MEP 27 - The New Feature that never happened

[DGSketcher]

Can someone from Graphisoft please step up and own the current abject failure to deliver the renewed MEP Modeller?

Today I joined the many others who have had to return to using AC26 in order to deliver on our MEP commitments.

We all pay out for GS to deliver improvements to AC, yet here we are 7 months later with a key feature broken & software we can't use. Can someone at least tell us what we can expect in terms of delivery of fixing this MEP debacle and when?

It's bad enough struggling with the 3D screen "grey outs", and the disappointment of new features that suddenly became experimental, but finding a fundamental tool is no longer useable... 🙄

[thesleepofreason]

It feels quite limiting not being able to offset a route segment that is connected to a branch. The angle of the branch can be changed by changing the angle of the segment so why can't the position of the branch be changed by changing the position of the segment? Yes - sometimes the position (and angles) of the branches is significant but it should be up to the user to decide when that is the case and lock it. If not it should be possible to move everything around while keeping the connections. As it is now it doesn't really gives the feeling of working within a system in any sense beyond a property.

[jfaugustine]

The MEP, routing tool could benefit from having a pet palette that behaves similar to the stair tool, the roof tool, and the beam tool for inspiration. With those, you can control how the stretch, move, or offset occurs.

We are still working through the scheduling schemes, properties, and expressions for the MEP elements...

Joe A.

(ArchiCAD since 8.0)

[Balint Kezer]

Thanks for the comments!

Quick answers to the raised questions or observations:

• The quick connections feature refers to a functionality where you can ask Archicad to help you connecting to a Terminal. Here is how you can try it:
  1. Place down a Terminal
  2. Take note of the Terminal's MEP system
  3. Start routing with the same MEP system
  4. Once you are dragging the route to the Terminal's port it will show a highlight indicating that you can connect to it
  5. Using the up and down arrows you can select one of the three suggested solutions for the connections.
• Yes, it would be good to also be able to offset segments that are connected to other routes via a branch element. Unfortunately we did not manage to develop that functionality as of now.
• @jfaugustine: There are already a few route specific options on the pet palette for the route elements, depending on whether you are selecting a segment or node you can manipulate the route different ways. What functionality would you miss from this? What else should we add?

[thesleepofreason]

Alright, so it's not nothing more than an aid for creating static routes? And its not possible to quick connect to existing routes? And it's not possible to do anything but a simple 1-1 connection with an elbow inserted?

The feedback for the solutions is poor as it doesn't really give the user any information. When making a connection there are a few parameters that should be clearly presented and possible for the user to control such as slope of the connecting pipe, vertical offset from the fixture and elbow/branch configuration. All that's given now is the route trace (even worse in plan) which most of the time means that the user has to control/edit the solution manually.

[thesleepofreason]

And it looks like it can suggest rather poor solutions to rather simple routes....

[DGSketcher]

So after the protracted wait for 27.2 our patience has been rewarded with what still appears to be a work in progress with results as unstable as before. When you spend more time trying to understand and make a tool work than the time it should realistically take to do the job you know things aren't right. 🕰 💀

[jl_lt]

Hi! We normally dont do MEP, but recently we actually modeled (kind of) the 2dMEP we received and it wasnt as painful an experience as we initially thought... that is, in Archicad 25.   With some tweaks, specific improvements and the ability to generate routes out of dwg lines and more easyness working in change of height in z axis it could work pretty well for what it is, which is visualition, scheduling and clash analysis.

GS, what is it that you are trying to accomplish, that currently, from what i hear, it is a completely messed up experience in 27?  could we expect it will be much (MUCH) better than what is currently possible in 25, or will it remain the same as it was once its fixed?

[DGSketcher]

---

@jl_lt wrote:

GS, what is it that you are trying to accomplish, that currently, from what i hear, it is a completely messed up experience in 27?  could we expect it will be much (MUCH) better than what is currently possible in 25, or will it remain the same as it was once its fixed?

---

From what I am seeing I don't think they understand the problem to know what they want to achieve. The fact drains have gradients, double connections and transitions based on inverts has shown up their complete lack of practical and real world experience. Without that knowledge how can you design a system? A degree in computer science isn't going to cover it. At best we have been fobbed off with a clumsy piping tool, at worst there seems to be no logic to managing or using the data points & attributes forming the system.

[thesleepofreason]

So I just tried to model a downspout as a route - which has to be the "MEP" system that most naturally falls on the architect - but apparently it isn't possible to change the floor plan display to cut only?

It's much smoother and makes more sense than using the GDL object. The result is good in elevation (would be nice to be able to hide lines between segments) but useless in plan... GS really need to take a more generic approach to modelling and stop wasting resources on some imagined user case. 

 

[thesleepofreason]

Whats really worrying is constant release of underdeveloped  features or functionalities that I can't imagine have been tested and validated by any relevant usergroup. How long is this suppose to continue? Looking at the roadmap, there is four MEP items in the coming soon category that has nothing but disaster written on them given how poor the implementation of the basics has been. I would of course love to be proven wrong but even if I am - all this is specific for some imagined potential MEP userbase and thus has limited value to architectural designers who instead have to continue to dream about a system approach to walls...