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

Opening Tool as Standard Wall Penetration Tool

Lingwisyer
Virtuoso
Hi all,

Wouldn't it be nice if doors, windows and curtain walls all lived within the Opening Tool?


If you want to use the Curtain Wall Tool to create a custom window, it will automatically cut the bounding wall by the defined boundary.

If you want to demolish a window while retaining the penetration, the opening would be retained as existing.

If you want to change your floor to ceiling window into a sliding door, there's no need to delete and change tool.



Ling.
AC18-23 AUS 7000
Self-taught, bend it till it breaks.
Win10 | E5620 x 2 | 24GB | K2200
11 REPLIES 11

runxel
Mentor
Thanks for making a wish out of my post , Ling!
AC 24 [ger] | Win 10 | Developer of the GDL plugin for Sublime Text |
«Furthermore, I consider that Carth... yearly releases must be destroyed»

DGSketcher
Virtuoso
I have always thought that the structural opening should just that and the contents of the opening should be something that can be freely changed. As with real life you could then build up the opening with a wall or as suggested swap doors & windows or even remove the contents and just add a decorative lining for a change to open plan.
Apple iMac macOS Big Sur / AC24UKI (most recent builds)

Lingwisyer
Virtuoso
Was reminded of it when Lazlo mentioned having to manually make a wall opening for a curtain wall.
AC18-23 AUS 7000
Self-taught, bend it till it breaks.
Win10 | E5620 x 2 | 24GB | K2200

Anonymous
Not applicable
This is a very important wish. I voted useful.
And while we are here: What about Reveal options be part of Openings, and only Trims remain within Windows?

DGSketcher
Virtuoso
Braza wrote:
This is a very important wish. I voted useful.
And while we are here: What about Reveal options be part of Openings, and only Trims remain within Windows?
Personally I think adding anything to an opening should be non-structural and treated as an associated but separate element. I don't have a problem with hiding the exposed ends of composite skins as a quick drawing clean up, but adding a lining thickness is just a lazy solution for something that probably needs independently scheduled in the project. The more difficult area is adding heads e.g. lintels and sills which can be frequently separate from a window but still associated with an opening, is that what you meant by Reveal Options?
Apple iMac macOS Big Sur / AC24UKI (most recent builds)

Anonymous
Not applicable
DGSketcher wrote:
... is that what you meant by Reveal Options?
Exactly. Leave the masonry as part of an opening and the joinery/carpentry on the window/door part.

Anonymous
Not applicable
Or perhaps, (as Ling proposal to Window/Door) add the ability to "Attach" beams and columns to opening edges (with CP's that model sills, lintels, etc), .
This way we could schedule/quantify every piece of BM on an opening.

Lingwisyer
Virtuoso
See this wish in regards to CP sills and jambs.
AC18-23 AUS 7000
Self-taught, bend it till it breaks.
Win10 | E5620 x 2 | 24GB | K2200

Anonymous
Not applicable
Thanks Ling.
Yes. Red's proposal/wish is a good start.
Openings could be the core where a Window/Door and individual CP's (That could be Sills, Jambs, Headers) for each opening edge. And all could be scheduled.
Anyway... It would be nice to have Kristian's opinion on this, as he is doing a remarkable job with Infinite Openings.
He also recently mentioned that he is working on making Infinite Openings Free.

Currently we notice there are a lot of problems with quality of life features from ArchiCAD which are considered 'bad' BIM by contractors.

For example windowsills, lintels etc are very easily added as option from windows/doors, but are required to be specified as a different entity in our IFC exports, so we've resorted to drawings these seperately for projects that require this. We feel like we are dumbing down the model.

Anything that would allow us to specify more parts individually as with curtain wall, stair and railings would help. Just keep the ease of drafting there. No placing of opening and then populating the opening in a 2nd action please!
Erwin Edel, Project Lead, Leloup Architecten
www.leloup.nl

ArchiCAD 9-24 NED FULL
Windows 10 Pro
Adobe Design Premium CS5

runxel
Mentor
Erwin wrote:
Currently we notice there are a lot of problems with quality of life features from ArchiCAD which are considered 'bad' BIM by contractors.

For example windowsills, lintels etc are very easily added as option from windows/doors, but are required to be specified as a different entity in our IFC exports, so we've resorted to drawings these seperately for projects that require this. We feel like we are dumbing down the model.

Anything that would allow us to specify more parts individually as with curtain wall, stair and railings would help. Just keep the ease of drafting there. No placing of opening and then populating the opening in a 2nd action please!
I can understand the resentment against 2-action workflows. I, actually, have them, too!
I'd say if you place a window/door, that the opening has to be placed in the same moment. So just like before.

But again: The opening itself is something totally different to the thing that piggybacks the opening.
See, I do a lot of reno and it will only get more, since building totally new houses will be a thing of the past soon (in cities at least). So often enough I will only swap the door itself.... but Reno doesn't know what that means, thus resulting in having a false model (when displaying what to demolish).

To be honest I was expecting the system you described to happen in version 24 already. The path is quite clear: The CW, the railings, the beams and columns, etc. made it obvious that parent-child systems are the way forward in Archicad. And it works astonishingly good.

Details of implementation aside: The current way of dealing with doors/windows is heavily outdated and something need to be done about this. Rather sooner than later.
AC 24 [ger] | Win 10 | Developer of the GDL plugin for Sublime Text |
«Furthermore, I consider that Carth... yearly releases must be destroyed»

Still looking?

Browse more topics

Back to forum

See latest solutions

Accepted solutions

Start a new discussion!