The Global ARCHICAD Community

Stay informed. Get help. Share your knowledge.

Modeling (Wall, Door, Window, Roof, Stair...), Favorites...

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

What's your opinion about this wish?

Essential (5)
Important (4)
Average (3)
Not important (2)
Not needed (1)
They way ArchiCAD works now is great, so don't get me wrong. I just think it could be done better.

Why do you need slabs, walls, beams,etc?? Why even the names?

How many times have you used a wall to construct a beam? A slab to construct a roof? A roof to construct a ramp... and so on. Well I have tons of times. And I bet many of you too. Just because sometimes we need different display options (fill in beam), etc.

So my question is - why do we use those names? Why don;t the ArchiCAD people just create ELEMENTS, like: surface-based (slab), profile based (wall), bent surface based (roof) etc, and give it all of the display options and just let THE USER decide what and how he wants to construct. That would blow up the possibilities so much. Basically with just a few basic construction elements that behave in a certain and different way you can achieve all.

Just my thoughts. I think we are slaves to schemes (house=walls, slabs and roofs), and that's not very imaginative.

A computer program is not real world, and a brick is not a brick. It's a code. I think the programmers of ArchiCAD kinda forgot that.
I thought about this too and asked myself the same question. I guess the main reason not to do so is the performance speed. One element has to cover all imaginable cases for display etc. and from all cases, finally choosen is only “one” for display.
The idea seems fantastic, but in real life you have the same problem. Try to eat soup by using a fork. Yes there are tools available for camping with a spoon at the one side and a for at the other one, but if you have soup with spaghetti (only an imagination) you always have to rotate your tool, this takes time and if you did not clean up the tool properly with your lips, your fingers will looks like ...
Isn’t it?
Your idea is not without merit, but also not original as it has been suggested before. If AC was a new start up then this may be an immediate route for development but it has a very long legacy and you can't just turn around to your client base and say all your old drawings are useless and we completely changed the interface so you have to work different. AC is evolving quite nicely as technology advances; so in a few years your wish may be forthcoming, but for now don't assume the very talented programmers at Graphisoft don't know what they are doing.
I had the same ideea and its amazing that i am not the only one. Since this is BIM and everything can be changed, we are only working with reference geometries. There should be a way to convert abstract geometry to BIM elements either in Archicad or with the new Rhino Grasshopper connection.