I realize that they've improved stair tool and more productivity tools in this version. But nothing has changed for years.

I don't know GS firm structure and strategy. But something iş going wrongly or slowly. Have architects lose their roles in GS team? It smells a bit engineering weather.
I envy Revit's improvements in this case. They're improving the program very fast.

Wish a better "AC 15" with fulfilled important customers' wishes.

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Karl Ottenstein — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 18:20:19 GMT

Just to clarify: just because we do not have our wishes granted (StairMaker, etc), does not mean that the people (particularly management) at Graphisoft are not aware of the issues. They really do read these forums and keep track of it all.

And, yes, they do comment hear from time to time, as those links from the past prove ... and as posts from Zsolt and Greg recently show. But, they don't have a PR person on payroll who can respond to every thread with soothing words of "Yes, we hear you and will take that into account" or whatever. Would you like to pay more for upgrades so that they could hire such a person?

Trust me, they pay attention to comments here and know the issues. Much of design and management is by architects or those with architectural training - that has not changed. But Graphisoft has hundreds of balls to juggle.

I'm not apologizing for them. I'm just sayin'...

Cheers,
Karl

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:32:02 GMT

Hello,

I suppose this problematic still exist. Or have it been fixed in the last versions of AC and I missed it ?

I would like to know where the technical difficulties are. At least to understand better the omission of this very important feature. Dear AC team, let us have a little insight in this topic.

Meanwhile, maybe the most experienced user could share their technics in this matter. Or point to post where this technics have been covered.

Thanks,

Sergio

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:12:18 GMT

Karl wrote:
Just to clarify: just because we do not have our wishes granted (StairMaker, etc), does not mean that the people (particularly management) at Graphisoft are not aware of the issues. They really do read these forums and keep track of it all.

And, yes, they do comment hear from time to time, as those links from the past prove ... and as posts from Zsolt and Greg recently show. But, they don't have a PR person on payroll who can respond to every thread with soothing words of "Yes, we hear you and will take that into account" or whatever. Would you like to pay more for upgrades so that they could hire such a person?

Trust me, they pay attention to comments here and know the issues. Much of design and management is by architects or those with architectural training - that has not changed. But Graphisoft has hundreds of balls to juggle.

I'm not apologizing for them. I'm just sayin'...

Cheers,
Karl

Karl no hard feelilng but i must say just LOL

They are blind and deff !
For years people talk about same stuff, for years... and you can say that they pay attention...dont be funny man, turn on your gray matter u had it before !

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Sat, 22 Jan 2011 16:48:56 GMT

We have this wish for ages! A very simple wish , posted many times on the Forum! I have given up!

Re: composite walls / composite slabs intersection problem

Anonymous — Sat, 22 Jan 2011 21:34:28 GMT

There are really two wishes here.

One seems like it would be trivial to implement but have large benefits. This would be to simply distinguish between separation lines (between adjoining elements) and outlines in section so that we could have proper sections with the fills actually shown and cleaning up properly. I have been asking for this one way or another for probably 15 years or so. I too am frustrated to the point of giving up on this one. Fortunately for me my practice doesn't require presentable sections (or much in the way of 2D at all) so this is now just mildly irritating to me rather than highly aggravating.

The other would presumably require considerably more development effort and likely have performance implications. This would be to have full and proper intersections between composites and profiled elements in section with priorities and core/finish taken into account.

I hold out some hope that the latter is under development and will naturally include the former if and when it actually shows up.