Modelling ARCHICAD joinery in 2D and 3D

[Anonymous]

Hi,

Apologies if this topic has been well covered already. My office specialises in high end residential projects. We do a lot of custom joinery but mostly all orthogonal.

I have been experimenting with building joinery with morphs, walls, and slabs. It seems that each tool has its pros and cons.

Morphs
Pros: Relatively easy to manipulate into non-orthogonal shapes. It also has graphic attributes for both horizontal cut and vertical cut.
Cons: In 2D view (e.g. plan), you cannot uniformly stretch the morph. If you try to stretch the edge of the morph in 2D view, it "skewers" the geometry.

Slabs
Pros: Very easy to manipulate in 2D view. Able to stretch in plan view uniformly.
Cons: There is no horizontal cut graphic attribute. Which means if I am building a full height joinery out of a single slab tool, I cannot set line type for horizontal cut.

Walls
Pros: Has graphic attributes for both horizontal and vertical cut.
Cons: Cannot change the thickness graphically - only numerically via the object settings.


I'd be interested in knowing how different people tackle joinery modelling for both 3D presentation and 2D presentation. We have not purchased any of the "add ons" for joinery (e.g. cadimage) in hope that we could tackle joinery design with the native ARCHICAD 20 tools. The modular joinery in ARCHICAD 20 doesn't give me enough flexibility (e.g. I can't even get a joinery kick that offsets from 3 sides).

Thanks,
Ben

[Anonymous]

Hello Steve,
Thank you very much for the complete reply!

Regarding the wardrobe elevation.
I changed the material of the slabs to MDF 1 and MDF 2. It worked, but I don't understand it, as parts with the same material are still in contact. When using a personalized door in the Archicad standard wardrobe, it is possible to choose only one type of door, one module. It is not possible to choose two modules (same door with alternate materials). I will upload a drawing showing it. I highlighted the personalized panel in saturated colors, and the repetition done automatically by Archicad is shown in faded colors.
Usually, I use different materials to model parts separately, but it is not possible to assign materials to each part when using the Archicad standard elements. However, it worked! Thank you very much! Do you add the opening lines in 2D?

Regarding the vanity unit.
It works when I model each part separately. I suppose the pictures you sent are pieces that you modeled, correct? The problem is when we try to use the Archicad default counter element, it won't allow us to assign different materials to each part. We can choose the material for the entire counter, therefore the pieces are merged. Modeling each part individually is a solution. It is just a bit frustrating being unable to use the counter element due to its wrong 2D representation. Another option is to use the counter element, turn off the backsplash, and add it separately. This way would require only the backsplash modeling and not the entire counter, making future alterations easier.
I can turn off the legs of the vanity. The element allows this modification. The problem is still the missing lines in the section. Likewise the counter, we can't assign a different material to individual parts of the joinery and the elements are merged.
I also would like to remove this wood piece (please verify the attached picture), but I can't do it using the Archicad standard element. Of course, it is possible to model everything, but I was trying to use GDL standard elements to be faster. Bolean operations are not allowed between GDL elements, so I can't subtract this part. One possibility is to transform the element to morphs using the command, and not remodeling it, and then it is possible to modify everything. However, parametric qualities are lost, making future alterations harder.
I am afraid we can't have the division lines using Archicad elements. Maybe we need to decide between modeling each piece or adding small 2D lines to amend the automatic 2D representation.

Please share your thoughts.

Thank you very much,
Pedro

[Steve Jepson]

paborges wrote:
...I changed the material of the slabs to MDF 1 and MDF 2. It worked, but I don't understand it, as parts with the same material are still in contact. ...

There are some mysteries with ArchiCAD for sure

I will get back to you about this when I get a little more time because it may be a useful conversation for others as well.

Ok.. here is a response:

1. All it takes to stop the graphic merging of the surfaces is the name of the adjacent surface.

2. There is probably no good reason to use the Wardrobe Object for what I think you are wanting to model.
Double Door (D2 23 Object ) with Ganging will probably work better. ?

3. No, I never use Opening Lines because it is usually redundant information. Opening direction can be shown for doors in Plan View and on in the Door Schedules. Section and Elevation views usually have hardware (handles, nobs, hinges) to indicate the opening direction. When I do use an indicator for door or window openings ( sliding glass doors for example) I use the X and O format not arrows or the lines. I do this with the prefix or suffix setting in the door or window Marker or in the Label. I use both a Marker and a Label for all doors and windows. One for the ID, one for the size and/or operation/handing.

4. You won't need to use any lines.

You should be able to configure the bathroom sinks and wall hung base cabinets with these (3) objects
Use SEO with the counter top on Base Cabinet Tripple Door 23 with Upward Extraction to see the full sink bowl and drain if you like.

For the Closet Doors, you may want to use a use a Door with Empty door panel and some Wardrobe Objects with custom Door Panels. ?
Nothing Custom here - Just Regular Objects

[Anonymous]

Another way to avoid the missing line between identical materials (and in this particularly situation), is to create a millimeter (very small) gap on the edge of the custom panel (Which is what happens in reality).

Cheers,

[Steve Jepson]

I think you probably don't want to have all of the joints display with the correct lines unless you are trying to generate Shop Drawings. In which case, the Cabinet Objects will be of no use because they can't be configrued for enough detail. You are probably better off to show all Object materials in a Section the same since they only need to be symbolic place holders. You can use a Label to call out the Cabinet ID number or an note that says "See Cabinet Shop Drawings by Others" . If you want to make Shop Drawings then you need to model with pre-assembled elements that are easily configured for what you need.

[Anonymous]

Hello Steve,

Thank you again for the detailed reply.

1) Wardrobes
The reason I am using the Wardrobe Object is that it will be replicated in many rooms. In some rooms, it will be a built-in joinery piece, and in other rooms, it will be a free-standing piece. The dimensions will also vary slightly. Therefore, it is easier to use a customizable object instead of making them individually with empty and double doors. Also, considering the possibility of future alterations, if I need to change the door design, I can modify it once in my source object, and all the wardrobes doors will be automatically updated. However, your first answer suggesting to change the material of the parts solved the problem! Even if I don't understand the reason (as you said, Archicad has its mysteries) this question is sorted! Thank you very much!

2) Vanity unit
I used the exact objects that you showed to build my counter and cabinets. Everything works fine in elevation and 3D, the problem is the section that does not display the joint lines. However, as you said, maybe it is not necessary to show the lines, as it is indicative and not Shop drawings.
I will use details or refer them to the manufacturer drawings.

Thank you very much again for all the help.

Best regards,
Pedro

[Anonymous]

Hello Paulo Henrique,

Thank you for your reply.
It is possible to leave the gap if we model each piece individually. This configuration is not allowed when using a standard Archicad object. In any case, changing the material as per Steve's suggestion solved the problem.

Thank you so much,
Pedro

[Anonymous]

Hi Pedro,

You can create a gap by adding a small morph rectangle (no edges and invisible BM) next to the slab and save all (slabs and morphs) as Custom Door Panel.
Here is an example:

Duplicating Surfaces is a fine workaround, but I only use it as a last resource.

As a side note: I think edge visibility between identical surfaces should be an option inside the Surface dropdown settings for individual elements. The default behavior could be "Hide", but there are many situations (i.e. Wood Framing) where "Show" is essential for a clear documentation.

Cheers,

[Steve Jepson]

Braza wrote:
Hi Pedro,

You can create a gap by adding a small morph rectangle (no edges and invisible BM) next to the slab and save all (slabs and morphs) as Custom Door Panel.
Here is an example:

CustomDoorLeafGap.jpg


Duplicating Surfaces is a fine workaround, but I only use it as a last resource.

As a side note: I think edge visibility between identical surfaces should be an option inside the Surface dropdown settings for individual elements. The default behavior could be "Hide", but there are many situations (i.e. Wood Framing) where "Show" is essential for a clear documentation.

Cheers,

Because this issue always occurs some where in every project for almost always the same situation, and because the duplicated Materials/Surface with different name is already available it is typically less work for me to just assign a different material than any other workaround. It's even faster than drawing a line, and much faster than modeling or adjusting geometry, drawing in a morph, etc... And the duplicate material option is something that takes care of all similar instances at one time. For me that might be 1,000 places - as seen in this picture where there are perhaps 1,000 or more places were I don't want the same material to merge. Anywhere a person might view this framing model with BIMx or VR needs to show the specific say the framing intersects with similar materials, show where the splices are, that sort of thing..

[Anonymous]

It is good to know both possibilities and apply the best solution, whether you need a gap or only a joint line.
Thank you very much for the valuable comments!

[Anonymous]

@paborges

I'm glad it helped. And welcome to the forum!

@Steve Jepson

I totally agree Steve. I just avoid it because I have some sort of PTSD due to "Colossal Attribute Avalanches" during multiple hotlink modules updates... Just imagining two identical surfaces with sequential numbers makes me shiver.
Perhaps one day we will have a rock solid attribute management in AC.