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

wall intersections in 3d

adamsb
Newcomer
Hi all,

I have noticed that, even when two walls intersect properly at an angle in plan, one wall always has priority over the other in 3d. This causes the materials to not line up very well. (I know that individually setting the 3d alignment manually can overcome this, but that's not the point.) This also ends up affecting the way the sections work through cuts near this intersection.

This isn't a wall priority problem as both walls are the same building material, surface material, fill, layer, wall priority, and everything. They also meet properly on plan. I would like the wall "mass" in 3d to create a mitered affect, instead of one wall passing all the way through the other wall.

Can somebody help me with this one? Thanks.
AC21 64-bit
Mac OSX 10.12, 4.2 GHz Intel Core i7, 64 GB mem
Mac OSX 10.11, 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7, 32 GB mem
16 REPLIES 16

adamsb:

Try this: select the weaker wall (the one whose Surface does not reach the corner) and increase its Junction Order (in the Model panel of the Wall Settings).

David
David Maudlin / Architect
www.davidmaudlin.com
Digital Architecture
AC24 USA • iMac 27" 4.0GHz Quad-core i7 | 24 gb ram • MacBook Pro 2.8GHz | 16 gb ram • OSX10.14.6

adamsb
Newcomer
Thanks David,

Their junction orders are equal to each other, so this shouldn't be happening to begin with, right? But, right now in my example they are both set to 8, and make the weaker wall a 9 causes it to take over and "push through". This is just as much of a problem, as the walls should meet as a mitered connection only, neither stronger than the other.

What do you think?
AC21 64-bit
Mac OSX 10.12, 4.2 GHz Intel Core i7, 64 GB mem
Mac OSX 10.11, 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7, 32 GB mem

adamsb:

This is what I get when increasing the Junction Order of the weaker wall.

David
Wall_Corner_Textures.png
David Maudlin / Architect
www.davidmaudlin.com
Digital Architecture
AC24 USA • iMac 27" 4.0GHz Quad-core i7 | 24 gb ram • MacBook Pro 2.8GHz | 16 gb ram • OSX10.14.6

adamsb
Newcomer
David wrote:
adamsb:

This is what I get when increasing the Junction Order of the weaker wall.

David
I appreciate you testing that for me. It looks like your walls are doing the same thing I mentioned, based on the material directions across the top of your walls. I assume that if you click on one of the walls, that it would show the right wall coming "through" the left on the corner. Am I correct?

Do you (or does anyone) know how to get this to be truly mitered? Thanks!
AC21 64-bit
Mac OSX 10.12, 4.2 GHz Intel Core i7, 64 GB mem
Mac OSX 10.11, 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7, 32 GB mem

Erich
Newcomer
The former miter behavior changed with the introduction of building materials. What is it that you need to accomplish that cannot happen with the new methodology?
Erich

AC 19 6006 & AC 20
Mac OS 10.11.5
15" Retina MacBook Pro 2.6
27" iMac Retina 5K

James B
Graphisoft
Graphisoft
This may be related to this problem:
http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=48526

The texture alignment issue has now been fixed in AC19.
Technical Product Manager, Graphisoft

adamsb wrote:
David wrote:
adamsb:
This is what I get when increasing the Junction Order of the weaker wall.
David
I appreciate you testing that for me. It looks like your walls are doing the same thing I mentioned, based on the material directions across the top of your walls. I assume that if you click on one of the walls, that it would show the right wall coming "through" the left on the corner. Am I correct?

Do you (or does anyone) know how to get this to be truly mitered? Thanks!
Based on your screen shot, I thought the issue was the texture on each vertical wall surface (I cannot see the top of the walls in your image). The walls do not miter (there is a legacy switch under Project Preferences > Legacy, but that is a step backwards in other ways). So I am not clear what you are trying to accomplish. You could use Morphs on top of the wall to control the texture appearance if that is the issue.

David
David Maudlin / Architect
www.davidmaudlin.com
Digital Architecture
AC24 USA • iMac 27" 4.0GHz Quad-core i7 | 24 gb ram • MacBook Pro 2.8GHz | 16 gb ram • OSX10.14.6

adamsb
Newcomer
Thanks everyone for your responses!

There are two problems this behavior is causing. One problem is similar to the link that James B added. I would like to do a manual 3d texture alignment differently on the two walls. This can't be done if one of the walls if forcing to show up on the adjacent plane.

The other problem this is causing...hard to describe. I have a project with a 15º turn in the wall. Because I need to cut two sections, one on either side of the wall break, these walls don't show up properly in section cut. Whichever wall is the "stronger" wall will show up in section, but cause the other wall to disappear in section, and show nothing! Not good.

I mitred return angle within all the composite wall elements would completely solve this! Should I assume, based on your Legacy option David, that this simply cannot be done? It really doesn't seem very helpful, I hope they change this!
AC21 64-bit
Mac OSX 10.12, 4.2 GHz Intel Core i7, 64 GB mem
Mac OSX 10.11, 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7, 32 GB mem

Erich
Newcomer
Since this appears to be a somewhat free standing fireplace element, can you change the walls to morphs and get things to work for you? That would eliminate the wall end behavior and perhaps get you better control of the materials.
Erich

AC 19 6006 & AC 20
Mac OS 10.11.5
15" Retina MacBook Pro 2.6
27" iMac Retina 5K

adamsb:

Are the Reference Lines on opposite sides of the Walls? If they are, try changing the Reference Line for one wall so both are on the same side.

David
David Maudlin / Architect
www.davidmaudlin.com
Digital Architecture
AC24 USA • iMac 27" 4.0GHz Quad-core i7 | 24 gb ram • MacBook Pro 2.8GHz | 16 gb ram • OSX10.14.6

Mats_Knutsson
Expert
I'm also interested in how/why the walls don't join mitered. I want to use BM.
AC 24 SWE Full
HPZbook 32GB i7 7820HQ 2,9 GHz
Quadro M2200 2GB

adamsb
Newcomer
Agreed. The program should split the angle to create a simple mitre. This would allow one surface to be overridden to a different material, with the corner remaining the change point.
AC21 64-bit
Mac OSX 10.12, 4.2 GHz Intel Core i7, 64 GB mem
Mac OSX 10.11, 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7, 32 GB mem

Mats_Knutsson
Expert
adamsb wrote:
Agreed. The program should split the angle to create a simple mitre. This would allow one surface to be overridden to a different material, with the corner remaining the change point.
However I agree with previos posters that this is not a normal situation...but let's say I want a brick wall in my garden..I'm curoius about the quantities I'll get with this kind of wall joins. Need to try that in the week-end.
AC 24 SWE Full
HPZbook 32GB i7 7820HQ 2,9 GHz
Quadro M2200 2GB

Steve Jepson
Advisor
Mats_Knutsson wrote:
adamsb wrote:
Agreed. The program should split the angle to create a simple mitre. This would allow one surface to be overridden to a different material, with the corner remaining the change point.
However I agree with previos posters that this is not a normal situation...but let's say I want a brick wall in my garden..I'm curoius about the quantities I'll get with this kind of wall joins. Need to try that in the week-end.
I think this is a graphics issue that will not make any difference in the schedules, which you would probably want to be based on the reference line.

But I think it is an important graphics issue that should be fixed.

I would prefer that the clean up not be automatically mitered, but that it would clean up just like the walls skins will be constructed. Wall skins are rarely mitered. I would like to set the priority for which skins overlap or clean up as a miter in the Composite settings.

ArchiCAD 25 4013 USA - Windows 10 Pro 64x - Dell 7720 64 GB 2400MHz ECC - Xeon E3 1535M v6 4.20GHz - (2) 1TB M.2 PCIe Class 50 SSD's - 17.3" UHD IPS (3840x2160) - Nvidia Quadro P5000 16GB GDDR5 - Maxwell Studio/Render 5.2.1.49- Multilight 2 - Adobe Acrobat Pro

Laszlo Nagy
Community Admin
Community Admin
I am afraid the way skins of joined Walls are constructed in L- and T- and other types of joins is something that occurred as a consequence of Priority Based Connections (PBC) in ARCHICAD 17.
Before PBC we had mitered joins. (This was not perfect either because if could give us incorrect results - the mitering was not performed for the whole wall, and not on a skin level.) With PBC the strength of each skin is evaluated by the program. The stronger skin cuts the weaker skin (a Solid Element Operation is performed internally based on the Intersection Priority Number values of the Building Materials (BMs) of the connecting skins). If the Intersection Priority Numbers of the two connecting skins are the same (e.g. because they are the same skin of the same Composite), then ARCHICAD randomly decided which skin cuts the other skin.
This means that there is no mitered join on a skin-by-skin basis. On skin always cuts the other. And this is what you guys see in those attached screenshots: at each joint one skin is always extended as far as possible and it cuts the other skin with the same BM.

My guess is that technologically it is a totally different ball-game to be able to handle each skin of each structure separately and create mitered joins on a skin level - that is totally different from creating a mitered join for the whole wall.
....................................................................................................
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

Steve Jepson
Advisor
Yes. Someday controlling the walls skins independently might be possible. We need that especially for independent vertical control of the skins. When we can do that, we will also be able to control the horizontal skin connections.

My idea/wish for a long time has been for composites skins to behave as one, or temporarily ungrouped so they can be controlled independently, then regrouped. When the skins are ungrouped would be the time to configure the ends of the skins to mitered or lapped.

I believe this will be possible in ArchiCAD someday because the demands for more precise details are increasing exponentially with the implementation of LOD's that are becoming closer and closer to 100% virtual modeling of the entire building.

I like the clean up as it is in this image. No miter.

ArchiCAD 25 4013 USA - Windows 10 Pro 64x - Dell 7720 64 GB 2400MHz ECC - Xeon E3 1535M v6 4.20GHz - (2) 1TB M.2 PCIe Class 50 SSD's - 17.3" UHD IPS (3840x2160) - Nvidia Quadro P5000 16GB GDDR5 - Maxwell Studio/Render 5.2.1.49- Multilight 2 - Adobe Acrobat Pro

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!