The Global ARCHICAD Community

Stay informed. Get help. Share your knowledge.

Any 2D tool what you need for drafting.

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

By frankyvero
#283146
Like the option for objects, need an option for walls to turn off 3d. I can think of a number of reasons for this but one is foundation plans. You don't want 3d, you don't want to mess around with fill. When the size changes, it is just one click. If it is fill, or lines it takes a lot more time.
User avatar
By LaszloNagy
#283212
I will not ask why you want to do this or say that your should model your walls and whole Project, for that matter.

The closest thing you can do to achieve this is to select the Wall and use the Explode command. The 3D of the Wall will be gone, and its 2D symbol will be exploded into Lines and Fills.
User avatar
By Barry Kelly
#283246
If you are not modelling the 3D, then just use the walls in plan anyway and don't worry about the height.
Or set them all as zero height walls.
Then you will still have all the benefits of trimming and stretching in plan.

Barry.
By frankyvero
#284948
Barry- I would, but, setting a wall to 0 still is visible in model and still messes with other wall intersections, I do not do everything in 2d. I do everything hybrid. I don't want 2d items such as footings to show on 3d and I don't like to spend time modeling everything. Draw in 2d and it is guaranteed to be in that place only. Model in 3d and is guaranteed you have to go hunting for what was screwed up by what you did.
User avatar
By ejrolon
#284966
If you don't want them to intersect or interact with other objects then you change the Intersection Number for the layer those walls reside in.
By frankyvero
#284968
I know all the workarounds, this is a wish list because we are after less.
User avatar
By ejrolon
#284969
I know all the workarounds, this is a wish list because we are after less.
Very well but I am not part of the "We needing less" so I don't consider it as something "needed".
By frankyvero
#284970
I should have been rephrased that, because what someone might consider a workaround others would consider it there standard workflow. So I guess I am wrong on needing less workarounds, maybe just less that don't make sense to ME :lol:
User avatar
By ejrolon
#284971
And rephrasing the rephrase the correct procedure for avoiding items interacting with others is to have them in Layers with different priority numbers. Which means that this is not a work around. :wink:
By frankyvero
#284973
True. Until you change layer sets. Then you start the wheels turning, just for a simple task. Who's on first, what's on 2nd.