Design forum
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Archicad 24. One Building, one team, one model

GOBA
Newcomer
Hi, I’m not sure if this topic should be in other section.

I’m structural engineer, user of ArchiCAD. I’m Spanish. I specify this because the most used structural software (two of them) are quite different from other countries. And this is because they generate the analytical model from the physical model. So, users of those software don’t really need the new features to generate the analytical model, in ArchiCAD.

But the reason I am writing this post, is because I am really surprised with the concept of “one team, one model”. I don understand it, I don’t intend to use it. But maybe, I haven’t understood. Let me try to explain myself.

If I have understood the workflow, physical model is responsibility of the architect. Is that it? If the proposed workflow is like that, how can this work? Structural design, before structural analysis should be done by the structural engineer (if there is one). So, do architects and engineers modify the same elements from the physical model? Isn’t this dangerous? I don’t see how engineers could design the structure, modifying slabs that architects are working with. We need to place beams, adapt slabs to those beams, and only then, the analytical model could be generated. Is this proposed to be done, in the same model?

Moreover, how do they manage, architects and engineers, to work with column’s floor plan display, if this configuration depends on the element, instead of the views. For example, If I want to show columns of story 1, and beams and slabs of story 2 (usual structural representation), I need to define “One story up” in “Floor plan display”, but this won’t work for the architect.

Haven’t I understood something?

Thanks!
ArchiCAD user since November 2109
AC24, Windows 10
19 REPLIES 19

Anonymous
Not applicable
Hi GOBA,

I haven't tested this feature, but from I saw in the presentation, Architect and Engineer share only the SAM (Structural Analytic Model). The Architect will use AC and the Engineer with RISA or SCIA. If I get it right.

Here is a tutorial I found in Spanish:



Does this help?

GOBA
Newcomer
Thanks Braza!

I’ve seen some videos, and yes, I think that’s the workflow, but I don’t see how it could work. In order to generate the SAF file, the physical model of the structure should be design. I think this won’t be done by the architect. At least, not always… so engineer will modify the physical model in ArchiCAD, and moreover, will use it to generate layouts.
ArchiCAD user since November 2109
AC24, Windows 10

Anonymous
Not applicable
You are welcome GOBA.
I get your point and I am confused too...
Perhaps it would be nice if GS create a practical tutorial with this workflow to clarify this. With also the integration of sw other than RISA and SCIA.

jl_lt
Enthusiast
What i understood from all this is once the analitical model is checked and done, you can send it to the engineers and then you can receive dimension proposals from the engineers from which you can actually change your columns and beams and slabs dimesions in the 3d archicad model; all this is done within the same database and environment instead of you having to import the engineers model and change everything manually, and then repeat all the process n number of iterations.

If one can somehow link the physical model with the analitical model and you can automatically adjust structural elements according to the engineer calculations, there a lot of benefits in this.

GOBA
Newcomer
Hi jl_lt,

So, can I assume that in other countries architects are responsible of the structural design (physical model with all the structural elements), and engineers are only responsible of the structural analysis (analytical model)?
ArchiCAD user since November 2109
AC24, Windows 10

Nathan Hildebrandt
Participant
The problem with this workflow is that it requires the structural engineer to use Archicad. I honestly do not see many structural engineers switching from Revit to Archicad when they work with other Architects that are using Revit. I am keen to see a business case (a real financial one, not one where people say it is better) for a Structural Engineer that works mainly with other consultants in Revit and some Architects in Archicad (because this is the reality in Australia). If there is a business case I will happily promote it to all of the engineers I work with. But knowing the challenges I face already in an Archicad > Revit workflow when I work with Engineers I struggle to see them wanting to take the plunge. Unless there are other significant cost/time savings that make it worthwhile.

One workflow I thought might be somewhat useful was that the Architect could generate a model in Archicad that was suitable for export as a SAM. But the problem is that the effort required by the Architect in Archicad to generate such a model would take too much time, and the lines of the model would probably be placed in the wrong location by the Architect, opening up liability to them. That way the Structural Engineer could benefit from the work of the Architect, but dangerously as the accuracy could be significantly off.

In the end, I hope the concept and workflows bring benefits to me, but I don't see them at the moment.
Nathan Hildebrandt
Director | Skewed
www.skewed.com.au

Laszlo Nagy
Community Admin
Community Admin
My understanding is that there are two main cases:
1. Integrated Practices, where both architect and structural engineer is within the same firm. In this case, yes, they would probably make the structural engineer use Archicad (at least for some of the structural engineering tasks). They would also work in a shared Teamwork project environment.
2. Architects working with consultants. In this case, the architect would use Archicad, be responsible for creating and updating the Structural Analytical Model (SAM) in Archicad, but could exchange this data with the structural engineers through the SAF (Structural Analytical Format) format, or by using the bi-directional links with RISA or SCIA, if the structural engineer uses either software.
....................................................................................................
Laszlo Nagy, Lead Moderator, Community Admin
Get Archicad Tips at https://twitter.com/laszlonagy
AMD Ryzen 1700X CPU, 48 GB RAM, NVidia GTX 1060 6GB, 500 GB NVMe SSD
2x28" (2560x1440), WIN10 PRO ENG, AC20-AC25
Loving Archicad since 1995

GOBA
Newcomer
Thanks all of you.

I think everyone of us would need to find our workflow. I'm not convinced with Graphisoft proposal, even though I'm user of ArchiCAD, so I could work in Teamwork with the architect, in the same model.

I think it's better to have 2 physical models (architecture and structure), and coordinate them. Engineers being responsible of the physical and analytical model of the structure.
ArchiCAD user since November 2109
AC24, Windows 10

Takis
Participant
Hi Goba, I am also a structural Engineer and I use Archicad for many years.
I agree that we have to find our way to communicate with Architects taking the advantage from this new feature.
In fact how I understand this new workflow is that having the project on BIMcloud, we use the same model with the Architect, off course we will take care of the SAM before exporting to the structural software either by exporting SAM or IFC.
Not all structural software have the option of SAM import / export, so the new revised model after the analysis won't be exported back to Archicad if IFC is used.
Furthermore to fully work with Archicad after the analysis and design, there are also some other limitations with the current tools provided in Archicad 24.
There is no Reinforcement Tool, there are no steel connections, the roof wizard tool creates objects instdead of beams, so those objects cannot be exported as members to the structural software using SAM. Also there are no specific tools for 2D detailing like anchors, bolts etc.
I want to believe that since Graphisoft has decided to include the Structural Analysis Model in Archicad, will not stop here but will continue to fulfill the software as it should be in a way that both Architects and Structural Engineers collaborate together in preparing the work to the final construction drawings stage and even more from that.

Takis.

GOBA
Newcomer
Hi Takis and thanks!

Have you tried this?

https://www.graphisoft.com/archicad/partner_solutions/eptar/#eptar-reinforcement

I haven’t. It’s not included in the ArchiCAD license.
ArchiCAD user since November 2109
AC24, Windows 10

Takis
Participant
Hi Goba, yes I use Eptar's Reinforcement tool for many years but the tool has a lot of problems, it needs powerful improvements regarding efficiency, reinforcement schedules corrections, labels, numbering problems etc. Nobody knows when Eptar will decide to do something about it. Also every year we have to wait for Eptar to make the tool compatible to the Archicad's newer version and this may takes months, so we are stuck in Archicad previous version for some time.

GOBA
Newcomer
Thank you for the information!
ArchiCAD user since November 2109
AC24, Windows 10

GOBA
Newcomer
Takis wrote:
There is no Reinforcement Tool, there are no steel connections, the roof wizard tool creates objects instdead of beams, so those objects cannot be exported as members to the structural software using SAM. Also there are no specific tools for 2D detailing like anchors, bolts etc.
Hi Takis!

Do you use a steel detailing software? If yes, which one?

Thanks!
ArchiCAD user since November 2109
AC24, Windows 10

Takis
Participant
Hi Goba, I do not use any steel detailing software because of the expenses for extra software and the annual subscriptions.
For 3D steel detailing I work with objects in Archicad and sometimes I import ifc files from my steel connections design software (Steelcon).

Here is a small sample of my 3D steel detailing in Archicad.

Takis.

GOBA
Newcomer
Thank you very much Takis!

I don’t have any steel detaining software, because of the same reason. I didn’t know I could do that in ArchiCAD.
ArchiCAD user since November 2109
AC24, Windows 10

jl_lt
Enthusiast
GOBA wrote:
Hi jl_lt,

So, can I assume that in other countries architects are responsible of the structural design (physical model with all the structural elements), and engineers are only responsible of the structural analysis (analytical model)?
Hi Mr. GOBA. sorry for the late response. I have encountered 3 main workflows so far. In all 3 cases Architectural and structural elements in the digital model aspire to end up with the same dimensions and elements (after many iterations), but still, structural analysis is the responsibility of the structural engineer with the info provided by the architect and the design intent.

case 1. Mostly for small, low budget projects. Most of the time you get to work with more old school engineers who still work only 2d. They ask you to send the project info in 2d plans, and even if they have people that can handle 3d models, you still get 2d drawings from them. Then you update your project model with the information you received and fight with them on overdimensioned elements until compromise is reached from any or all of the parties involved or time runs out.

case 2. medium sized projects. if you are lucky the engineer already works with 3d models (still asks for 2d cad info). You can either receive 2d cad info, as in case #1, which you then pour into the model (just element dimensions, not rebar, which i strongly oppose). Or, you receive a clumsy 3d model which you then attach to your main file, but its so clumsy and uneditable that your best course of action is to leave it as reference and adjust your own elements in the architectural 3d model.

case 3.bigger projects. Nice budgets for everyone involed. Architectural and engineering models become integrated. The model integration is done either by the Architect or by 3rd parties specialized in BIM modelling. Architect creates the first base design and dimensioning of elements, then the model is refined by the engineers and after some iterations and compromises on both parts, Architecture´s and engineer´s 3d structural model becomes one and the same thing. After this, the architect or the BIM specialist uses the structural engineering model as the reference and base for modeling evething else (non structural architectural elementos and MEP) and its all kept in one database and/or distributed to all the parties involved to use it for their specific work.

Until now, i havent personally seen of EVERYONE working on the same model in real time, but i know of a couple of local megaprojects where it has been at least partially done with Revit, with great costs for everyone.

Maybe the goal is to bring down this process from the high end projects to smaller scale projects.
Personally i would like to always achieve something like case number 3, but i think the separation of the Architects and structural engineer work is still important, so engineers should do their analitical model.

All the aforementioned process is in Mexico and is my personal experience. so, to answer your questions, Here the structure is responsibility of the engineer while the 3d model with the input from structural engineering might or might not be responsability of the architect.
it is my understanding than in Europe and maybe other places the structure is the responsibility of the Architect eventhough it is calculated by an engineer, so it would be interesting to hear about their workflows and how it all integrates with the workflow proposed by graphisoft.

GOBA
Newcomer
Hi jl_lt, in Spain, the structure is responsibility of the engineer, but also the architect. Here, architects can design structures, but sometimes they work with engineers (or other architects) that are specialists. But even in those cases, they accept the structural design, and they become responsible of it: we both are.
ArchiCAD user since November 2109
AC24, Windows 10

jl_lt
Enthusiast
Ok, so that being the case, the workflow proposed by Graphisoft makes more sense, that is, the analitical model starts with the architect with info ready to be applied by the engineer.

bouhmidage
Enthusiast
jl_lt , your explanation is just PERFECT
i'm in the case 1, i remodel all the strcutal 3D elements on archciad from 2D CAD sent by engeneer, it's laborious, but efficient in small scale projects,
this workflow promoted archicad for engeneers, as the collaboratio is on structural elements size, modelling quickly and efficiently in archicad made engeneers try to yse is for this task,
Rebar and calculations have their own tools, i don't know why people try to have ALL in one solution,
Revit focused on 10000 things, and he lost quality on almost everything, ArchiCAD focused on little things, with a good quality , that's the point.
One thing, Graphisoft should make the SAF format available for all kind of softwares, and this will KILL the monopole of working on the same software

The SAF format inspired me, this logic could be used in MEP in other sort,
MEP elements are " a block " with connections, inputs and outputs, a common format between all MEP softwares, that scribes theese inputs and outputs and " the block itself"
Inputs : common input parameter ,
Output ; Common output parameter
Block : geometry convertion
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X, 32 GB RAM, RTX 3080 10 GB

Archicad 23

Windows 10 professional

https://www.behance.net/Nuance-Architects

Didn't find the answer? Start a new discussion

Labels

Still looking?

Browse more topics

Back to forum

See latest solutions

Accepted solutions

Start a new discussion!