Object 2D view loses hidden edges effect

[Dalius]

When I save fills or slabs as an object, I get a different 2D view. Object that was made from fills looks OK, however object that was made using slabs loses hidden edges effect. Is it a bug? Does somebody know how to fix it?

[Anonymous]

Probably you have done in Archicad this from rectangles applying command "move forward"
You need to manually correct the script. You should be there command will POLY2_
So it is necessary edit coordinates of the points. Your rectangles should converted into hexagons. Calculate how much you have at the landfill of points of angles. 6 + seventh with a closing status = -1

Or apply DRAWINDEX. Elements with less drawindex are drawn before.
Read GDL Reference Guide

[rocorona]

For me, it works this way:
If the fill has a background pen different than zero, then it turns out in an opaque object otherwise it is like wireframe.
For Slabs it is the same, but you need to activate the "covering fill" option.
At the end, the object reflects the exact same aspect of the original elements on the floor plan.
The bad is that in AC 16 the autoscripted objects don't get a parameter to change the background pen.

[Dalius]

rocorona wrote:
If the fill has a background pen different than zero, then it turns out in an opaque object otherwise it is like wireframe.

Roberto, why it does not work when I save Slabs with covered fills and different colors? Please look at the attached image.

[Frank Beister]

Is the contour line closed or do you have any openings inside your slab?

[rocorona]

Dalius wrote:

rocorona wrote:
If the fill has a background pen different than zero, then it turns out in an opaque object otherwise it is like wireframe.

Roberto, why it does not work when I save Slabs

Don't know why it doesn't works for you. I didn't do anything particular, just save as object.

You can manually change a parameter in the script, if are not scared by GDL.
Typically a 2D polygon is scripted with a command like this one:

poly2_b{5}       5,      7,      0,      3,      10,      0,

(followed by the numbers)
The 6th parameter, here a zero, is the background pen. Zero is the transparent pen, that you can change for any other, or even with a parameter. I also suggest to set the second parameter to 7 (border ON + fill ON + closed perimeter)

[Frank Beister]

It seems that there's a bug in GDL, which makes fills transparent (regardless, if they have a background pen), in case of their contour line is not continious.

[Dalius]

Object background is not transparent. My question was - why only saving the fills I get an object with right floor plan view, I mean, hidden edges view. However saving the slabs (or morphs, or any other 3D elements) I get an object that loses hidden edges effect? Please look at another example - I’m saving some morphs as an object. The final result is not transparent, it has a background color, but it looks like transparent, because lines are not hidden.

[Frank Beister]

The fault is, that AC exports a slab fill as two poly_B commands. One for the fill and one for the lines. The second one for the lines is transparent. So they can't cover each other.

You have to correct it manual to get the same result: Delete the second POLY_B-command and modify in the first command the second parameter by aleading 1+. This toggles the switch to make the contour visible.

Example:

pen     penAttribute_1
fill fillAttribute_1
poly2_b{5}       5,     1 + 66,      2,      3, penAttribute_1, penAttribute_2, 
                   0,            0,            1,            0,            0,            1,            0, 
        -17.42024351106, 22.08870688189,      1, 
        -17.40158209447, 21.6734903627,      1, 
        -17.05168053336, 21.79012421641,      1, 
        -17.05168053336, 22.08870688189,      1, 
        -17.42024351106, 22.08870688189,      1
!pen     penAttribute_3
!fill fillAttribute_2
!poly2_b{5}       5,      1,      0,      3,      1,      0, 
!				   0,            0,            1,            0,            0,            1,            0, 
!		-17.42024351106, 22.08870688189,      1, 
!		-17.05168053336, 22.08870688189,      1, 
!		-17.05168053336, 21.79012421641,      1, 
!		-17.40158209447, 21.6734903627,      1, 
!		-17.42024351106, 22.08870688189,      1

[Piotr Dobrowolski]

There is also Drawindex command, that might be needed to achieve the correct position of the "parts" - ie if more poly** commands used.

Best Regards,
Piotr