Wishlist
Post your wishes about Graphisoft products: Archicad, BIMx, BIMcloud, and DDScad.
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

As it says in the Subject:

The Geolocation works only in the workspace, and the data gets lost in the layout.

For the CDE applications and similar workflows, it is necessary that the issued drawing - titleblock and all, therefore Layout - is geolocated.

Just for reference https://www.buildingsmart.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/User-Guide-for-Geo-referencing-in-IFC-v2.0....

I understand that this is likely a technically challenging request and that it may have been suggested before. However, I couldn't find it mentioned in this forum, so I am posting it here.

 

Feature Request:
The desired functionality is the ability to use multiple Floor Plan Cut Planes (FPCPs) within a single story. This would be particularly useful when working with projects that involve several building masses at different heights but require all of them to be displayed on the same layout.

 

Current Workflow:
At present, achieving this involves creating several views with different FPCP settings, each adapted to a specific height. These views then need to be combined manually on a layout to achieve the desired representation. This process can be time-consuming and error-prone.

 

Proposed Improvement:
It would be highly beneficial if Archicad could allow for the use of multiple FPCPs in a single view. This would streamline workflows, especially in projects with varied building heights, and would enhance the software’s flexibility in managing complex building representations.

 

Thank you for considering this suggestion.

Problem: Each Elevation and Interior Elevation view must be manually named "North", "South", "East" and "West".

 

Proposed Solution: After setting project north, elevation/interior elevation views automatically be named according to the directions, perhaps with the option to add a prefix or suffix like "Living Room North". This could be overridden for non-orthogonal elevations or fully custom names, but it would be an option/starting point.

Simple one from me this time I promise!

 

Do you know how CTRL+Up/Down means you can easily move through Stories?

 

Let's do the same thing for Elevation Sets, you could even change it up and do CTRL+Left/Right if you wanted to be cool!

I mean there are cameras too, but hey, if they can't do it...

After 20 years full time of Archicad and only 1 Year equivalent full time of Rhino. I'm well in the position to make this call.

 

Prove me wrong by adding these sick as Rhino features:

1. Type command bar

2. Re-Do Command by Enter

3. Gumball to move objects in 3D

4. Snap Points in 3D

5. 3D Polylines

6. Multiple viewports for elevations on one screen

7. Optimized High Poly projects

8. Better FBX Import 

 

That's my lazy attempt and all I can think of at the moment.

I would like to have the possibility to read (and hopefully modify) saved view orientation and zoom settings directly in the view settings window.

 

The problem is that if you save a view with rotated orientation but check Ignore zoom and rotation when opening this view you have no option to retrieve that information other than unchecking that box and opening the view or finding out that your view is rotated on a Layout. It can become really annoying to be honest.

 

Below is a quick mockup of how I imagine it being implemented (maybe we could even edit it from that point).

 

LucaP_0-1727954369022.png

 

 

ArchiCAD to ArchiCAD merge options.
We really need the option to merge details and worksheets, not only the virtual building and the layout book*, which have been our options the past 10 years or probably more.

As an alternative the merge option of views and related settings (layer combo**, model view combo**, reno filters**, graphic override rules and combos** etc.) would be an awesome feature. (And please add a scripted log of created items that I can later go through and overview, clean up etc.)

 

Here are some typical reasons why this is very important for us:

1. We have projects with hundreds of details and several dozen worksheets placed on layouts. We prefer to have projects where everything is contained within that project and try to avoid external drawing references. This means that we spend a lot of time creating details in other projects, setting up the view, copying the content from the other file and then place it on a layout.

 

2. Our template file contains hundreds of details and worksheets. Every now and then it would be great to start fresh with a new ArchiCAD version, but we can't because we would need to manually create and copy paste several hundred details. That takes weeks.

 

3. When choosing which project is the host (the basis of the future project file), we have to go with the file that has the closest content detail-wise. That is a tough compromise, because that file might not have the floor plan, section and the other model-based views in the file. We can import the model and the layout book, but have to manually create every single view and redirect in the drawing manager. This can also amount to days, weeks of work. So this is where the import view (+ related combos) would be very useful.

 

* the layout book merge is literally the layout book. the placed drawings will all be external references, views are not imported as internal views.

** most of these can be imported with either attribute manager or separate export/import features, but it would be great if this import process was automatic with importing a view - but that is the lesser issue. the larger problem is that views can't be imported.

While setting the colour of the cut elements section in BIMx is a great feature, for clarity and checks on site - where BIMx is supposed to be used the most - or with the subcontractors, or anyone else not using Archicad, it is ESSENTIAL that the cut elements show with the Building Material fills.

This is especially important in composite elements with air spaces

Archicad 3D Section.jpg

BIMx Section.jpg

  

Something I come across every so often is that you can't mirror a placed linked PDFs or DWGs.

I usually want this when I place a linked PDF or DWG into a worksheet or detail and I want to mirror to suit that arrangement I am working on.

 

My current workflow is to mirror the PDF in photoshop and reload that in which is just time-consuming, or explode the DWG, but this is a annoyance it I risk bringing in additional attributes.

 

It would be a very helpful little additional feature and could work well with some of the recent upgrade to linking multi-page PDFs recently introduced.

 

The performance of section and elevation views is extremely bad (slow), especially with shadows turned on and ('many') objects used.

It should match the performance of the floorplan display or the 3D window.

Especially the very slow update of these views on layouts kills all submission deadlines.

More styles / graphic variants, such as those in Rhino 3D window control (ghosted, x-ray, technical, Artistic, Pen, Arctic, etc.).

Different Transparencies in 3D views and sections/elevations based on building materials (or surfaces). Not just on / off.

Especially in non-shaded modes.

The option for transparency override of defined elements.

When there are a lot of views in the View Map, it would be nice if ArchiCAD somehow marked views that are inserted somewhere on sheets or simply intended for publication as views.
Thanks to this, a user cleaning the View Map would not accidentally delete such a view.
All you need is a small symbol next to the view, for example a gray Layout icon in front of the View, or a gray paperclip icon, or something else...:

view publication marker.png

I feel like I'm missing something here, but when you perform a solid operation (for example: cut a flat area out of a sloping site mesh) you can see that affect in all views except plan views.

 

My wish would be to have the ability to show all object accurately in plan, which would include there current shape, not their shape prior to being operated on

 

"plan view is an orthographic projection of a 3-dimensional object from the position of a horizontal plane through the object. In other words, a plan is a section viewed from the top. In such views, the portion of the object above the plane is omitted to reveal what lies beyond. In the case of a floor plan, the roof and upper part of the walls may be left out. Basically, a plan view is just another name for the top view of a 3D object".

 

3D View3D ViewElevationElevationPlanPlanSectionSection

Anonymous
My wish is for point clouds to be visible in drawing layouts, so that they may be used as base as-built drawings without having to take the effort to approximate what's there by modeling the as-built condition in BIM, painstakingly traced over the point cloud. On a renovation job, it would be more accurate, and less work, to just show the existing-to-remain point cloud on the drawing, along with cuts of any modified or added portions, which would be modeled in BIM. Breaking up the point cloud into regions and removing points to be demolished could happen in Recap or some other point-cloud-specific software. It would be ideal if we could follow the workflow described in this link for our renovation jobs, but in Archicad instead of Revit:

https://www.autodesk.com/autodesk-university/class/Reducing-Waste-Through-Reality-Capture-Utilizing-...

There is an existing work-around for Archicad, detailed in a video from 2015 or 2016, but it results in a not-to-scale, low-res raster image on the drawing sheet and would not allow this workflow. For this to work, point clouds need to show up in plan, section, and elevation layouts on sheets. Their visibility/characteristics should be adjustable (e.g. apparent point size, whether the point color is based on intensity, RGB, etc), so that points visually become lines.

If most of the scanned elements are to remain, it seems a waste to model them, as the existing condition has already been described by the point cloud, in a much more accurate and detailed way than tracing over the point cloud could do. The same goes for portions or components of a building to be demolished. If the purpose of modeling something to be demolished is only so it shows up in a demo drawing, wouldn't it be better to just put a hatch over that portion of the point cloud and have that show up in the drawing?