How would you draw this in ArchiCAD?

[Anonymous]

I need to draw this model I have made for a project at University. So far I have only drawn a 3D house in ArchiCAD, but that was made up from walls etc. What I want is a basic frame to show the shape and intersection of my model. Which tools etc, would I use to get it 3D

[Anonymous]

How can I change these profiles so that the hole at each end all match up, whilst retaining the same shape ? From the 3D shot, you can see where the the separate shields overlap, which isn't what I want, how can I eliminate this ? ( excluding Photoshop as I need several sections etc.

Thank You

[Anonymous]

Here's the 3D version where you can see the unsightly overlap

[Anonymous]

I see you are making good progress thanks to your ArchioCAD tutor Ralph!
Keep up the good work

[Anonymous]

Master wrote:
I see you are making good progress thanks to your ArchioCAD tutor Ralph!
Keep up the good work

I really am ! Still need help though... And thank you for your help.

Nathan

[Ralph Wessel]

NStocks wrote:
How can I change these profiles so that the hole at each end all match up, whilst retaining the same shape ? From the 3D shot, you can see where the the separate shields overlap, which isn't what I want, how can I eliminate this ? ( excluding Photoshop as I need several sections etc.

The simplest way would be to slightly thicken each successive layer so it encloses the previous one. You wouldn't need to produce any new profiles that way. The only disadvantage would be that you might notice the varying thickness of the profiles from certain viewpoints.

Otherwise, you would need to calculate the change in circumference from the increased radius for each successive layer and increase the profile length accordingly - probably not too onerous.

[Anonymous]

Ralph wrote:

NStocks wrote:
How can I change these profiles so that the hole at each end all match up, whilst retaining the same shape ? From the 3D shot, you can see where the the separate shields overlap, which isn't what I want, how can I eliminate this ? ( excluding Photoshop as I need several sections etc.

The simplest way would be to slightly thicken each successive layer so it encloses the previous one. You wouldn't need to produce any new profiles that way. The only disadvantage would be that you might notice the varying thickness of the profiles from certain viewpoints.

Otherwise, you would need to calculate the change in circumference from the increased radius for each successive layer and increase the profile length accordingly - probably not too onerous.

Would this also fix the rendering, as you can see in 3D there is an overlap...

Is there anyway that I can specify the size I want when doing the bend i.e a fixed lenght. The size of the plan ( 2D ) is 20000mm long, I need this to be 10000mm long exactly.

Thank You

[Ralph Wessel]

NStocks wrote:
Would this also fix the rendering, as you can see in 3D there is an overlap...

Is there anyway that I can specify the size I want when doing the bend i.e a fixed lenght. The size of the plan ( 2D ) is 20000mm long, I need this to be 10000mm long exactly.

You can precisely control the extent of the bending in the profile settings.

However, there is a 3rd option that might be easier still. Part of the reason the segments are clashing is that the bending is continued through the point where the segments are meant to connect, i.e. where they are riveted together. Ideally, each segment would be a flat plane at this point so they smoothly connect. To achieve this, perhaps each segment should be constructed of 3 parts - one curved part in the centre, spanning between two flat parts at either side. You would see a line where they connect in hidden line or shaded views, but it would be perfectly smooth when rendered.

The beauty of this option is that you can easily reuse the same curved part for all the different segments - all you need to do is offset each successive bend and lengthen the flat part connecting it to the rivet. Let me know if you need an illustration to clarify what I mean.

[Anonymous]

Ralph wrote:

NStocks wrote:
Would this also fix the rendering, as you can see in 3D there is an overlap...

Is there anyway that I can specify the size I want when doing the bend i.e a fixed lenght. The size of the plan ( 2D ) is 20000mm long, I need this to be 10000mm long exactly.

You can precisely control the extent of the bending in the profile settings.

However, there is a 3rd option that might be easier still. Part of the reason the segments are clashing is that the bending is continued through the point where the segments are meant to connect, i.e. where they are riveted together. Ideally, each segment would be a flat plane at this point so they smoothly connect. To achieve this, perhaps each segment should be constructed of 3 parts - one curved part in the centre, spanning between two flat parts at either side. You would see a line where they connect in hidden line or shaded views, but it would be perfectly smooth when rendered.

The beauty of this option is that you can easily reuse the same curved part for all the different segments - all you need to do is offset each successive bend and lengthen the flat part connecting it to the rivet. Let me know if you need an illustration to clarify what I mean.

I really appreciate your help and support on this, but I fear that it is becoming to complex for someone who has never really used ArchiCAD before ( though I want to learn ). I have a 10 minute go in Google Sketchup ( which is reccomended to use for first year Architect students ) and I got something that resembled my model in such little time. My tutor also implied that ArchiCAD is ' old' and isn't coming along very quickly, unlike AutoCAD which is understandable as AutoCAD doesn't work on Mac anyway...

I feel that with Sketcup I will have a good model that didn't take that long, but when it comes to more complex models/structures that require more technical details, sketchup won't be able to accommodate. Would the next stages you mentioned, really bring the model above what sketchup can do i.e is it worth me taking another day with ArchiCAD instead of using sketchup ?

Nathan

[Ralph Wessel]

NStocks wrote:
I really appreciate your help and support on this, but I fear that it is becoming to complex for someone who has never really used ArchiCAD before ( though I want to learn ). I have a 10 minute go in Google Sketchup ( which is reccomended to use for first year Architect students ) and I got something that resembled my model in such little time. My tutor also implied that ArchiCAD is ' old' and isn't coming along very quickly, unlike AutoCAD which is understandable as AutoCAD doesn't work on Mac anyway...

I feel that with Sketcup I will have a good model that didn't take that long, but when it comes to more complex models/structures that require more technical details, sketchup won't be able to accommodate. Would the next stages you mentioned, really bring the model above what sketchup can do i.e is it worth me taking another day with ArchiCAD instead of using sketchup ?

Always use the tool that's most appropriate for the task. Don't try to make one tool suit every application. I still use pencil and paper for early sketch design - it's very quick, fluid, and helps me clarify my thoughts. All software packages are a bit too literal/concrete to be helpful at that stage.

I think Sketchup is fine as a prototyping tool, but I wouldn't use it for professional documentation. You might start with one and progress to the other. If you need a model that will never move beyond the concept/prototyping stage, then by all means use Sketchup if that seems to be solving the problem quickly. You will learn more about ArchiCAD if you persist and I'm sure you could produce a good result, but don't overload yourself (and don't miss deadlines!).

ArchiCAD takes longer to master simply because it has vastly more to offer and is capable of providing solutions on a very large scale. For what it provides, I think ArchiCAD is as easy as it gets. It isn't easy to advance ArchiCAD simply because it was so far ahead of the competition for so long. Conversely, Autodesk can simply copy what GS has pioneered.

As for being 'old', AutoCAD gets first prize. There was a version of AutoCAD for the Mac, but it was such an ugly, awful piece of software that no Mac user wanted to touch it - working by hand would almost be preferable. I hope your tutor was actually referring to Revit, because AutoCAD is technically a museum-piece (still polished occasionally, but mostly sitting on the shelf).

[Anonymous]

Ralph wrote:

NStocks wrote:
I really appreciate your help and support on this, but I fear that it is becoming to complex for someone who has never really used ArchiCAD before ( though I want to learn ). I have a 10 minute go in Google Sketchup ( which is reccomended to use for first year Architect students ) and I got something that resembled my model in such little time. My tutor also implied that ArchiCAD is ' old' and isn't coming along very quickly, unlike AutoCAD which is understandable as AutoCAD doesn't work on Mac anyway...

I feel that with Sketcup I will have a good model that didn't take that long, but when it comes to more complex models/structures that require more technical details, sketchup won't be able to accommodate. Would the next stages you mentioned, really bring the model above what sketchup can do i.e is it worth me taking another day with ArchiCAD instead of using sketchup ?

Always use the tool that's most appropriate for the task. Don't try to make one tool suit every application. I still use pencil and paper for early sketch design - it's very quick, fluid, and helps me clarify my thoughts. All software packages are a bit too literal/concrete to be helpful at that stage.

I think Sketchup is fine as a prototyping tool, but I wouldn't use it for professional documentation. You might start with one and progress to the other. If you need a model that will never move beyond the concept/prototyping stage, then by all means use Sketchup if that seems to be solving the problem quickly. You will learn more about ArchiCAD if you persist and I'm sure you could produce a good result, but don't overload yourself (and don't miss deadlines!).

ArchiCAD takes longer to master simply because it has vastly more to offer and is capable of providing solutions on a very large scale. For what it provides, I think ArchiCAD is as easy as it gets. It isn't easy to advance ArchiCAD simply because it was so far ahead of the competition for so long. Conversely, Autodesk can simply copy what GS has pioneered.

As for being 'old', AutoCAD gets first prize. There was a version of AutoCAD for the Mac, but it was such an ugly, awful piece of software that no Mac user wanted to touch it - working by hand would almost be preferable. I hope your tutor was actually referring to Revit, because AutoCAD is technically a museum-piece (still polished occasionally, but mostly sitting on the shelf).

No, he was referring to the current version of AutoCAD and ArchiCAD. He said that AutoCAD has ' required ' 3DS and a few other programs and just labelled it Autodesk... Not to be a ' Mac fan ' but you can quite simply tell that AutoCAD was made to work on a PC, by the layout of the toolbars etc. I think that he only recommends AutoCAD because at least 90% of the students will have Windows' PC's ( 4 of my group have Mac's and are using Bootcamp, Windows 7 and AutoCAD as well as sketchp, but that's because they are influenced by what the tutor has said, in the lecture to 170 students, that is ) and the University have PC's of which they can run AutoCAD for free and use the latest version each year.

Attached is a 5 minute preview of what it will look like in Sketchup, I think that it will look o.k, but it won't have that certain quality that ArchiCAd offers, and I'm not to keen on the section cuts and not sure if it has elevation settings.

How long would it take you to create my model to a ' perfect ' quality ? I'm not asking you to send me the version ( though screenshots would be helpful ) nor asking you to spend your time creating it, I just want an idea of how long a professional can do it.
Nathan