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

Materials and intersection priority with meshes

Paul King
Mentor

Because site meshes are typically the most complex entities in an ArchiCAD project, by a very large margin (unless you live in Holland of course), SEO operations on them are quite expensive computationally, and successive operations rapidly slow regeneration of cross sections and elevations while editing, on even the fastest machines.

 

Bewilderingly, meshes STILL don't support materials priority intersections despite this fact, and despite the fact that every single project has foundations that need to cut into the site mesh. So this is not an edge case.

 

On sloping sites, foundations and siteworks are inherently very complex, and site meshes are inherently very complex even before SEOs are applied, meaning a project of any scale rapidly becomes unworkable, even on top end hardware, as the number of SEOs required keeps expanding to follow the progression of design & documentation processes. Hundreds of objects typically need to interact with the ground.

 

Highly embarrassing spending $10K on the best PC that money will buy, and half that again on (increasingly) the second-best BIM software that money will buy, to have even the normal requirements and complexities of depicting the actual construction of buildings on actual sites exceed the capabilities of the system, without time wasting and laborious manual workarounds. 

 

PLEASE give some serious love to meshes, as the highest priority. The current functionality is literally decades old, and is so limited that it is completely beyond justification.

 

Unless and until there is some way found to massively speed up SEO calculations, please at the very least enable materials priority for meshes

 

 

 

3 Comments
Patrick M
Mentor

yes! meshes should be able to:
-interact with slabs, walls, beams, columns and roofs w/ PBM intersections
-include renovation status for individual points/contours
-allow for contours and boundary line types to be different
-allow for individual contours pen and line types to be set unique from each other
-schedule for volume reduced (IE: inverse of conditional volume) for quick excavation and back fill calculations through expressions
-have a poly-reduction option (similar to morphs); so that if tracing a survey by an overly zealous drafter (IE contour points at 1/2" increments), we do not need to run it through a third party application like rhino or illustrator to get a usable polygon count

Paul King
Mentor

Good list.!

I would add to this

  • Support for vertical and concave faces, without SEO
  • Ability to switch off display of mesh edges in plan and section (so only contours lines are showing - edge lines of meshes showing in plan otherwise imply some sort of construction or change of surface or boundary, when in reality they just correspond to where the surveyor's data ended) 
  • Separate line styles for edges vs contours
  • ability to switch off contour / ridge lines in section/elevations views
  • composite mesh surfaces to distinguish between layers of different soil types and paving etc, all following same site contours

 

Ricardo Heim
Enthusiast

And I think the ability you pointed @Paul King, to switch off the lines should be in MVO

Status
Open

with 6/200 Votes 33.333333333333%

Wish details