I do often like this :
1. I draw my building without roofs
2. I draw an easy and fast section, but exact, over the building to calculate where the pivotline should be. The pivotline I normally have at top of my trusses so thickness of roof is the thickness above truss. (I would do this because I often use our officestandarddetails, if it's a more free building, then I do point 3 first before I make my section), and I'm an engineer, not an architect
(Don't say ArchiCad isn't an construction tool, I've heard it alot, specially from AutoCad resellers, I've used it for that in over 4 years and don't want too hear that it's not possible to make constructions because, than I don't know what I'm doing last years 
)
3. I build my roof
4. I draw my trusses with Fill tool in section view and marked it and copy
5. I open "Create complex profile" and choose Create
6. I paste my fill into the new view and choose this to apply as beam
7. In plan view, I draw a beam with my own profile and the length of the beam is the with of the truss
This I think is the fastest way to create a roofplan with roof and trusses.
And, when comes the feature too build roof there pivotline is on top (or a thickness that has a negative value) ? We could change referenceline in walls, but not on roof..
1. I draw my building without roofs
2. I draw an easy and fast section, but exact, over the building to calculate where the pivotline should be. The pivotline I normally have at top of my trusses so thickness of roof is the thickness above truss. (I would do this because I often use our officestandarddetails, if it's a more free building, then I do point 3 first before I make my section), and I'm an engineer, not an architect
(Don't say ArchiCad isn't an construction tool, I've heard it alot, specially from AutoCad resellers, I've used it for that in over 4 years and don't want too hear that it's not possible to make constructions because, than I don't know what I'm doing last years )3. I build my roof
4. I draw my trusses with Fill tool in section view and marked it and copy
5. I open "Create complex profile" and choose Create
6. I paste my fill into the new view and choose this to apply as beam
7. In plan view, I draw a beam with my own profile and the length of the beam is the with of the truss
This I think is the fastest way to create a roofplan with roof and trusses.
And, when comes the feature too build roof there pivotline is on top (or a thickness that has a negative value) ? We could change referenceline in walls, but not on roof..
Jefferson wrote:This is pretty much my approach also. Not trying to "go Nuts".
Dan -
Like Link and Steve, I set the roof as strictly the top skins. Thickness is usually choosen in reference to rafter tail thickness, and elevations are top plate heights. In it's early stages it's thick for visual representation, [read for the client's viewpoint]. The basic form, valley, hip, gable adjustments etc. and then once trusses/rafters are modeled, the up/down in section, [when I'm feeling "on my game", in 3D window.] The "thinning" of the roofs, 5/8" sheathing, + whatever roofing material buildup will be, and final elevation adjustments are a tail end process, once everything else is "set".
This is an extension of my model it as far possible,without going nuts, attitude. It yields nearly completed sections + elevations, plus it's RIGHT. That means no surprises on the job site, and then the only four letters used for my name are the original ones
Jefferson, how are you modeling fascia? I tried the Cadimage #D Profiler with no success.
As far as the modeling Trusses question, I use the (not using AC10 yet) the AC "TrussPro" Object. There are no webs and I do not model them. In the Section views that show the truss I use the Polyline tool to "fake" the webs. I group the polylines for ease of copying & pasting to another Section view.
My one problem with the truss modeling is discussed here.
Also a truss discussion is here.
I will attach a few of my "going Nuts" with the Model.
Roof Rafters
Here is a Section view with the Fake 2D polylines representing webs. Often not the True truss web either just a representation.
Morning Dan -
Good thread you started here! No contracting here, my tool belt days are mostly over. It is that time that spent wearing one that drives me to "finish" the model as much as is reasonable, [we've seen that debated a few times here
]
My thinking is threefold: 1st the amazing ability we're provided through this program and because we can, 2nd in doing so it previews any problem areas and allows us to address them in the best way, before we actually get there. Along that path the solutions have greater range, and we are better able to participate in the ultimate decision. 3rd, and perhaps the biggest reason, basically this is exactly what we get paid to do, some very handsomely. Figure it all out while it's still virtual and affordable to solve.
Those flat-cadders and hand drafters who don't follow through on their designs, it is beyond my comprehension how/what is charged for an incomplete service, especially when the technology is available. It borders on criminal. A tad overreactionary to be sure but I have been the guy on the jobsite trying to solve a problem one of these folks had already been paid to do. Pushed my own button there, sorry........
Good thread you started here! No contracting here, my tool belt days are mostly over. It is that time that spent wearing one that drives me to "finish" the model as much as is reasonable, [we've seen that debated a few times here
] My thinking is threefold: 1st the amazing ability we're provided through this program and because we can, 2nd in doing so it previews any problem areas and allows us to address them in the best way, before we actually get there. Along that path the solutions have greater range, and we are better able to participate in the ultimate decision. 3rd, and perhaps the biggest reason, basically this is exactly what we get paid to do, some very handsomely. Figure it all out while it's still virtual and affordable to solve.
Those flat-cadders and hand drafters who don't follow through on their designs, it is beyond my comprehension how/what is charged for an incomplete service, especially when the technology is available. It borders on criminal. A tad overreactionary to be sure but I have been the guy on the jobsite trying to solve a problem one of these folks had already been paid to do. Pushed my own button there, sorry........
Jefferson wrote:
Morning Dan -
Good thread you started here! No contracting here, my tool belt days are mostly over. It is that time that spent wearing one that drives me to "finish" the model as much as is reasonable, [we've seen that debated a few times here
My thinking is threefold: 1st the amazing ability we're provided through this program and because we can, 2nd in doing so it previews any problem areas and allows us to address them in the best way, before we actually get there. Along that path the solutions have greater range, and we are better able to participate in the ultimate decision. 3rd, and perhaps the biggest reason, basically this is exactly what we get paid to do, some very handsomely. Figure it all out while it's still virtual and affordable to solve.
Those flat-cadders and hand drafters who don't follow through on their designs, it is beyond my comprehension how/what is charged for an incomplete service, especially when the technology is available. It borders on criminal. A tad overreactionary to be sure but I have been the guy on the jobsite trying to solve a problem one of these folks had already been paid to do. Pushed my own button there, sorry........
Jefferson,
Glad you like the thread!..I think we are all benefiting from the diverse solutions. I'm especially appreciative of the opinions from individiuals like yourself who actually have field experience...The more "toolbelt" people we can involve the better!
Here's my response to you points:
1. I agree, ArchiCAD gives us some powerful tools to explore/document design issues.
2. Again, I agree...better to explore and find discrepincies before they arise.
3. Hmmm, I don't know if this applies to everyone...I get paid to do builder's set... anything beyond is money out of my pocket. I think this gets back to your first point about modeling it because "we can" If I'm not paid to do it I can't afford to do it. I know some/most clients expect it, but I guess it centers around what your contract actually requires.
Dan K
Still looking?
