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

Floor Plan Cut Plane adjustable elevation (stepped)

David Larrew
Booster
The Floor Plan Cut Plane really needs to be more flexible.

Most of our projects are not on level sites. Changes in a single floor level can range from 0' to 12' difference from one end of the building to the other, yet we still need to show the entire floor as one level for documentation. Currently, the single level Cut Plane just doesn't cut it (pardon the pun).

This really is apparent when working on a multi-unit complex that sits on a sloped site. Maybe 2 out of 10 units will look correct from the settings of the single level Cut Plane.

We need to be able to step up/down the Cut Pane at user-defined points (similar to staggering the Section/Elevation cutline in Plan).

I just spoke with GS Tech Support and was surprised to find that this was never wished for, so they don't realize that there is this major flaw with the Cut Plane. There are many other issues that also need to be addressed, but that is for another post. BTW, I was told that ADT already has this flexibility.
David Larrew, AIA, GDLA, GSRC

Architectural Technology Specialist

a r c h i S O L U T I O N S



WIN7-10/ OSX 10.15.7

AC 5.1-25 USA
15 REPLIES 15

Karl Ottenstein
Moderator
David wrote:
I just spoke with GS Tech Support and was surprised to find that this was never wished for, so they don't realize that there is this major flaw with the Cut Plane. There are many other issues that also need to be addressed, but that is for another post. BTW, I was told that ADT already has this flexibility.
Glad you started this poll, David. Actually, there were some very strong behind the scenes arguments for this feature after the FPCP first arrived. The design guys in Budapest know that it is a wish...but a poll like this might help emphasize how strongly it is desired.

An inconvenient, and far from perfect (joints/intersections, time involved, etc) workaround is to use multiple views, each with a different FPCP height, and then crop and stack those views on a layout to obtain the desired result.

Cheers,
Karl
One of the forum moderators   •   AC 25 USA and earlier   •   MacOS 11.6.1, iMac Pro

kliment
Newcomer
An essentilal wish indeed, David!
Kliment Ivanov
http://www.klimentivanov.com
AC /since 4.55/; AutoCAD; Max; SketchUp; VRay; ArtL; Photoshop; Illustrator; InDesign; CorelDraw
Win 7 Ultimate 64

LewBishop
Newcomer
This wish is at the very top of my list as the current project we're working on has a 4' split in two sections of the project. The floor levels in one section are not the floor levels in the other section -- since the story markers are set for one section, the other is not correct. In order to work around I was going to create two building files and ex ref into a site file just to have the stories workable and the resultant views to show doors, cabinets etc correctly. Lots of extra work to make things look correct.

Lew Bishop
Jon Worden Architects
MBP 17" OS X 10.5 AC11 1114US
MBP 15" retina 16GB 512 SSD
High Sierra - AC 21
27" Thunderbolt
AC since 4.16

Thomas Holm
Booster
Karl wrote:
An inconvenient, and far from perfect (joints/intersections, time involved, etc) workaround is to use multiple views, each with a different FPCP height, and then crop and stack those views on a layout to obtain the desired result.
I have a feeling this isn't an easy fix. Even in Microstation, which is very flexible in 3D, are VCPs defined per view - it's part of the view definition and can be graphically defined from another (perpendicular) view.

I find the present state logical when you work, and the combine-on-layout workaround Karl describes above fairly easy. And if you use the view map for navigation after they're defined, it's also pretty convenient to work with.

For me, a true 3D cut option for the floor plan, and above all, free rotation of floor plan windows, has much higher priority.
AC4.1-AC24SWE-25INT; OSX11.5; MP5,1+MBP16,1

Erika Epstein
Contributor
David,
A long overdue wish. Hard to believe given the many times problems with multi-level units have been discussed here that one hasn't been posted before.

Karl's posted work-around has worked fine for me so far, but is a lot of set up and views to wade through.
Erika
Architect, Consultant
MacBook Pro Retina, 15-inch Yosemite 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
Mac OSX 10.11.1
AC5-18
Onuma System

"Implementing Successful Building Information Modeling"

Rob
Graphisoft
Graphisoft
I have run into similar problem (stepped down plans) one year ago and it gave me a real headache.
Anyway, I was discussing this with GS (they are pretty aware of this issue) and indeed it is not an easy fix. The major problems are (as I can recollect) the way of controlling and updating the section plane in terms of the user interface (3D kinks, recesses etc). Each section plane region would have to have it's own setting in terms of visibility upwards/downwards plus it would take some toll in regards to CPU use (filtering all elements by the section plane region heights). Also, the section plane varies by the storey as well so all of that adds up to huge complexity we would have to face to. Well it would be something for GS UI department to handle, however the task itself looks like an overkill for a feature that is admittedly used but not 'life threatening' in terms of a docs workflow.
::rk

Thomas Holm
Booster
Rob wrote:
I have run into similar problem (stepped down plans) one year ago and it gave me a real headache.
Anyway, I was discussing this with GS (they are pretty aware of this issue) and indeed it is not an easy fix. The major problems are (as I can recollect) the way of controlling and updating the section plane in terms of the user interface (3D kinks, recesses etc). Each section plane region would have to have it's own setting in terms of visibility upwards/downwards plus it would take some toll in regards to CPU use (filtering all elements by the section plane region heights). Also, the section plane varies by the storey as well so all of that adds up to huge complexity we would have to face to. Well it would be something for GS UI department to handle, however the task itself looks like an overkill for a feature that is admittedly used but not 'life threatening' in terms of a docs workflow.
Exactly. Each region/step would internally have to be treaded as a view of its own, and then seamlessly joined together in the screen floor plan window.
Admittedly, we have that in sections already, but they are still generated from the model when activated, not truly live.
The way Archicad is built around the live symbolic floor plan gives this another dignity. First, they have to solve the issues of true 3D cuts in floor plans and having more than one floor plan window open simultaneously. Those are heavy wishes on their own and will probably come sooner. I also give rotation of the floor plan a higher priority.
AC4.1-AC24SWE-25INT; OSX11.5; MP5,1+MBP16,1

ameyaj
Newcomer
I agree with this wish. I have similar problems with Stepped Buildings and also with a couple of buildings with varying room heights on either wings.

It might be difficult to execute, But if we can indeed generate multiple plan views of the same storey, by drawing stepped, cut planes in sections (like we can draw section lines on a plan) then it will definitely save a lot of additional work.

If it is too difficult then maybe these could be just plan views with very limited options for actual editing.(so we may need to go to the actual plan view for major editing). Even this would help immensely for a couple of things I am working on right now.
AC12 Windows 7

Zak
Newcomer
We are now in 2014 with the release 18 and still nothing has been done about this? Why do we even bother with this forum? Can we please have some clarification on the points raised in this post...
David wrote:
The Floor Plan Cut Plane really needs to be more flexible.

Most of our projects are not on level sites. Changes in a single floor level can range from 0' to 12' difference from one end of the building to the other, yet we still need to show the entire floor as one level for documentation. Currently, the single level Cut Plane just doesn't cut it (pardon the pun).

This really is apparent when working on a multi-unit complex that sits on a sloped site. Maybe 2 out of 10 units will look correct from the settings of the single level Cut Plane.

We need to be able to step up/down the Cut Pane at user-defined points (similar to staggering the Section/Elevation cutline in Plan).

I just spoke with GS Tech Support and was surprised to find that this was never wished for, so they don't realize that there is this major flaw with the Cut Plane. There are many other issues that also need to be addressed, but that is for another post. BTW, I was told that ADT already has this flexibility.
Archicad 21 - Build 5021
Windows 10 - x64 / i7 CPU 975 - 18GB RAM
NVidia Graphics - GTX960

karinamdp
Newcomer
Already at AC18 and this option is not availabe
AC 23 INT / AC 24 USA
Windows 10

ant2017
Newcomer
Hi all,

1st time ArchiCAD talk user, just wondering if there are new solutions with the above question?

Im currently having the same problem. I have 40 x 2 stories townhouses across a large sloping site.

Height difference from the lowest to the highest point of the site is 4m.

I'm using modules for each of the townhouses.

I am really struggling with setting up a site plan that shows ground floor plan to all townhouses.


Any comments or advise will be much appreciated!!! Thank you in advance!

Im using AC 19 & AC20

alemanda
Beginner
@ant2017
I would use symbolic view only. I think there's no option at the moment.
AC 19 and AC21 latest hotfix
Win 10 Pro 64bit
Double XEON 14 CORES (tot 28 physical cores)
32GB RAM - SSD 256GB - Nvidia Quadro K620
Display DELL 25'' 2560x1440
www.almadw.it

vasil4y92
Newcomer
1.It will be a great thing if Archicad have region cut plane like in Revit.

2. Also, the AutoCAD flexibility when drawing in 2D will be much appreciated in Archicad, which has very slow 2D workflow. Layer workflow is also slow.

3.Instance drawings is a necessary thing.

3.Another thing that is going to speed up the workflow is command line. It will
synchronize working with a lot of programs, which comes very frustrating.

4. Archicad has a lot of settings that can be simplified. 50% of the time i am wasting energy searching for a setting that is slowing me down. It needs to be more intuitive and the most important settings at the front.

5. Archicad - Grasshopper connection is great, but its meaningless and not working for me because export geometry is rough for 3d visualizations and is not working for 2D at all./For more complex projects/ Maybe with very big and simple project is time saving.
6.It will be useful you make changes in working with complex geometry, morph and shell flexibility is wooden, awful and it needs improvements. As an architect, i want to have a program which allows me to hand model any form, make it architectonic, disintegrate it into parts and panels, make junctions and freeform beams in any direction, not only vertical and horizontal. And it needed to be done in Archicad, not making plugin that only complicates the workflow.

So conclusion for me so far is that Archicad needs to be more like Autocad in terms of 2D drawing and more like Rhino and grasshopper for complex projects.

It a lot to ask, but if you want to be the best architecture program, you have to consider these important aspects.

Anonymous
Not applicable
SO has there been a new thread or update on this archicad limitation?

It seems it's been 10+ years and counting.

Barry Kelly
Moderator
nrkeone wrote:
SO has there been a new thread or update on this archicad limitation?

It seems it's been 10+ years and counting.

No there has been no change in the situation.
I can imagine it would be almost impossible to implement properly.
You would somehow have to describe areas on your plan for the various heights.
These area could in theory be any shape and size.
I am not sure how you would implement it and I am pretty sure that would be the issue.

I would rather stick with the idea of joining multiple views on a layout.


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

Still looking?

Browse more topics

Back to forum

See latest solutions

Accepted solutions

Start a new discussion!