- last edited on by
Rubia Torres
● I tried to use tool like Beam or railing with profile manager
- for beams Its advantage that it's connecting to itself and disadvantage to manipulate with heights
- for railing tools is good for different heights but doesn't connect to itself
Is there some other way how can I do nice road ?
● Also I know how to do it by solid operation, but in this case it doesn't looks like proper road. [Picture 2]
- And not working with renovation tool if I have more then one renovation Filter. ( usually using for other suggestions)
I tried to search and some videos on YouTube but I didn´t found any good solution for it.
Is there some tutorial or forum information about it ?
Thanks for any advice
This is bothering me many years
Screens shots :
You seem to have a good grasp of some of the best methods available to make good convincing roads.
It's just a question of which method to use where and when since not all methods are appropriate for all scenario.
You only need to adjust a little or modify your technique to give you better results.
Personally I now prefer to use the rail tool with a basic (low poly) road profile as a rail segment, since it intelligently maps onto an existing site mesh if you use the magic wand and a path and have gravity to mesh turned on. (just make sure your rail origin point or lowest point is set to match where the road connects to the mesh or a few feet slightly below depending on your profile).
It gives better control with the nodes allowing you to adjust the individual road elevation height points after the fact and thus giving you more control.
For larger sites with less resolution needed in the roads, I just use the "duplicate site mesh - with road shapes subtracted - lowered a couple of inches and SEO-subtract the original mesh" method. Pretty basic but gets the job done and gives me what I need.
The only recommendation I would make to the image you've posted and which is what I do as an addition is after I apply the road as a rail object, I use the Solid Element operation with the road/rail as an operator and subtract with upwards extrusion the mesh so that you don't have parts where the site mesh is pouring onto the road like you have shown.
Additionally, after you're happy with how your road looks, you can refine the site mesh further by adding custom contour lines (using the 2D polyline) at the parts of the mesh where the road and mesh meet but where the mesh looks like it drops sharply or is too far below the road, and then use the custom contour line control points to get a better connection between the road and the mesh in the areas where you need it.
One last thing I would add is that there is no single 100% perfect solution to resolving any situation (certainly in ArchiCAD a lot of the times) and usually you might find you need to use a combination of tools and methods to work together to get a good result.
(for example, combining the rail tool method with beams using the same road profile in certain parts where you need to, and also using custom mesh's or even morphs as well.)
See images below:-
I think you're not too far off. You just need to refine a bit some of the methods you're already working with, use what suits the situation best (not everything works for all situations) and tweak, tweak, tweak...and tweak once more until you find what works best for you.
Good luck.
It's just a question of which method to use where and when since not all methods are appropriate for all scenario.
You only need to adjust a little or modify your technique to give you better results.
Personally I now prefer to use the rail tool with a basic (low poly) road profile as a rail segment, since it intelligently maps onto an existing site mesh if you use the magic wand and a path and have gravity to mesh turned on. (just make sure your rail origin point or lowest point is set to match where the road connects to the mesh or a few feet slightly below depending on your profile).
It gives better control with the nodes allowing you to adjust the individual road elevation height points after the fact and thus giving you more control.
For larger sites with less resolution needed in the roads, I just use the "duplicate site mesh - with road shapes subtracted - lowered a couple of inches and SEO-subtract the original mesh" method. Pretty basic but gets the job done and gives me what I need.
The only recommendation I would make to the image you've posted and which is what I do as an addition is after I apply the road as a rail object, I use the Solid Element operation with the road/rail as an operator and subtract with upwards extrusion the mesh so that you don't have parts where the site mesh is pouring onto the road like you have shown.
Additionally, after you're happy with how your road looks, you can refine the site mesh further by adding custom contour lines (using the 2D polyline) at the parts of the mesh where the road and mesh meet but where the mesh looks like it drops sharply or is too far below the road, and then use the custom contour line control points to get a better connection between the road and the mesh in the areas where you need it.
One last thing I would add is that there is no single 100% perfect solution to resolving any situation (certainly in ArchiCAD a lot of the times) and usually you might find you need to use a combination of tools and methods to work together to get a good result.
(for example, combining the rail tool method with beams using the same road profile in certain parts where you need to, and also using custom mesh's or even morphs as well.)
See images below:-
I think you're not too far off. You just need to refine a bit some of the methods you're already working with, use what suits the situation best (not everything works for all situations) and tweak, tweak, tweak...and tweak once more until you find what works best for you.
Good luck.
Still looking?
