Wishes forum
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Consistency with all modeling tools

rm
Enthusiast
I am modeling a simple and standard concrete curb and gutter for the edges of a parking lot for our building site. Ofcourse the lot is not dead flat, it has fairly steep slope for drainage.

I can model the curb/gutter profile with the Profile Manager and the wall tool to layout the curbs. As long as the curb can be modeled flat, not a problem, it works great especially at corners and radiuses. The moment the curb has to be put in on a slope, the tool no longer can do what it needs to do, meaning you cant slope curb profile parallel to the slope of the grade.

Conversely, I can model the same profile with either the Morph tool or Shell tool (which is an overly complicated tool). The Morph tool will not allow easy miters at intersections points, like the wall tool will allow and in plan view. The morph tool represents the curb graphically, completely different than does the wall tool with same profile, that should not be the case. The Shell tool is the worst in plan view as it oversimplifies the profile.

However, both the Morph tool and Shell tool allow you to pull up an elevation or 3D view of curb profile modeled and rotate or slope the profile to match the slope of the adjacent grade.

In elevation, section or 3d view, you cannot rotate the wall tool to make it parallel adjacent to the slope of the adjacent grade......When, if ever, is GS going to design the Wall tool, Slab tool, Roof tool, Beam tool, with the same ability to rotate in 3D, elevation, and section, as with the Morph and Shell tool, so we can eliminate geometry limitations in our design models.

I find this to be a weakness that has existed for too long with AC.
Robert Mariani
MARIANI design studio, PLLC
Architecture / Architectural Photography
www.robertmariani.com

Mac OSX 11.6
AC 24 / 25
11 REPLIES 11

DGSketcher
Virtuoso
+1 Too many tools doing the same thing all uniquely coded leading to a complex user interface and difficulty in managing connections. Primarily there should be linear elements (beams, columns), planar elements (walls, slabs, roofs) both freely rotatable in 3D and a single opening tool to form a hole which is then filled as required (Doors, Windows, Skylights).
Apple iMac macOS Big Sur / AC24UKI (most recent builds)

Lingwisyer
Virtuoso
Single Pitch Roof should be merged into the Slab Tool... Though most of the consistency issues come from the UI.
AC18-23 AUS 7000
Self-taught, bend it till it breaks.
Win10 | E5620 x 2 | 24GB | K2200

Anonymous
Not applicable
The Curb/Gutter problem in slope terrains, is a geometry one. Two profiles with different slopes and orientation, will never miter perfectly. In the real world there is a small adjustment/cut in each connection to handle this.

The only way to represent this situation in both 2d and 3d as parallel lines is to make a little distortion on the profile along the curb length. Its a kind of twist on the profile along its length. GDL doesn't have a tool/command for this, as Tube will twist path nodes and distorting the 2d projection. (perhaps it deserves a wish?)

I really like DGSketcher´s idea of Consistency along tools in AC. But this will put another dilemma for GS: AC was built with 2d/3d strength/performance based in the dissociation of 2d and 3d projections. What we see in 2d is a "Lowpoly" version of the 3d geometry and that is why we doesn´t have to wait that much for a 2d regen.
So. This thing will demand a whole new rethinking of AC bone structure, and therefore it won't be in GS near future plans for sure.

rm
Enthusiast
Braza -

I think you are missing the point from my post. No one mentioned trying to get 2 profiles shapes with different slopes matching up on miters.

The point is any modeled geometry should be able to be manipulated in 3D and 2D space/drawing respectively tool to tool. That is not the case in AC and it is a problem.

Again, why can it be done with morph and shell tool, but not with wall, slab, roof tools.....this makes no sense and limits design to the tool capability instead of allowing designs/presentations to be only limited by the imagination of the Architect/designer.

In other words, I don't want my software tools to limit the execution of design intent.....currently that is the case here.


Braza wrote:
The Curb/Gutter problem in slope terrains, is a geometry one. Two profiles with different slopes and orientation, will never miter perfectly. In the real world there is a small adjustment/cut in each connection to handle this.

The only way to represent this situation in both 2d and 3d as parallel lines is to make a little distortion on the profile along the curb length. Its a kind of twist on the profile along its length. GDL doesn't have a tool/command for this, as Tube will twist path nodes and distorting the 2d projection. (perhaps it deserves a wish?)

I really like DGSketcher´s idea of Consistency along tools in AC. But this will put another dilemma for GS: AC was built with 2d/3d strength/performance based in the dissociation of 2d and 3d projections. What we see in 2d is a "Lowpoly" version of the 3d geometry and that is why we doesn´t have to wait that much for a 2d regen.
So. This thing will demand a whole new rethinking of AC bone structure, and therefore it won't be in GS near future plans for sure.
Robert Mariani
MARIANI design studio, PLLC
Architecture / Architectural Photography
www.robertmariani.com

Mac OSX 11.6
AC 24 / 25

Anonymous
Not applicable
Thanks RM. I missed your point in the mitering part.

In this particular situation, I use the beam tool as it can control slope easily in plan, section and 3d. And now that it has plan fill, even better.

But I understand and share your frustration. This Consistency on Modeling Tools must be a kind of taboo in GS. And probably we wont see such thing implemented in the near future.

rm
Enthusiast
Braza -

Thanks relooking at the post. You had me thinking, why didn't I look at making these curbs with the beam tool.

Unfortunately, once again, AC shows its inconsistency between tools when manipulating their respective geometry. The beam tool cannot be used on round shapes as noted in my image in my previous post. As for how it displays in 2d, everything looks like a flat surface as if looking down on the top of a beam flange.

Its remarkable how many tools we potentially have to help us model a simple and common curb element, yet not one of them can handle achieving a task that goes into virtually every building site!

Its very discouraging, even more so as you stated, "won't see such a thing implemented anytime in the near future". Lets hope, for all our sakes, you are wrong.
Braza wrote:
Thanks RM. I missed your point in the mitering part.

In this particular situation, I use the beam tool as it can control slope easily in plan, section and 3d. And now that it has plan fill, even better.

But I understand and share your frustration. This Consistency on Modeling Tools must be a kind of taboo in GS. And probably we wont see such thing implemented in the near future.
Robert Mariani
MARIANI design studio, PLLC
Architecture / Architectural Photography
www.robertmariani.com

Mac OSX 11.6
AC 24 / 25

Anonymous
Not applicable
Yep. Round beams doesn't allow a slope angle.

This kind of work is better suited for the Profiler Addon. You can find information about it here.

You can also vote for a proper Landscape Tool for AC here

Cheers,

rm
Enthusiast
Hi Braza -

I didn't mention I was looking for a landscape tool specifically. The model I showed better illustrates the need for site design tools, again, part of every architecture project I get involved with. Landscape tools would be more focused on softscape/plant layout or design and flatwork.

While I appreciate the link to the AC poll for "landscape", which really speaks to site design in that poll, it is again disappointing that the date on that poll goes back to 2018! Here we are halfway through 2020 and we still have no real integration of site design tools. While related here, not the main thrust of my original post.

Cheers!

Braza wrote:
Yep. Round beams doesn't allow a slope angle.

This kind of work is better suited for the Profiler Addon. You can find information about it here.

You can also vote for a proper Landscape Tool for AC here

Cheers,
Robert Mariani
MARIANI design studio, PLLC
Architecture / Architectural Photography
www.robertmariani.com

Mac OSX 11.6
AC 24 / 25

Barry Kelly
Moderator
rm wrote:
Unfortunately, once again, AC shows its inconsistency between tools when manipulating their respective geometry. The beam tool cannot be used on round shapes as noted in my image in my previous post. As for how it displays in 2d, everything looks like a flat surface as if looking down on the top of a beam flange.

Its remarkable how many tools we potentially have to help us model a simple and common curb element, yet not one of them can handle achieving a task that goes into virtually every building site!

And then you have the railing tool.
You can use profiles, curve them and slope them - all at the same time.
And the connections between flat and sloping can be controlled.
The path can be edited at any time in X, Y or Z axis.
The railing can even be associated with the landscape elements so if they are adjusted the railing will adjust as well.


Barry.

One of the forum moderators.
Versions 6.5 to 25
Dell XPS- i7-6700 @ 3.4Ghz, 16GB ram, GeForce GTX 960 (2GB), Windows 10
Dell Precision 3510 - i7 6820HQ @ 2.70GHz, 16GB RAM, AMD FirePro W5130M, Windows 10

Anonymous
Not applicable
...And then Barry comes and saves the day.


@RM

Regarding the Landscape Tool: Some Architects (myself included) consider roads, paths, sidewalks, curbs, etc as Landscape elements that are required for a proper Architecture Project. Sorry again for the misunderstanding.

Have you checked the Profiler Addon? Actually I don't use it since ages. But I think it can do the job too. Tough the Railing suggested by Barry seems more straight forward.

p.s.:
rm wrote:
Its very discouraging, even more so as you stated, "won't see such a thing implemented anytime in the near future". Lets hope, for all our sakes, you are wrong.

I have hope too... That's why I also stated "Probably" at the beginning of the sentence.

Minh Nguyen
Graphisoft Moderator
Graphisoft Moderator
Hi All,

Thank you for making the wish and sharing your own opinions!

I am happy to say we took notice of this wish and I have added it into our WishList database (please refer to it as Wish #12793). Personally, I think this is an important one. Morph has the most freedom in geometry, but it lacks many abilities in terms of 2D and 3D presentation. I myself came across many element that cannot be done with standard ARCHICAD tools, due to their own limitations.

Hopefully, our Product Management team will adopt this one in the future!

Thank you all once more, and I wish you a great day!

Best regards,
Minh

Minh Nguyen
Technical Support Engineer
GRAPHISOFT

Still looking?

Browse more topics

Back to forum

See latest solutions

Accepted solutions

Start a new discussion!