Specialized Foundation Tools: Footings, Piles, and...

Gerard Santos · ‎2026-01-24

It is time to stop using generic "Slabs" and "Beams" to model structural foundations. Archicad needs a dedicated Foundation Toolset for better IFC classification and geometric accuracy.

Key Requirements:

Dedicated Entities: Specific tools for Isolated Footings, Strip Foundations, Piles, and Grade Beams.
Dynamic Interaction: Foundations should interact with the DTM (Terrain) to automatically generate excavation pits or recognize the soil level.
Technical Parameters: Native fields for reinforcement ratios, soil bearing capacity, and "lean concrete" (blinding) offsets.
Clean Geometry: Better intersections between piles and caps without complex SEO (Solid Element Operations).

Why it matters: This would streamline the structural coordination and ensure that IFC exports are correctly mapped from the start without manual renaming.

runxel · ‎2026-01-24

Oh NO, absolutely not. ❌

That's the opposite of what we need in Archicad. I don't want more and more super specific tools.

I guess you're coming from Revit?

Instead the opposite is wanted: To make the existing tools as flexible as possible, to be able to create the geometry and their 2D as needed.

Gerard Santos · ‎2026-01-24

The argument that we should just make existing tools more 'flexible' ignores what BIM actually stands for. If the goal was simply to have flexible geometry and 2D representation, we would all be using Rhino. But BIM is about Information and Standardization.

Here is why 'flexible generic tools' are not enough for modern professional workflows:

Data Integrity vs. Workarounds: Using a 'Slab' to model a foundation is a workaround. It requires manual IFC re-classification and custom properties every single time. A dedicated tool ensures that the element carries the correct structural and analytical data out of the box.
Architectural Responsibility: In many regions, such as Spain, architects are also the structural engineers for their projects. We don't just 'draw' shapes; we design systems. We need tools that reflect that technical responsibility, not generic shapes that we have to 'label' as foundations.
Efficiency over 'Hacks': Using SEO (Solid Element Operations) or complex profiles to simulate a footing-site interaction is a waste of time. A dedicated tool with built-in logic for excavation and structural priority is what makes a software 'Pro'.

@runxel The 'more specific tools = bad' mindset is what keeps us stuck. Architects are taking on more technical roles than ever, and our tools should evolve to support that precision, not just give us 'flexible' bricks to build everything with.

To clarify: I’ve been using Archicad since version 20 and I have never used Revit. This isn’t a 'Revit user' request; it’s a request for technical maturity in BIM.

runxel · ‎2026-01-26

@Gerard Santos schrieb:
The 'more specific tools = bad' mindset is what keeps us stuck.

There is no evidence for this. Quite the contrary.

You have a very special need that I can not relate to at all. It would be better if we can keep things broad and usable for everybody.

Maybe you can sharpen your wish; in your AI generated text is no clue to what you actually need that is not currently possible.

What does "technical maturity" even mean here?

Gerard Santos · ‎2026-01-26

@runxel , I find it interesting that you label a request for architectural precision as 'special needs'. In a BIM-driven industry, Technical Maturity means moving from 'visual representation' to 'data-driven construction'.

If the current tools were enough, we wouldn't be spending hours creating complex workarounds. To answer your question about what is currently not possible or extremely inefficient:

Automated Excavation Volumes: Try calculating the exact soil displacement of 50 different isolated footings on a sloped DTM using only the 'Slab' tool and SEO. It’s a nightmare to manage and update. A dedicated tool would handle this natively.
Structural Analytical Members: A 'Slab' used as a footing doesn't always translate correctly to structural analysis software via SAF. A dedicated Foundation tool would ensure the 1D or 2D analytical member is correctly positioned from the start.
Attribute Management: Using 'Slabs' for everything forces us to over-complicate our Layer Combinations and Classification Mappings.

As for the 'AI-generated' comment: I used tools to ensure my English is clear and professional because this is a global forum. But the frustration and the technical requirements come from my daily experience in a professional studio in Spain, where we handle the full technical responsibility of the project.

Standardization isn't about making things 'less broad'; it’s about making them reliable. If you prefer generic boxes, that's fine, but don't hold back the evolution of Archicad for those of us who need to deliver high-precision BIM models.

Specialized Foundation Tools: Footings, Piles, and Grade Beams