Graphisoft public roadmap - Follow-up conversation

[Gordana Radonic]

Dear Community, 

We're excited to have published our roadmap!

We'd love to hear your thoughts and questions. Please feel free to use this thread for discussion.

Graphisoft Insights announcement: https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Graphisoft-Insights/Graphisoft-public-roadmap/ba-p/375281

Public roadmap on the Graphisoft website.

Thank you.

[mthd]

Politics and being a specific CAD software vendor do have some similarities when it comes to who wants what included in the future. I am not complaining but simply asking for things that I need to make my work and others here easier to do, if that is at all possible in some cases at least ? After all there is a wish list part of this forum and not all things will get implemented right away and some things may never get done. Some persons will not be satisfied no matter what they do in the future because that’s how they are as individuals and that is their prerogative.

If GS was my company then I would have a big say in the direction it takes similar to what we all do in our own personal businesses. In the end if I don’t like the direction GS is taking now with Archicad then I can look elsewhere if I choose to do so and that goes for anybody using this software. I am happy with the general direction so far but would like more emphasis on architectural tools as most of us do. So I make my wishes known and leave it at that and hopefully it may just get looked at and implemented in some way down the track.

Edit: AC28 is definitely stacked with MEP improvements when you read the coming soon part of the roadmap. Had the “ideas pool” been in the coming soon part of the roadmap, that would have been a big win for all of us needing architectural tool improvements. Once most of the MEP work is completed and the many “ideas pool” improvements are made and implemented, I think many of us should be content for a while ? Or maybe not because you always get those few who will never be satisfied lol.

[DGSketcher]

The GS brief for the roadmap should be quite simple really; we are all paying in to see upgrades that improve our productivity. That productivity is only positively impacted by improving the workflow of repetitive actions, or by simplifying regular modelling processes, not by adding unwanted features or complexity and certainly not by delivering upgraded tools that don't work (MEP27) or upgrades that are a work in progress or even just experimental.

Since AC23, GS have delivered very little that contributes to architectural productivity. Yes they may believe they have been busy if you look at the version history, but if you look closely you can see the drop off in architectural development towards cosmetic tinkering while more & more time has been poured into Structures & MEP. That's ok if that's where they see the market going, but don't expect users with no interest in those aspects to be writing open payments and not seeing a return on their investment. The current roadmap offers very little scope for architects to recover their investment and after the previous shortfall, another two years of S&MEP priorities has me wondering whether to continue supporting AC. In two years time will we be looking at AI and conceptual development for large commercial projects while drawing production remains stagnant for the smaller office?

[mthd]

To be honest, for a small solo practice “Archicad Solo” would suffice, that is if it was available in my region. I just wouldn’t use all those extras like bigger companies who take on that sort of work do. 

My plumbing is a drain pipe from the library or gutters and down pipes created from the Cad Image tools. I used to draw my in floor basic plumbing in 2D but it’s all 3D these days. So I can understand the direction taken by GS but they shouldn’t put certain necessary things on the back burner and just focus on MEP. As we all know GS are the salve to the parent company Nemetscheck and they will control what they develop and work on for the future.

The basic building elements like terrain, slabs, walls, doors, windows and roofs must have the focus for improvements including 3D physical based rendering. The rest can be easily done in other specialised apps because AC 3D collaboration specifically allows for that. I think GS themselves see that but have to listen to the parent company.

All the Architects see that and it’s really a waste of time to ramble on about all the fixes needed in the basic elements because they have to listen to the boss first. In the end whether we like it or not we are forced to take what we get and to be grateful for it. 

[Kamil Dylo]

I worked on the big projects for the last couple of years and we never used those MEP or Structural tools in ArchiCAD. There are external advisours for doing their work who send us IFC. And I never seen MEP guys or structural guys using ArchiCAD for their job. Never. 

btw It is frustrating how limited ArchiCAD is for big projects. I think Graphisoft is loosing a big market here. Crazy why they do not see it.

[DGSketcher]

On a big project that's what I would expect to happen. But I also think there is scope for a set of basic tools for MEP to cover concept design on smaller projects where 3D model collaboration is not an option. The AC MEP are just a more appropriate version of beams & columns or other Objects, in fact you could view them as generic modelling tools. I'm sure someone will abuse them to create an architectural feature at some point e.g. neon lighting or a space frame structure.

I am interested in why you think AC is limited for big projects e.g. where are the "pain points" to use a popular term? 

[thesleepofreason]

There is definitely a need for the functionality of the MEP modeller but it's a shame that GS doesn't share such generic view of modelling (except as an justification of workarounds in an everything can be anything) as it means that the cost of development won't be fully recuperated but locked away in a niche. Its so obvious that functionality developed for MEP modeller would be very useful elsewhere - eg wall systems with control over corners/edges or tube objects etc.

[jl_lt]

Hi, same as @DGSketcher , i would also like to know what is the threshold at which you feel Archicad begins to breakdown on big projects.  Is it the project size itself? complexity? many buildings? number of layouts and views to handle? layers?  manually having to annotate hundreds of views and layouts?   being in the documentation process but still having to add little changes that mess up your dimensions and notes?    all of the above?

[claudiuiancic]

Thoughts about the planned new Door/Window Tool

The Door/Window Tool element should allow access to the SUB-ELEMENTS of which it is composed, as follows:
- the emptiness of door/window vs. the actual door/window
- within the object it must be possible to have access to the settings especially for CLASSIFICATION but also for other PARAMETERS
- to be able to set different types of glass for the carpentry meshes (eg: safety glass on the part below 90cm and LowE glass on the upper part, etc.)
- to be able to set different CLASSIFICATIONS for sub-elements (as is the case with the balustrade/staircase), i.e. after classifying the HOLE as HOLE, the CARPENTRY as CARPENTRY (or Door/Window/Skylight/etc) we can classify window sills, handles, door leaf or sash, frames, etc.

[Bricklyne Clarence]

---

@claudiuiancic wrote:

Thoughts about the planned new Door/Window Tool

The Door/Window Tool element should allow access to the SUB-ELEMENTS of which it is composed, as follows:
- the emptiness of door/window vs. the actual door/window
- within the object it must be possible to have access to the settings especially for CLASSIFICATION but also for other PARAMETERS
- to be able to set different types of glass for the carpentry meshes (eg: safety glass on the part below 90cm and LowE glass on the upper part, etc.)
- to be able to set different CLASSIFICATIONS for sub-elements (as is the case with the balustrade/staircase), i.e. after classifying the HOLE as HOLE, the CARPENTRY as CARPENTRY (or Door/Window/Skylight/etc) we can classify window sills, handles, door leaf or sash, frames, etc.

---

Is there a planned new Door/Window Tool or it this just a wish on your part?

The Roadmap doesn't seem to indicate there's any planned re-do of those tools anytime soon.

I mean, it's not even in the "Under Research" tab which is like the third tier of their Roadmap scheduling (after "Coming Soon" and "In Progress") which to me implies that they're not even thinking about it, let alone working on it. (I don't take the "Idea Pool" seriously because it feels to me like those were just random disparate wishes they culled from the Wishlist forum that had scored high, which they dumped in there to make everyone happy that had noticed the other sections are a bit to MEP/DDS/Structural heavy (....which they are))

Because I hate to break it to you, but people have been wishing for improvements to the door and window tools since forever, with seemingly no impulse or inclination to do so any time soon on Graphisoft's part.

But hey, I hear we now have AI to play with.

Not like it's going to help you design any better doors or windows for your project, though,....

[Pato99]

Nah it's just a dodgy Stable Diffusion integration that has minimal features. They got it to work on one guys computer and posted to social media about it. 

You're better off learning SD as a standalone product. 

[torben_wadlinger]

OK, there is one door-tool to rule them all! It's free, it's all-embracing - but it's in german.

https://www.dormakaba.com/de-de/verkauf-support/digitale-planungsunterstuetzung/bim-von-dormakaba/bi...

But it is the tool we all need and want. GS knows this tool. It's made by the famous Frank Beister (hail to Frank, be praised!) and the door itself can be separat from the opening!

Surely it needs some improvement and further programming. And translation. But it is soooo close to be perfect. I use it regulary in ever project.

[Rex Maximilian]

The best I've ever seen was CADimage Door and Window Builder several years ago (before they used an API). That single door and single window did EVERYTHING!!! And it was perfect. Of course, as it goes, all advancements go in the wrong direction and we have worse, tab heavy libraries.

[Takis]

Dear Gordana hello,

For better collaboration between Architects-Engineers and better SAF model and presentation I would like to suggest the following:

Add (horizontal and inclined) Beam Ends vertical and horizontal rotation in both directions.

Better to have (edges and central/center of section gravity) end-3D hotspots and drag them back-forward (attachement).

Also this applies to columns ends.

Add 2D plan view result of the above.

AC27 INT

Takis Apostolides.

 

[snow]

'Slanted Ends' are one – late – topic on the road map.

But yet, the option to bevel beams in horizontally plane is missing so badly.

In case of profiled beams... sometimes we can help ourselves by making a 180° turned profile... and we turn it back in the model...

... but that can not be the way... really not.

I've been so bold to add some to the image...
The end-cut has always to be a plane... but could then be turned even to a 'jack rafter cut'

[Takis]

Hello,

thanks for all clarifications, all of them are right and helpful to better understand the situation.

Takis.

[DGSketcher]

Hopefully the Product Manager can see beyond a single cut angle. @Takis was probably suggesting that each hotspot could move independently along the beam axis to form a "compound" cut e.g. one where the cut on the Y axis is at 30 degrees and the Z axis is at 45 degrees.

[snow]

Thank you for translating the drawing... now I understand, I think... 😉

So when the second angle for beam ends is mentioned... I just want to add this annotation, that it could be often helpful, if it's possible to type in the second angle not in relation to the beam plane but in relation to the direction of the first angle... ( difficult to bring this in words... hope it could be understood with this sketch...)

[DGSketcher]

Think of a sloping roof framing rafter hitting a wall at a twisted angle (e.g. rotated about Z) so it isn't square to the wall. I am about to start a project with this requirement. At this point I can only think that I am going to have to use Morphs as I will need compound cuts at both ends. 

If only we had instancing... or a beam tool with compound cuts...

[snow]

When I need such cuts... I try to cut with SEO...

..often there is a ridge or valley rafter that can do it...

[Takis]

Dear Gordana hello,

For inclined beams and curved beams, I would suggest the Level Dimension Tool to get information about the top/bottom level at each point of the beam on plan, just like we have available for the terrain tool.

Also, the General Label does not give all the information about the levels.

It only indicates the bottom-lower and top-upper level of the inclined beams.

It should also indicate the top-lower and bottom-upper levels of the inclined beam.

AC27

Takis Apostolides