Jump to content

floor object edges


ptarmigan

Recommended Posts

If you extrude the floor geometry to the desired floor depth instead of AEC>create floor, the edges of the floor extrude will also render the texture. Although it is probably more realistic to have the floor surface render a texture and apply a simple color to the overall floor to represent the edge treatment for many flooring types.

Link to comment
  • 2 months later...

If you extrude a polygon instead of using the floor option you are not able to have the edges of the floor (extrusion) as dashes.

Is there no way to have all surfaces of a floor to show as a texure? Or top as one texure and sides as another?

Link to comment

The best solution would be for NNA to make it so that floors, like walls, can have textures independently assigned to their tops, edges, and bottoms. Particularly in residential construction where there is rarely a suspended ceiling and it would be nice if a single floor slab (instead of a floor slab and an extruded ceiling polygon) could be used as both floor and ceiling. Those are my thoughts...

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

While the idea of a Floor object being used as a general "marzipan" representation of a floor/ceiling assembly between floors is common, it isn't a good "virtual reality". We all know, in fact, they are really two different systems/surfaces with entirely different characteristics that are held together/apart with an entirely different structural system. If one were to more accurately model reality, one would create a floor object for the structural floor sheathing above, another floor object for the finish floor material above, framing for holding up the floor and a separate extrude or floor object for the ceiling below, directly adjacent to the framing. On the sides of the entire assembly, you would create a wall type that was exterior wall sheathing and exterior wall finish only, drawn directly adjacent to the framing extents (in plan) and directly above the corresponding wall components of the walls above/below.

For the interior surfaces, you would have a wall type of just gyp bd sheathing that wraps the edges of the extents of the exposed edges of a floor slab.

Edited by Jeffrey W Ouellette
Link to comment

Jeffrey

We know that the floor can be modelled as you suggest - we could also model the nails, screws, wires and recessed light fittings if you want to be truly pedantic.

The point is, what we users are asking is why can't the floor have textures applied to each face as with other objects? Why can't we apply the texture directly to the edge instead of having to construct a special wall as you suggest? It would be faster, and for 99% of projects, would be all that is needed.

Link to comment

Horses for courses.

At the Design stage, when the design is still fairly fluid. the need is to model the floor quickly and easily. This is where having the ability to have separate finishes (colours or textures) for the top, bottom and sides of floors would be a big advantage. Ceilings are usually white, whereas floors rarely are. The sides of floors are visible at stair wells and the like.

Modeling the exact construction during the working drawing phase, when the design is hopefully fairly static, may have some merit. Many times though the effort is not worth it even then. Better to draw over the top in the Sheet Layer Section Viewport, or to draw the section from scratch.

Link to comment

Mike,

That assumes drawings are the ultimate output. While, practically and legally, drawings are the standard output now, models are becoming increasingly important and used. The predominant scenario of the future of BIM eliminates paper CDs as we know them today. Any "drawings" will merely be purpose-driven snapshots of the model at any given time. That will require that models, even at early stages, be more "considered", not necessarily more detailed/complete, but at least conscious of the potential for detailed development and completion.

I can see, in my own future of architectural practice, the opportunity of projects being conceived and completed WITHOUT 24x36 sets of "blueprints". Instead, an intelligent model will be the basis for all design, permit/review, cost and construction processes. It is starting to happen now.

Link to comment

Pat,

I think "composite floors" are a viable concept. I know ArchiCAD uses them. I would like to see the ability in VW, too. While it would help the "marzipan" model, I don't know what value it may have in a more detailed BIM process.

Walls have similar shortcomings. How? When a BIM-cpcable contractor needs a BIM for a project, more often than not, the architect's model is NOT useful, because it is not detailed enough. While the architect has enough information to show a virtual design intent, the contractor needs to show virtual construction, directly reflecting reality (though maybe leaving out all the nails and screws, eh David?). So while two points a thickness parameter and a height parameter may be enough implicit representation for the architect, the contractor needs to be more explicit, showing framing, the "stuff"/services in the wall, the sheathing of the wall and the connection relationships between the wall and the horizontal surfaces above and below.

Ideally, the BIM would be able to be "transformed" as it moved along in the process from architect to contractor, without the contractor having to rebuild a new, highly-detailed model from scratch. This requires apps to do things that they don't do yet...

Link to comment

David,

I don't have a problem with the request, I'd like it too. I have no problem with the "marzipan" method, but I often see it implemented incorrectly.

What I am trying to get across is that modeling (at any phase) requires a lot more (fore)thought.

Simply adding the capability of doesn't "fix" the issue, but I think highlights existing and future workflow, data structure and representation issues.

Link to comment
Mike,

That assumes drawings are the ultimate output.

Maybe someday more projects will be digital, but in my neck of the woods I would guess that about a third of all building projects are drawn by hand or don't have any substantial drawings at all.

There certainly isn't a local builder who is going want a BIM in lieu of blueprints.

If I want to check out the paperless construction future, I'll send my personal robot in the flying car to check it out...once he gets back from vacationing on the moon.

Right now I'm buried in paperwork.

Link to comment

the free "slab object" by patrick higgins does exactly

what you want.

can be classed separately for 2d view + 3d top sides +

bottom, height + thickness of the slab + even rotation

of the texture for the sides.

fine tool!

get it at vectordepot

http://www.vectordepot.com/Plugins1.shtml

makes you wonder why NNA don't make it themselves,

but i suppose they've got jeffrey making fabulous

obfuscations and heath-robinson extrapolations.

i do love david w's idea of virtual screws, you could

fix the cladding to the side of the floor slab, except

we use a lot of plastered concrete, so can we have a

'plastered ceiling + edge of the slab tool' for VW 2080?

ok, i'll stop now, we have nonsense like jeffrey's every

day from our politicians + i get carried away...

have fun

Link to comment

Gideon

Brilliant! I've downloaded it, works like a charm.

Exactly what we were asking for earlier, congratulations, Patrick!

It'll do me until Jeffrey's brave new world sweeps all before it.

The cool thing is I can render the edges to match the exterior wall render, so I don't have to fiddle around with keeping the slab edge back from the outer face, it can be its full size, but will blend in Final Render.

Edited by D Wood
Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

That slab tool is perfect.

At the moment you can draw a polygon (or any 2D shape) then go AEC > FLOOR and it turns the 2D object in to a floor.

Is it possible for someone to make a ?plugin? so this can be done for the slab tool also?

I have no programing skills at all, so dont know if this can be easily done.

Link to comment

Ditto what Brudgers said -- and furthermore, construction documents, particularly for projects that aren't high-budget and high-end, and therefore not detailed to the teeth, are drawn quite abstractly, with the assumption that a competent contractor is quite familiar with standard building practices and codes. While that's not ideal, it is the reality we work in day to day. Getting the right level of detail (or lack thereof) onto a piece of paper in the easiest and most legible form is essential...

Link to comment

I also agree with Brudger's POV. It is up to me, my client and builder to settle on what constitutes a working planset. If someone's software tools don't help in this regard, one is likely to consider alternatives . If I can spend less time using tools that force me to do work-arounds I might HAVE time to layer on more information ala BIM.

Don't put the cart in front of the horse, of course.

The real battle for ground in the coming years will be with CADware that moves toward simplicity* rather than complexity.

*See Sketchup

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...