How would you go about creating this? (accurately)

[Anonymous]

Hi,

I'm in the process of making a rough model of part of a building concept at University. I'm quite familiar with the tools in ArchiCAD but since this structure is not 'typical' the tools don't seem to accommodate, or at least not in the way I would like them to.

I've tried creating this elevation (image attached of model) with a mesh, since the outlines of the elevation were created in ArchiCAD (2D fill), however, I can't rotate the Mesh on the y axis i.e it's drawn on plan but in 3D it needs to be rotates 90 degrees so it becomes a wall.

I've also tried creating each piece of the wall using OBJECTiVE but again, this takes far too long and I'm still left with empty spaces on the wall. ( the Model shows that there are walls protruding inside and outside of other elements)

I guess the mesh could work but it's just that it doesn't look like it can be rotated in 3D.

Thank you for your help.

PS I know the concept may look 'crazy' ( well contemporary architecture) but that's what they want in Architecture school these days...

[Dwight]

These kinds of problems are why I wave my arms about meaningfully and guys like you start to sweat.

You need to triangulate your principle roof points independently and then join them by making roofs in 3D.

See this topic in your Archicad Help:

"Create a Simple Roof in 3D"

[Anonymous]

I'm sorry I don't get this concept. I may just have to use OBJECTiVE and try to make joints meet with mesh's.

I don't get how to apply the 'Simple 3D Roof' to my design.

[Erika Epstein]

Nathan,
The curtain wall tool is another option. You can make single panels of very unusual shapes, rotate them, turn of frames, you can make custom doors...
Could be fun
HTH

[Ralph Wessel]

NStocks wrote:
I've also tried creating each piece of the wall using OBJECTiVE but again, this takes far too long and I'm still left with empty spaces on the wall. ( the Model shows that there are walls protruding inside and outside of other elements)

There are many different methods for using OBJECTiVE's tools. If you describe the way you're attempting to draw this, I might be able to suggest an easier method. It may still be a slow process though - forms like that aren't trivial to realise, hence the fact that you rarely see them in real buildings.

One thing to bear in mind is that OBJECTiVE gives you the ability to change the working plane. If the setout is difficult in the current plane, rotate the whole assembly into a plane that simplifies the problem.

[Anonymous]

Ralph wrote:

NStocks wrote:
I've also tried creating each piece of the wall using OBJECTiVE but again, this takes far too long and I'm still left with empty spaces on the wall. ( the Model shows that there are walls protruding inside and outside of other elements)

There are many different methods for using OBJECTiVE's tools. If you describe the way you're attempting to draw this, I might be able to suggest an easier method. It may still be a slow process though - forms like that aren't trivial to realise, hence the fact that you rarely see them in real buildings.

One thing to bear in mind is that OBJECTiVE gives you the ability to change the working plane. If the setout is difficult in the current plane, rotate the whole assembly into a plane that simplifies the problem.

I'm drawing the profile using a slab, then I rotate it to make the shapes fit together better. The problem is that the angles need to be precise so that the shapes fit correctly - something I will have a problem with no matter which tool I use.

Once the planes have been rotated, there are large gaps or overhangs and SEO's don't always cut away each part...The image I posted took over 90 minutes to resemble what I wanted, even though it wasn't very close!

I don't mind spending too long on the model ( I have 3 days) as longs as it's accurate enough and looks like my model.

I have all the outlines of each elevation so it's no problem finding the shape, it's just fitting them together.

I've ried Sketchup but it's the most stupid software I know. Maybe it's because I don't use it often enough but I find it hard to just rotate things! (Again complex shape)

A Rant: My Tutor is all well saying that we need not to make 'Shoe boxes' i.e more practical but create something that " Can change the City"... He hasn't touched CAD for years he said so he doesn't know what kind of learning curves we go though when we have only a few weeks to complete a project!... The ongoing debate about architecture school continues but not what I want to discuss on here

Thank You

[Ralph Wessel]

NStocks wrote:
I'm drawing the profile using a slab, then I rotate it to make the shapes fit together better. The problem is that the angles need to be precise so that the shapes fit correctly - something I will have a problem with no matter which tool I use.

OK - rather than drawing the polygon first and then rotating into place to see if it fits, could you rotate the entire assembly so that the position for the new polygon is in the plane of the floor plan, i.e. horizontal, and then simply trace the polygon over the required opening (making a profile with OBJECTiVE of course). Because all OBJECTiVE components can be freely rotated, you can continue this process of re-orientating your model to create subsequent polygons. Not trivial, but workable I think.

[Anonymous]

Ralph wrote:

NStocks wrote:
I'm drawing the profile using a slab, then I rotate it to make the shapes fit together better. The problem is that the angles need to be precise so that the shapes fit correctly - something I will have a problem with no matter which tool I use.

OK - rather than drawing the polygon first and then rotating into place to see if it fits, could you rotate the entire assembly so that the position for the new polygon is in the plane of the floor plan, i.e. horizontal, and then simply trace the polygon over the required opening (making a profile with OBJECTiVE of course). Because all OBJECTiVE components can be freely rotated, you can continue this process of re-orientating your model to create subsequent polygons. Not trivial, but workable I think.

That's kind of what I did/ Although the elevation looks like 1 large shapes because it's flat at the minute (fill/slab) I have created each shape individually. Like on the model, there are around 8 separate outlines that I have cut/scored to bend or fold...

Below is what I achieved (although this was slightly quicker). It looks a mess but that's mainly because the angles aren't correct or there are gaps.

[Ralph Wessel]

NStocks wrote:
That's kind of what I did/ Although the elevation looks like 1 large shapes because it's flat at the minute (fill/slab) I have created each shape individually. Like on the model, there are around 8 separate outlines that I have cut/scored to bend or fold...

Does that mean your proposed design contains curved elements, i.e. the element faces are not in the same plane? If that is the case, I assume that makes it impossible to trace an exact polygon shape because the opening edges are not all in the same plane. Is this the case?

[Anonymous]

Ralph wrote:

NStocks wrote:
That's kind of what I did/ Although the elevation looks like 1 large shapes because it's flat at the minute (fill/slab) I have created each shape individually. Like on the model, there are around 8 separate outlines that I have cut/scored to bend or fold...

Does that mean your proposed design contains curved elements, i.e. the element faces are not in the same plane? If that is the case, I assume that makes it impossible to trace an exact polygon shape because the opening edges are not all in the same plane. Is this the case?

All the planes are flat, they are just not a a 90 degree angle. Below is a image of the fills I've used to created each separate piece of the elevation, which obviously creates the outlines of the elevation. By hi lighting the profiles you can see the different shapes that have made the elevation - that is shapes go in and out of what would be the boundary line (if that makes sense)

[Ralph Wessel]

NStocks wrote:
All the planes are flat, they are just not a a 90 degree angle. Below is a image of the fills I've used to created each separate piece of the elevation, which obviously creates the outlines of the elevation. By hi lighting the profiles you can see the different shapes that have made the elevation - that is shapes go in and out of what would be the boundary line (if that makes sense)

The image seems to be missing.

I'm still not sure where the process is going wrong. Are you doing something like the following:

• 1. Create the primary/major building surfaces, but not necessary the correct shape.
  2. Use the Split tool to cut the surfaces where they intersect. You may need to rotate the whole assembly to an appropriate working plane to do this.
  3. Create the secondary surfaces to close gaps by rotating the whole assembly such that the vertices of the opening are on a level plane and tracing over the required opening size.

OBJECTiVE's rotation is not limited to 90 degrees or to any particular axis, so this should be achievable.