Round wall w/door object

[jfmarch]

I have inserted a door object into a round wall. The door is a double swing french and the wall has a large radius. When first inserted, the door was offest so much that it appeared not in the wall. When is entered a offset dimension, the door is centered in the wall but now there are jamb lines that stick beyond the wall edge to one side only. Any suggestions on how to correct visual problem? Thanks.

[islandmon]

You shall need to segment the radius into min. 3 parts:

1 curved leftside, 1 straight segment for door insertion, and 1 curved on the rightside

[jfmarch]

sounds like door objects don't get along with round walls then...

[D Wood]

Well, they don't in real life either.

I would try to set the door up and adjust offsets and frame dimensions so that it most closely resembles how you are going to detail it and how it is going to be built.

If that doesn't work, you may have to resort to 2D drawing in plan & elevation, but I have to say that in my experience, if you have trouble drawing something, it is probably unbuildable as well.

[P Retondo]

if you have trouble drawing something, it is probably unbuildable as well.

Try telling that to Frank Gehry or Jorn Utzon. Following that logic, some of the most innovative architecture of the century would never have been tried.

[islandmon]

One way to insert objects into round & tilted walls is to first punch-out the opening using subtract solids and then insert the window or door into the cavity.

[jfmarch]

I did the first suggestion, using curved-straight-curved sections- and it worked. It is just a curious thing to me that a door will not work in a curved wall...

As for the drawing comment, if that were the case, much architecture would never be built. Having trouble drawing things is a challenge that is always good, if you have the right approach. What should not be the case is your software limiting you in drawing challenging things...

[D Wood]

Pete & Jim

The point I was trying to make, obviously badly, was that if it is difficult to draw, it is probably going to be difficult to build, and the program is indicating that . The danger is that just finding a work around in VW only postpones the problem to the building phase, where you will be confronted by a builder who wants to know how to build it and an owner who wants to know who is going to pay the extra. Better to work out how to detail it first, then you have a way to draw it and build it.

How is the door to be made? Is it going to have curved sill, leaves (glass?) and head, or is it going to an have extra wide head and sill? If the latter, is it OK if the jambs project outside or the sill projects inside? How will the door be weathered? How do the wall claddings and linings meet the frame? Once those kinds of things are decided, then it's time to look at how to draw it.

I am not advocating limiting anyone's imagination, quite the contrary, I am saying that the program (any program) is limiting in itself, and may also seduce you into thinking that because you have found a way to draw something, it's all plain sailing from there on. I try to concentrate on the actual building process and not the virtual drawing program because once you have solved the building details, you may well have solved the drawing problem.

[jfmarch]

While your approach is a novel one, and might be useful for you, I have never heard of this concept in the world of architecture before. Even in the days of had drafting (I remember fondly, but don't miss it much), I don;t think I ever heard the excuse that if you could not draw it, therefore, it could not be built.

In this particular case, I have drawn, detailed, and overseen straight doors built in curved walls. It's not rocket science, as long as the radius is large enough to handle (no pun intended) the door width.

While I appreciate the capabilities, and limitations, of any software, as well as VW, I do not need the have it tell me what things can or cannot be built. I leave that up to the experience of the designer.

Again, all I was pointing out is that there seems to be a problem with inserting a door object into a round wall...

[islandmon]

Both sides of this argument have equal merit:

If it's constructible using a consistent fractal scale then it must be programmable using the same fractal scale.

Arc segmentation is a perfect example of the fractal scale problem. The ideal arc chord segment is equal to the length of the door jamb width segment.

The required thickness of the wall is then a function applied to the inner radius based on the arc angle of the outer most door jamb segment.

[P Retondo]

David, your point is an interesting one, but I think there is a danger in equating the digital design process with the construction process. The thing we want to watch out for is how a CAD program can make our design work unnecessarily formulaic, by making it easy to depict certain solutions over others. By the same token, just because I can easily show you a shape in VW generated from a complex NURBS object doesn't make it easy to build!

[islandmon]

It's often 'easier' to construct complex curved surfaces by bending & folding the actual material than to model the shapes in CAD.

Origami paper folding problems offer an example ... take a piece of paper and contort it into a folded shape... easy...try to model that shape in CAD ... difficult.

Finally, write a vectorscript with a manual describing the process ; )

Scale is important ... it's easier to model large folded steel sheets mathematically to form the hull of a ship than to

physically bend those steel pieces to fit perfectly onto the ribs.