Wishes
Post your wishes about Graphisoft products: Archicad, BIMx, BIMcloud, and DDScad.

Building Material Plan & Section cut fills to be seperate

Anonymous
Not applicable
Add an additional cut fill option when creating new building materials.

This feature would give us more control over how we draft.
I have set up a brick cut fill that reads as bricks should for a 1:50 or larger section, which has been saving me time in making sure that my levels, windows etc are set up to brick-scale.
HOWEVER
This does cause major issues for my walls in plan (as they are now reading the fill I set up for sections)
I am using a graphic overide on the plans to fix the cut fill, however, the graphic overide changes the entire walls hatch, not just the selected building material.

Adding a feature that allows you to set up a separate hatch for plan and section would allow for way more control over drafting.

(allowing graphic overides to effect only specific building materials, rather than the entire element that contains the building material would also be greatly appreciated.
18 REPLIES 18
Anonymous
Not applicable
Thanks Laszlo! Done.
godi
Enthusiast
I have just entered that forum to write just near the same wish, but I think each material should have 3 different fills: front, section and plan, and only let in surface settings the option to override the predefined material front fill with a custom one.
Laszlo Nagy
Community Admin
Community Admin
What is a front fill?
Loving Archicad since 1995 - Find Archicad Tips at x.com/laszlonagy
AMD Ryzen9 5900X CPU, 64 GB RAM 3600 MHz, Nvidia GTX 1060 6GB, 500 GB NVMe SSD
2x28" (2560x1440), Windows 10 PRO ENG, Ac20-Ac27
godi
Enthusiast
Sorry for the year delay 🙂

A brick wall 3 fills, as I think every material should be able to have:
Barry Kelly
Moderator
godi wrote:
A brick wall 3 fills, as I think every material should be able to have:

The front is already separate.
That is controlled by the fill attached to the surface that you apply.

A wall can have 3 different surfaces - front, back and edges.
I guess it would be nice to have the edge surfaces split so top/bottom can be controlled separately to the sides, but Archicad does a fairly good job at wrapping the surfaces in the correct direction.

Beams already have 5 surfaces and slabs can have individual edges overridden.
It would be nice to have consistency among all elements.

But now I am going off topic from the original question about fills.
Yes, it would be great if plan and section fills could be different.
Surface fills we already have separate (but slightly limited) control over them.


Barry.
One of the forum moderators.
Versions 6.5 to 27
Dell XPS- i7-6700 @ 3.4Ghz, 16GB ram, GeForce GTX 960 (2GB), Windows 10
Lenovo Thinkpad - i7-1270P 2.20 GHz, 32GB RAM, Nvidia T550, Windows 11
godi
Enthusiast
Front and back of a wall would be the same most of the time, but all edges aren't, as in my brick example, or in a plasterboard.
Anonymous
Not applicable
I still think this is essential. Its a pity we have all the benefits of priority based intersections and still missing a proper BM 3d visualization.
Yes. Total control of surface within elements would be very difficult to implement, as many elements doesn't have total control of it, like walls only have one surface for all edges. But I would be happy if we could at least have control over BM sectioned fills and surfaces (Of course with a proper fill orientation for sections. Because currently "fit to skin" only works for plan view ). A suggestion for UI implementation could be like this:

gdford
Advisor
I am certainly on board with this, but to be honest i think there are a few fundamental issues that still need to be resolved in the basic Building Material.
Clearly Building Materials are becoming the core data point for elements in archicad. The most frustrating issue if have had with building materials since day one, has been having access to the building material data via schedules and autotext (or factory supplied special labels)... Now this has been getting better... For a while now we have been able to schedule a building materials ID, Name, Description, (and other items), and recently we can add a classification to each building material. This is great. Ultimately all of the building material data (including the intersection priority value), needs to be accessible via schedule Criteria and Data Fields as well as Autotext. Schedules do not have complete control of a building materials classification for use as a Criteria to filter the results of the schedule. This is important as ultimately, it is classifications that describe every item in a construction project. Getting schedules and labels to be accessing the same building material data and classification is super super important as we advance along the path of better BIM.
Gary Ford
Self Employed - Modeling, Estimating, Construction
Archicad 12-26
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X 12-Core Processor
3701 Mhz, 12 Core(s), 24 Logical Processor(s)
(RAM) 128 GB
NVIDIA RTX A2000
Anonymous
Not applicable
Yes Gary. Data extraction from BM is surely more important.
I don't deal much with quantifications, but I understand that working around data access limitations must be way harder than graphical ones.
As I said, I am not a quantities/data expert, but I am starting to see some conflict between BM and Elements properties, as many elements are composed by different BM's and there may be the cause of those AC limitations that you are referring. Perhaps there would be some differentiation between BM and Element properties and classification.
And yes. BM's has so much potential in this new "Digital Twin" AEC approach.
Cheers,