- last edited on by
Rubia Torres
I have a problem trying to generate a special wall. I'm surprised with the new stretch and angle modification of walls in archicad 10, but I need to create a wall with some special shape and with some empty opening shapes. I try to make the wall in sketchup or autocad, like a 3d object, but is very frustrating comparing to archicad walls.
So, the question is: Why is possible to make those interesting shapes and empty openings in a slab but is so difficult to make the same shape in elevation on a wall??? (Considering the stretch and angle modifications)
And the final question: Is there a way of making the wall i'm trying to make without using roof trims, external objects, maxon form?
And the final final question: using any tool, internal or external; which is the easiest way of modeling this wall?
Two images posted of the autocad section and my experiments with walls and slabs in archicad.
That's a question only GS can answer.
I'm sure they'll be here to reply you......... tomorrow!
Cheers,
Link.
I'm sure they'll be here to reply you......... tomorrow!
Cheers,
Link.
Einstein wrote:You might consider OBJECTiVE as a solution. The attached image was modelled in about the time it tool me to draw the polygon shape.
I have some problems making the interior "empty windows" or perforations in my superwall. It is possible to rotate a window or a empty window in this case? This is important because I want to align the windows to the external shell. [...] Any proposition will be received!!!!
If you wanted to use ArchiCAD walls, OBJECTiVE can also help by quickly making custom extrusions which you can rotate and cut in 3D to use for SEO operators at the openings. Take a look at
The reason "it" can't be done -to have a wall behave like this, has to do with how GS originally wrote the code. They didn't plan on such complexities, and while we USERS see the graphical images and work with such end results, to change the CODE and reclassify something like the code for a wall, means going back 10 years and remaking the whole program.
While it might be time for that at some point, these small requests, vs. the work arounds we've become used to, for such specific and not common uses of the program, make for some cost-prohibitive complete renovations that probably NO one on board at GS not only could convince an investment board to do, but wants to go back to square one to tackle it all over to begin with.
We sometimes want 3d modeling solutions in AC, but remember- maybe more than 99% of the buildings in the WHOLE WORLD never need anything special like this (well, except if we're modeling very crude 3rd world structures- but again that's not a majority, as they don't use architects very often there, let alone computers for remodeling and renovations!)....The wall tools in AC, as they are, are PERFECTLY reasonable for what the software was intended for. Those of us who want more, well, we really are in a select minority, and in the end, if you do a vote and a poll, you've got like maybe 50 users on here to protest or plead for something, a change that goes through someone who reads these things (admins) and then on to management at GS and then winds up on the desk of maybe 2-4 people who would be involved with this, and when asked if it can be done, and they say- give us 6-10 months full pay and long weekends to re-write all the ways the walls work, and yes, we can do it.... and then they factor in how many people will benefit from this new flexibility, and how much it will cost to implement in code... well it's a loosing battle! The people who need these functions, even architects, we only need it once in a blue MOON- those who need it regular use 3dsM or something for MODELING. Why have GS try and be 3DS?
As we get into more complex 3d modeling, changing providers to something more 3d, might be a better route. You CAN make all this stuff even in ancient versions of 3d max and such -even the old free ware 3d modeling apps!
The work arounds in AC require a bit more familiarity with the software, but that's what the forums are for, yeah? Because sometimes we NEED weird walls, to create something artistic and not a square box.
AC isn't a modeling app though- modeling app code would be an absolute nightmare to begin to implement without bugs all OVER the place with the current scripts as they are. Even a box to check for changing the functions in how and when a window or door operation effects something else... it is a lot of seriously complex stuff for the programmers.
While it might be time for that at some point, these small requests, vs. the work arounds we've become used to, for such specific and not common uses of the program, make for some cost-prohibitive complete renovations that probably NO one on board at GS not only could convince an investment board to do, but wants to go back to square one to tackle it all over to begin with.
We sometimes want 3d modeling solutions in AC, but remember- maybe more than 99% of the buildings in the WHOLE WORLD never need anything special like this (well, except if we're modeling very crude 3rd world structures- but again that's not a majority, as they don't use architects very often there, let alone computers for remodeling and renovations!)....The wall tools in AC, as they are, are PERFECTLY reasonable for what the software was intended for. Those of us who want more, well, we really are in a select minority, and in the end, if you do a vote and a poll, you've got like maybe 50 users on here to protest or plead for something, a change that goes through someone who reads these things (admins) and then on to management at GS and then winds up on the desk of maybe 2-4 people who would be involved with this, and when asked if it can be done, and they say- give us 6-10 months full pay and long weekends to re-write all the ways the walls work, and yes, we can do it.... and then they factor in how many people will benefit from this new flexibility, and how much it will cost to implement in code... well it's a loosing battle! The people who need these functions, even architects, we only need it once in a blue MOON- those who need it regular use 3dsM or something for MODELING. Why have GS try and be 3DS?
As we get into more complex 3d modeling, changing providers to something more 3d, might be a better route. You CAN make all this stuff even in ancient versions of 3d max and such -even the old free ware 3d modeling apps!
The work arounds in AC require a bit more familiarity with the software, but that's what the forums are for, yeah? Because sometimes we NEED weird walls, to create something artistic and not a square box.
AC isn't a modeling app though- modeling app code would be an absolute nightmare to begin to implement without bugs all OVER the place with the current scripts as they are. Even a box to check for changing the functions in how and when a window or door operation effects something else... it is a lot of seriously complex stuff for the programmers.
You can do the slope roof wall today ...
... with custom profile of course.
Only:
- the ref line will be perpendicular to the wall instead of parallel
- your doors and windows will not be placeable
Using objects or meshes, you will also have to resort to workarounds for the openings, mostly SEOs, that will increase the polycount and maybe bog the computer down - not to mention the wrong 2D representation.
So ... until the day that we have those walls, the time proven techniques are:
- cutting off the top with an appropriate roof (wireframed, layer off in all the documentation layers)
- creating the sloped top as a separate editable entity and controlling the changes in 3D
- using a freeform empty opening to punch out the portions of the wall you don't need (for example, crenellations are nicely modeled with empty window)
You will notice that I do not mention SEOs. I am old fashioned enough to always think about the computer load and always use the techniques that burden the machine the least, because the moment that the machine does not respond almost instantly, I am starting to lose billable time. Doing my first ever 3D model on a ZX Spectrum probably also has something to do with it ...
... with custom profile of course.
Only:
- the ref line will be perpendicular to the wall instead of parallel
- your doors and windows will not be placeable
Using objects or meshes, you will also have to resort to workarounds for the openings, mostly SEOs, that will increase the polycount and maybe bog the computer down - not to mention the wrong 2D representation.
So ... until the day that we have those walls, the time proven techniques are:
- cutting off the top with an appropriate roof (wireframed, layer off in all the documentation layers)
- creating the sloped top as a separate editable entity and controlling the changes in 3D
- using a freeform empty opening to punch out the portions of the wall you don't need (for example, crenellations are nicely modeled with empty window)
You will notice that I do not mention SEOs. I am old fashioned enough to always think about the computer load and always use the techniques that burden the machine the least, because the moment that the machine does not respond almost instantly, I am starting to lose billable time. Doing my first ever 3D model on a ZX Spectrum probably also has something to do with it ...
Brett wrote:Yes, OBJECTiVE will do this. As with most tools, there is more than one way to address the problem. This is the first method - the second will follow in the next reply. Referring to the attached image:
Ralph, Question, Can Objective do walls with a sloping top, texture horizontal, have a hot spot on the lower end to adjust height up and down in 3D.
- 1) I've drawn a curved ramped surface with a brick wall along one edge. The wall is a profiled object created with OBJECTIVE. We are seeking to slope the wall to match the ramp incline.
2) I've switched to an elevation view, selected the wall object, and used "OBJECTiVE/Tools/Offset" to raise one end of the profile.
3) The elevation following the "Offset" operation
4) Completed result in 3D. The texture remains horizontal as required, although control over this is not as good as I'd like yet. The next release will improve control over texture direction.
Still looking?
