The Global Archicad Community

Stay informed. Get help. Share your knowledge.

Sections/Elevation/3D Document/Worksheets/Details etc., Annotations, Texts, Labeling, Autotext/Project Info, Layouting, Renovation Filters, Graphic Overrides, Revisions/Issues, Printing/Plotting, PDF, Mark-Up, etc.

Moderators: Karl Ottenstein, LaszloNagy, ejrolon, Barry Kelly, gkmethy

@Minh, a critical part of this is the cut plane needs to be just below the top morph surface, this is why I was wrongly expecting to see the cover fill on the top rather than the cut. It would also appear the material definition is critical to the appearance. I have attached my BM setting which may help.

As I said earlier, I was thinking if the cut plane is above the morph top surface then the surface cover fill would be visible on the top and where the morph is cut by the roof then the Building Material cut fill would be displayed.
Screenshot 2020-02-18 at 15.36.42.png

Now I get it! So it seems like with morph, it used the wrong cut fill when it is shown in Floor plan: either with Vectorial Hatching (when SEO is active), or with Building Material's own cut fill (in case of Section/Floor Plan Cut Plane).

The problem is that, you cannot set a cut fill for a morph, this fill depends only on Building Material's settings. I will ask our developers to see if this could be a potential bug (or feature :wink: )

I will announce the investigation's result once I have the conclusion from the developers. Thank you for your help!

Best regards,
Hi All,

I have received a confirmation from the developers. This is, in fact, a design decision. The Cut part made by the Roof is covered by Vectorial Hatching (or Cover Fill), not by material's Cut Fill. If you change the Cut Plane height, the stripes width will change. This behavior is more or less the same as the Roof's Cover Fill.

In short, this is not a defect. I hope this is understandable to you all!
Thank you very much!

I wish you a great week ahead!

Best regards,
It's ok, I won't shoot the messenger :lol: BUT how on earth is that remotely logical as a "design decision"?

So did the design team meeting go like this...

Dev1: A morph has been trimmed by the roof, the users think it isn't displayed correctly, how should we represent the cut surface on plan?

Dev2: We've discussed this before, we need to show the cover fill rather than the Morph's Building Material cut definition because this is the quirky thinking that makes Archicad different. If we show it as a cut that would be too much like a logical solution.

If I wanted to display the cover fill I would have redefined the morph to its trimmed shape & removed the "cut".

Sorry, I don't know what planet the Developers come from but I don't think it's Earth. :roll:

Let me ask the developer again. What you said is completely true, and is similar to what I thought, but I can understand their point also. I will get back to you once I have an explanation from them!

Best regards,

After some discussion, I came to the conclusion that this is a limitation of ARCHICAD, but also a design decision. While the representation of other elements shown in floor plan (for example: Roof) is mostly symbolic, Morph is 3D projected. Unfortunately, SEO's effect is hardly displayed correctly on the floorplan.

At the same time, the Morph is defined to be a monolithic element, therefore if you cut a morph, in 3D, the cover surface will be visible in the cut part. If this cut part is visible in the floor plan, the cover fill will be shown here, due to the nature of Floor Plan Display (Projected: shows cut part of the element’s 3D model, plus its uncut (downward) part).

In short, this issue is a limitation (SEO effect on floor plan display), and a design decision (Morph is monolithic) at the same time.

I hope this will be understandable! Let me know if there is any further question you would like to ask!

Have a nice day, and stay safe!

Best regards,