I would like to thank @Braza for directing me to this thread, and @Lazlo for copying the link.
And with all your permission I will write down all the things that I think that should be addressed for ArchiCAD MEP:
1. I have found out that an efficient way of modelling MEP services based on other media sources (
And although I know that this isn't the place to comment about Morphs, but I think the Morphs Node for this case must be made more visible, or bigger, because with the method I have just mentioned, search for a Morph node in a PointCloud is like search for a needle in the hey's stack.
2. More MEP options for GDL objects (
3. Off axis elements, since I have seen some pipes and ducts may grow or change in size or form off the MEP route axis..
4. Custom thickness Flanged Ducts and pipes: current MEP objects relate ducts' & pipes flanged thickness to pipe thickness, but this can be an issue for LOD 200+ modeliing.
5. Graphisoft should set a bare minimum of standardised parameters (https://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?p=298840#p298840 .
And if you will permit me, I strongly advise that the names of those parameters be adapted/inspired by EN norms.
6. A lot, and I mean a lot of your MEP object, lacks a decent number of hotspots and hotlines for 3D views, which can make 3D modelling a time wasting exercise.
For example: Model a wide rectangular duct at an angle, that have two non-uniform transitions of different sizes put side by side at the end of that duct, so that the outer perimeter of the transitions' edges should meet with those of the duct.
Update: I have been recently alerted that duct's more fittings was the answer for this particular inconvenience, but the need for more hotspots, hotlines & hotsarcs is still relevant and necessary ... So I would also like to add that in case of more fittings, we also need to set the size of the divisions between the secondary ducts.
7. For lighting, please add a simple 3D model for a simple/basic wall mounted flourescent lamp (https://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?p=311729#p311729
8. Last year, I have stumbled on a case were inline objects may have needed more than 2 MEP hotsopts, as I have explained in this threadhttps://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=67407&p=300657#p300657
9. I would like you to check ArchiCAD's standards ducts, cause (
10. Grasshopper connection, don't forget about that, and don't forget that sometime we need to extract the data in Grasshopper for calculations in Grasshopper.
11. In Revit there is a nice options that is available for electric appliances, were the hotspot will mention very simple info about the connection, like how many cables, volts etc, this must be implemented.
Update: Just to be clear, I'm not aiming that ArchiCAD should handle MEP calculations, what I aim for, that the user can have access to on screen data in its simplest form about the MEP connectors, in case of that the library part should have those data embedded.
12. Just a reminder, if you will incorporate changes, such for the parameters, don't forget to mention them in the manuals, and may be with a simple diagram so that we don't make wrong assumptions from our part (
13. Sometime, we would need to raise a node of a MEP element vertically in sections and elevation, right now we can't do that.
And with all your permission I will write down all the things that I think that should be addressed for ArchiCAD MEP:
1. I have found out that an efficient way of modelling MEP services based on other media sources (
And although I know that this isn't the place to comment about Morphs, but I think the Morphs Node for this case must be made more visible, or bigger, because with the method I have just mentioned, search for a Morph node in a PointCloud is like search for a needle in the hey's stack.
2. More MEP options for GDL objects (
3. Off axis elements, since I have seen some pipes and ducts may grow or change in size or form off the MEP route axis..
4. Custom thickness Flanged Ducts and pipes: current MEP objects relate ducts' & pipes flanged thickness to pipe thickness, but this can be an issue for LOD 200+ modeliing.
5. Graphisoft should set a bare minimum of standardised parameters (
And if you will permit me, I strongly advise that the names of those parameters be adapted/inspired by EN norms.
6. A lot, and I mean a lot of your MEP object, lacks a decent number of hotspots and hotlines for 3D views, which can make 3D modelling a time wasting exercise.
For example: Model a wide rectangular duct at an angle, that have two non-uniform transitions of different sizes put side by side at the end of that duct, so that the outer perimeter of the transitions' edges should meet with those of the duct.
Update: I have been recently alerted that duct's more fittings was the answer for this particular inconvenience, but the need for more hotspots, hotlines & hotsarcs is still relevant and necessary ... So I would also like to add that in case of more fittings, we also need to set the size of the divisions between the secondary ducts.
7. For lighting, please add a simple 3D model for a simple/basic wall mounted flourescent lamp (
8. Last year, I have stumbled on a case were inline objects may have needed more than 2 MEP hotsopts, as I have explained in this thread
9. I would like you to check ArchiCAD's standards ducts, cause (
10. Grasshopper connection, don't forget about that, and don't forget that sometime we need to extract the data in Grasshopper for calculations in Grasshopper.
11. In Revit there is a nice options that is available for electric appliances, were the hotspot will mention very simple info about the connection, like how many cables, volts etc, this must be implemented.
Update: Just to be clear, I'm not aiming that ArchiCAD should handle MEP calculations, what I aim for, that the user can have access to on screen data in its simplest form about the MEP connectors, in case of that the library part should have those data embedded.
12. Just a reminder, if you will incorporate changes, such for the parameters, don't forget to mention them in the manuals, and may be with a simple diagram so that we don't make wrong assumptions from our part (
13. Sometime, we would need to raise a node of a MEP element vertically in sections and elevation, right now we can't do that.
Few other points that I have just stumbled upon:
14. Takeoff must be able to connect with transitions ducts.
15. Better controls for Wye pipes so that if I have one that flows vertically, and I need to change it's configuration, ArchiCAD wouldn't rotate it horizontally.
16. This is optional, once in an engineering firm I was exposed to a method of expressing different MEP routes by naming the nodes by numeric values, in such a way we can follow them as if it had a tree data structure, with trucks and branches, that goes from one specific node origin to destination node (
This method simplified MEP calculations, and revisions enormously, and it would be advantageous for ArchiCAD to include this option as a schedule scheme.
14. Takeoff must be able to connect with transitions ducts.
15. Better controls for Wye pipes so that if I have one that flows vertically, and I need to change it's configuration, ArchiCAD wouldn't rotate it horizontally.
16. This is optional, once in an engineering firm I was exposed to a method of expressing different MEP routes by naming the nodes by numeric values, in such a way we can follow them as if it had a tree data structure, with trucks and branches, that goes from one specific node origin to destination node (
This method simplified MEP calculations, and revisions enormously, and it would be advantageous for ArchiCAD to include this option as a schedule scheme.
17. You should also revise the rotation matrix for cable trays, cause I have just stumbled on the case were I needed to a vertical tray , with its bottom is facing the wall and no cover.
On plan it's correctly represented, but in 3D view, it appears as if it was rotated 180º.
On plan it's correctly represented, but in 3D view, it appears as if it was rotated 180º.
18. Electric MEP, should have Trucking Square profiles as an independent library parts, so that we don't have to use square duct profiles as trucking profiles.
19. Air Diffuser needs to have the option to be connected from the top surface, and not just by the sides.
20. The objects "Rect Louver Face Ceiling Diffuser XX" & "Square Louver Face Ceiling Diffuser XX" are practically the same, you can even go with the rectangular, change its dimensions and make is a square, & the opposite is true.
I advise, you just keep the rectangular.
20. The objects "Rect Louver Face Ceiling Diffuser XX" & "Square Louver Face Ceiling Diffuser XX" are practically the same, you can even go with the rectangular, change its dimensions and make is a square, & the opposite is true.
I advise, you just keep the rectangular.
@Aaron Bourgoin
only if the library object was scripted with MEP connectors
only if the library object was scripted with MEP connectors
Still looking?
