Particular Wall Intersection, any ideas?

[Tierno23]

Hi!

Im modeling a project  and I came up with a few questions that I have not been able to solve: I have two composite walls that intersect in a corner at 90°. The first wall consists of a load bearing core and a layer of insulation, the second wall is just insulation. They both have an exterior finishing layer. The issue comes when the load bearing material of the first wall does not go all the way through the insulation of the second wall. Both materials, load bearing and insulation have the same priority to allow this situation. For now I have covered unwanted lines or missing fills with 2D. Is there a more "direct" way to achieve the wanted result without needing to draw on top of it? a way to maybe stop the load bearing layer of the composite and keep going with the insulation of the first wall so it intersects correctly with the insulation of the second wall?

Please find attached a few screenshots that help clarify the explanation.

Thank you very much in advance!

Using archicad 23 in a intel Mac 2014_macOS BigSur 11.7.10

Operating system used: Mac Intel-based 11.7.10 Big Sur

[scottjm]

I notice the reference line of your right hand wall isn’t merged with the reference line if the left hand wall. This could be contributing potentially?

From the looks of your red markup you only what the load bearing wall to partially cut the insulation of the left way. By default Archicad won’t do that. It’s either cut the whole skin or not. However you could trick it by creating two insulation skins on your left wall composite. The first being the thickness you want the load bearing to cut, the second being the thickness that would wrap around the end. You could turn off the skin separator line too. Potentially they may need separate building materials with differing priorities though. 

[Tierno23]

Thank you so much for your fast reply, it is a very good idea, I’ll keep you posted if I manage to make it work.

thanks a lot again!!

-UPDATE: I tried that solution and it works perfectly. As you said the end line of the core layer does not appear, being that the only drawback I think it is a good workaround to model this very specific problem. Thank you both Scott and Lucas for your time and interest in my issue. 

Have a great day! 🙂

[runxel · Accepted solution]

I would have suggested the same thing as Scott.

That works, but only to a certain extend. There is one big drawback tho, the end of the concrete core is missing. See the following pic:

That is one of the worser things with the current implementation of the intersection engine of Archicad. The missing line is treated as if it would be the skin separator, even tho it should belong to the concrete, whose end line is not turned off. It's just one of the things nobody has really thought through...

PS: One last thing. You'll need two different BMATs: The inner insulation layer needs to be of lower prio than the concrete core, while the other, outer one needs to be higher.

[Lingwisyer]

Might it not be better to just use a Complex Column? In that way you do not need a secondary BM that may cause scheduling issues, as well as the fact that the duplicating Composite route may cause other intersection issues resulting in the need for even more duplciates. eg. Outside corner, standard and inside corner.

Ling.

[Barry Kelly]

Do you have all of the skin end lines turned on in the composite settings?

I just made up walls with stronger materials on the outer skins going to weaker on the inner skins.

All end lines on and it seems to work.

Barry.

[Tierno23]

Hi Barry! I apologize, I realize now that I was not completely clear on my explanation. In this particular case I need my load bearing core to stop exactly where I showed in my screenshots, I did not want it to go all the way through. I have all end lines on and it is still missing. I assume its a limitation of the program and I will draw them by hand to complete them, unless there is another, more efficient, way.

Thank you for your reply!

[Tierno23]

Hi ling!

thank you for your reply, I think that can work as a solution, I have not explored it yet, but I think it could potentially solve the problem. Thanks again and have a good day! 🙂