mesh to roof tool - extrusion direction

[schagemann]

hello,

we are wondering if there is way of influencing the direction which the mesh to roof tool extrudes to... it automatically seems to use the mesh as bottom layer and creates the corresponding roofs on top.

and just another thought to throw in... would it not be great if one could assign a thickness to any given mesh thus making the rather awkward mesh to roof tool redundant altogether?

looking forward to any reply...

ds.

[Thomas Holm]

schagemann wrote:
would it not be great if one could assign a thickness to any given mesh thus making the rather awkward mesh to roof tool redundant altogether?

Mesh 3D.

http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/depository/dirlist.php?dir=13+Special+Construction%2FBasic+Shape...

or


http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?p=105363#105363

[schagemann]

that was pretty much what i was looking for - thanks very much for the tip...

am i the only one wondering why graphisoft have not yet used this as inspiration to improve their mesh tool?

ds.

[Anonymous]

schagemann wrote:
am i the only one wondering why graphisoft have not yet used this as inspiration to improve their mesh tool?

May be because the problem is far more complex than it seems at a first appoach.
A vertical extrusion should not be too difficult, but a perpendicular one could be.

Looking at Petri's object, you quiclky realise some limitations.
1 - because it is an object, not a tool.
2 - because some tiny math calc errors.
Despite these imperfections, it's a very good attempt.

Petri's math skill is very impressive, i just can say congrats.
Never seen such a complex object. If you know one, please tell me.
Unfortunatelly, after posting two objects, the guy disapeared.

Not asking for the moon, i wish GS could add a vertical extrusion to the mesh tool.

[schagemann]

Olivier wrote:

schagemann wrote:
am i the only one wondering why graphisoft have not yet used this as inspiration to improve their mesh tool?

May be because the problem is far more complex than it seems at a first appoach.
A vertical extrusion should not be too difficult, but a perpendicular one could be.

well, i agree mathematically it is a complex problem.

however, comparing this relatively simple 3d modelling problem with what other "cad packages" offer (e.g. vectorworks, formZ... etc.) for a lot less money (in fact about a third to half) i think graphisoft really needs to step up to the challenge at last.

now i know about their cooperation with maxon, however altough cinema4d is a very good and impressive piece of software which we have been using for renders & animations ever since, c4d simply is not an architectural modeller such as e.g. formZ... its background is completely different.

Olivier wrote:
Looking at Petri's object, you quiclky realise some limitations.
1 - because it is an object, not a tool.
2 - because some tiny math calc errors.
Despite these imperfections, it's a very good attempt.

completely agree - yet again the question can be asked why archicad users need to start coding solutions to such problems in GDL in the first place.

Olivier wrote:
Petri's math skill is very impressive, i just can say congrats.
Never seen such a complex object. If you know one, please tell me.

yes, in deed all the cudos to petri - neither have i seen such a complex GDL object before.

Olivier wrote:
Unfortunatelly, after posting two objects, the guy disapeared.

yes, very unfortunate.

Olivier wrote:
Not asking for the moon, i wish GS could add a vertical extrusion to the mesh tool.

presumably you mean perpendicular, since the mesh-to-roof tool already does vertical... to some extent.

anyway, what i really wish for is for archicad to be able to model complex shapes (e.g. nurbs objects) and be able to export / import them properly ... this in combination with their sophisticated documentation tools and we have a cad package worth its money.

ds.

[Anonymous]

schagemann wrote:
"would it not be great if one could assign a thickness to any given mesh thus making the rather awkward mesh to roof tool redundant altogether? "

Have you tried the de-elevated copy and SEO method for getting a
mesh with thickness ?
Peter Devlin

[Dwight]

While the MeshToRoof function maintains a constant thickness, the SEO method does not - only important when you have great variety of slope conditions in the mesh.....

Today I need a ScrewdriverToPaintScraper tool since the scraper is lost.

[Anonymous]

Hello Dwight,
I just did an experiment using the Mesh to Roof add-on because
I remembered there was an issue with the thickness of the roofs.
I found that with a steep mesh slope the vertical thickness of all
the little roofs was the same but the perpendicular thickness varied
with pitch. This was with the vertical edges selected in roof tool settings.
When the perpendicular edges is set in the roof settings, as you know,
you get a total mess when using the add-on. It would seem that
the add-on has the same problem as the SEO method. It indeed
does for obvious reasons and the only cure is to edit the surface
of the operator mesh to compensate. Something I have done often
when the compensation could be easily calculated or precisely modeled .
Thanks,
Peter Devlin

[Richard Morrison]

Olivier wrote:
Petri's math skill is very impressive, i just can say congrats.
Never seen such a complex object. If you know one, please tell me.

Oleg Shmidt's curtain objects are mathematically impressive. Generating the parametrically adjustable (and very realistic) cloth folds is just incredible.

[Dwight]

Peter wrote:
Hello Dwight,
I just did an experiment using the Mesh to Roof add-on because
I remembered there was an issue with the thick

You are right. I mis-remembered myself.