Control over Surface Merging

[Josh Verran]

I have searched the forums and found the below posts from a few years back (which are since locked).

https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Modeling/Intentionally-create-Lines-between-Elements-w-same-Surf...

 https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Modeling/How-to-disable-visual-merging-of-elements-Frame-houses/...

Wondering if there has been any development here that I have missed.

 In my current scenario, I have a series of walls drawn to represent Concrete Tilt Panels.

Working fine apart from in elevation we can't see the join.

Have tried the layer intersection value (0) but no change.

Reluctant to create more surfaces as affects take-offs etc (can fix with expressions if I had to).

Don't want to alter dimensions (0.1mm) due to quality control.

Any ideas?

[DGSketcher]

You can draw lines (no faces) with the Morph tool e.g. open boundary. The good news is you can create lines anywhere in 3D space, the bad news is the lines won't be associated with your panels, so best not used during model development. You can put the lines on their own layer.

If the panels are GDL generated, you can do a similar thing in the 3D script.

I think you have all the other options covered.

[Barry Kelly]

I am not sure if there is a 'niche' window object or similar in the default library that will allow you to create the joins.

But these days I would probably just use the opening tool.

The good thing about the opening tool is it can interact with more than one wall (can only be associated to one wall though), so if you have modelled separate wall panels and you want to centre the join on both panels, you can.

Barry.

[Lingwisyer]

If you are doing tiltup, I would be tempted to do Complex Columns matching your forms.

[Josh Verran]

So I might have gone down a bit of a rabbit hole here, but couldn't help myself.

It might be a tad overkill, but it has achieved what I need and I think I can reuse it on future projects.

It has limitations but I can live with that.

All the Walls have a unique Element ID. Regardless of what the ID is, it's going to end in a number between 0 and 9.
Assuming the walls are ID'd sequentially, that means that the walls alternate Odd/Even etc.

I created a property that takes the last right-most character (0-9), then used the IFS function to return "Odd" or "Even".

I'm lucky that the surface I have on the walls is just grey (RGB 220,220,220).
I then created a Graphic Override that overrides any walls with Property "Even" to RGB 220,220,220.

They now all look the same, but because technically one is a surface and one is an override, the joins show.

[Barry Kelly]

That should work so long as the Graphic Override is always active (or at least in every view that to need see the join).

You will need to add that rule to all of your GO combinations.

So long as you have an odd ID next to an even ID and you don't need to override the surfaces for any other reason you should be good.

Barry.

[DGSketcher]

Now that's an interesting solution. Although, I don't see how it is any better than assigning a duplicate surface using the GO if necessary. A duplicate surface then gives you the option on texture for 3D presentation. If you get in to difficulty with the Unique ID then perhaps being able to override the Property value manually might help, it depends on how many unique surfaces you are bringing together. In my work I frequently end up having to differentiate with 4 identical surfaces. 

[Josh Verran]

Good points thanks guys.
I misread the duplicate surface option.
I generally don't like the idea of duplicating surfaces due to the old "50m² of Sandstone Paint, and 10m² of Sandstone Paint - 2" effect on schedules.
But you're right, just overriding that surface through GOs keeps the data intact.

I really appreciate all the feedback and solutions.

[Laszlo Nagy]

If you duplicate Surfaces, there is an easy way to schedule them as the same Surface. Just create a new Property, which would have the same value for duplicated Surfaces. You could create an expression that would always cut off the " - 2" part of Surface Names, so the value of the Property would be "Sandstone Paint" for both the "Sandstone Paint" and "Sandstone Paint - 2" Surfaces. (This would require consistent naming of these duplicate Surfaces so the expression always gives the correct result.) Then, in the schedule, you would use that Property as a Schedule Field instead of the Surface Name and the duplicate Surfaces would be scheduled as the same since the value of the Property is the same for both.

Then you would not need to use the Graphic Override in those many Views.

[jl_lt]

If it just for visualization purposes i was going to suggest doing the joints with a very fine curtain wall. But this is much much better!