Composites-Are you using them and how?

[Dave Jochum]

There have been several discussions on this forum about composites, and they've generated more than a few polls and wishes. I'm still struggling, however, to find the best method of creating walls that need a minimum of patching in plan and section until GS improves the tools.

Duane Valencia stated at ACUW that he doesn't use composites due to the cleanup problem. Hopefully, Duane, you've recovered and can chime in. I didn't get a chance to view your drawing sets after hearing that comment. To Duane and others who don't use composites, how do you set dimensions if there is no core (framing) defined?

How are people getting composites to cleanup with a minimum of fuss?

[Anonymous]

You're right Geoff. Display options also need to be considered.

The whole matter is rather complex though since the settings will vary with different composites. The problem with making the settings in the composites is that they become global in all views. The (potential) problem with using the display options is that they affect all the composites.

The issue is how to permit both settings by view and settings by composite without tying people's brains in knots.

[SeaGeoff]

Matthew wrote:
The issue is how to permit both settings by view and settings by composite without tying people's brains in knots.

OK, are you saying that in one view I might want some composites controlled by the Display Option settings while others aren’t while in another view it would be different ones that conformed while still others are free?

I know I try to position myself as the champion of flexibility and consistent interface but if you are really suggesting this wouldn’t it be easier to do as other CAD apps do and make it possible for all kinds of sub-structures to have their own layers? Parts of composites and library parts could all have layers independent of their master layer. Each Quickview could then be saved with minute control over things like mullions, hardware, wall composites, stair rails, etc. When I switched to AC I was surprised that this wasn’t possible. After a time it was a relief. Talk about out of control layer proliferation and brain knots.

Please give an example of what you’re getting at.

[Anonymous]

I've got it Geoff!

View scripts

I have often posted about the powerful View Filters in speedikon. This would be another step in providing that functionality.

The idea would be to have the ability to add a script to a particular view which would allow the fine tuning of composites, etc. within the view. If this were only to govern the composites then it could be a graphical interface where you could specify the appearance of each one. Since the view also defines the scale this takes care of the scale sensitivity. The scripting approach would have the advantage of being able to copy/paste between views.

NO WAIT! There is a better way. A dialog to create named sets of display options for the composites (similar to the Layer Combinations). This way a Composite Display Setting could be easily selected for each view.

Something like this would be the best solution since it would add the capabilities without increasing the complexity of the basic functions. The new feature would not change the default behavior of the program at all but would be available for those who want it.

[SeaGeoff]

Matthew wrote:
A dialog to create named sets of display options for the composites (similar to the Layer Combinations). This way a Composite Display Setting could be easily selected for each view..

Great idea, glad you thought of it. But how is this different than including control of composite appearance in the current Display Option settings, which is really just a matter of expanding the “Construction Fills” options by splitting them into two pull downs, one with fill options and the other with line options including the new “Core Only” selection. Isn’t this all we really need? It’s already been the subject of two recent polls, http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=1876&highlight=core & http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=854&highlight=core

I think getting the composites to join the way we all want them to (including in section) will prove harder to implement than this simple request.

[Anonymous]

Geoff wrote:
But how is this different than including control of composite appearance in the current Display Option settings, which is really just a matter of expanding the “Construction Fills” options by splitting them into two pull downs, one with fill options and the other with line options including the new “Core Only” selection.

It is different by allowing settings for each composite. For example: at 1/4" scale a frame wall with brick veneer should display the brick but the rest of the detail; at 1/2" scale the air space might appear while the sheathing and GWB remain hidden; at 1 1/2" scale the full detail of the composite is shown: a simple concrete wall would show the same at all scales: an interior framed wall would only have two settings; with and without the GWB shown.

You see, I am trying to imagine the most comprehensive approach that would serve all possible needs without adding complexity at the top level. I am getting very tired of incomplete features and I certainly don't want patches on top of work-arounds.

[Dave Jochum]

Thanks, everybody, for all the responses. Some great ideas from seasoned veterans. I have also been eliminating the skin lines and using 50% fills in the skins as a new wall (to distinguish from the (E) empty skin walls.) There are still significant cleanup problems where they meet masonry and stucco'd veneer walls. I also dislike having to create a new composite for every wall thickness that occurs in a house. I have about 10 in a current project--and many won't be used in subsequent designs.

James--I'm sorry I didn't get to meet you. Unfortunately, the font selection for the name tags was not readable from further than a couple of feet away, so it was hard to find familiar names. I tried looking for faces that matched avatars, but that proved difficult also.

[Dave Jochum]

~/archiben wrote:
dave

not quite what you're asking, but a useful function that i find using composite walls:

http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=567

~/archiben

Very good--thank you.

[Anonymous]

As I have expressed numerous times GS missed the boat and not because they did not get the point but because they had no resources to address the issue: TO MAKE THESE OPTIONS AND ALL THE REST AN ATRIBUTE OF THE LATER GROUPING.

And now we have a maze of oncoordinated features with an opake structure.

Thank you GS, you realy did it " bravo"

You're right Geoff. Display options also need to be considered.

The whole matter is rather complex though since the settings will vary with different composites. The problem with making the settings in the composites is that they become global in all views. The (potential) problem with using the display options is that they affect all the composites.

The issue is how to permit both settings by view and settings by composite without tying people's brains in knots.
_________________
Matthew Lohden

[Anonymous]

Dave wrote:
I also dislike having to create a new composite for every wall thickness that occurs in a house. I have about 10 in a current project--and many won't be used in subsequent designs.

If they're new walls, they SHOULD all have their own composites - you need to know what walls you're putting in. However, if they're just part of the existing, what we do is use a 75% fill wall type (not a composite) and just adjust the thickness to what it measures out to in field. That way I don't end up creating all those composites, and keeps me from having the wall show too much detail in plan/section, and makes it easy to see what's new and existing to remain. Same idea with demo walls (different settings though).

That's IF I understood what you were saying...

[Dave Jochum]

Sergio wrote:

Dave wrote:
I also dislike having to create a new composite for every wall thickness that occurs in a house. I have about 10 in a current project--and many won't be used in subsequent designs.

If they're new walls, they SHOULD all have their own composites - you need to know what walls you're putting in.

No, in my 1/4" plans I don't show gyp board and framing. I show a new wall with a 50% fill for all three skins and no separator lines. The special wall sizes I'm referring to have voids, i.e., gyp. bd./studs/air space/studs/gyp. bd. They vary in dim. from f.o. GB to f.o. GB. There's no reason to have a series of composite walls to handle these conditions except that AC requires it. I don't have AC open and I'm about to turn into a pumpkin or I'd take a screen shot.