Lösung für verpringende Rohbaukanten unten und oben

Schlagworte:
  • Versprung
  • Geschossdecke
  • Architekturbauteile
  • Raum
  • Wand
  • Stütze
  • Unterzug
  • Unterdecke
  • Fussbodenaufbau

Hallo Leute,

dieser Beitrag thematisiert ein wiederkehrendes Problem der Modellierung von Geschossbauteilen (Wände, Stütze, Unterzüge und Räume) bei verspringenden Ober- oder/und Unterkanten der Geschossdecken/Fundamentplatten.

Das Problem könnte selbst unter Verwendung des Ebenemodells sehr einfach zu lösen sein:

Die Bauteile des Geschosses (Wände, Stützen, Unterzüge und Räume) befinden sich auch einem Teilbild
mit den entstpr. Ebenen. Drunter und drüber gibt es ein Teilbild mit den nächsten horizontal begrenzenden Bauteilen, also Fundamentplatten oder Geschossdecken.

Was wäre denn, wenn diese horizontalen Bauteile automatisch an ihrer Unterseite und ihrer Oberseite eine entspr. Bezugsebene generieren würden, und diese dann an die jeweilige Standard-Ebene "angehängt" würde.

Dann bräuchte man die Arbeitsweise nicht verändern, Wände, Stützen udn Unterzüge würden automatisch die richtige Ober- und Unterkante erhalten.

Für Räume braucht man (auch ohne die o.g. automatischen Ebenen) eine Lösung für Fussboden und Decke, wenn die jeweiligen Rohbauebenen unten und/ode oben verspringen. In der Regel soll der Fussbodenaufbau diese Versprünge an der Oberseite nicht "mitmachen", und auch die Unterdecke soll eine durchgehende Unterseite haben.

Auch dafür gäbe es eine einfache zu implementierende Lösung: Eine Füllschicht in den Ausbauschichten.
Diese würde nicht über eine Dicke definiert, sondern über eine Höhe für OK oder UK.
Bei der Unterhagdecke wäre die Füllschicht = Installationsraum, beim Fussboden würde man dazu "Schüttung" oder "Auffüllung" sagen.
Die genaue implementierung habe ich im beiligenden PDF Filler_layers.pdf beschrieben.

Für den Raum (und auch alle anderen Architektur-Bauteile) bräuchte man noch 4 weitere Attribute: tiefste Unterkante, höchste Unterkante, tiefste Oberkante und höchste Oberkante.
Damit liesse sich die kleinste und größe Höhe des Raums/Bauteils berechnen.
Bei Räumen wäre hier die lichte Raumhöhe = tiefste Oberkante - höchste Unterkante interessant.

Das war's.
Durch 3 einfach zu implementierende Erweiterungen könnte man das Handling von verspringenden Rohbau-Ebenen schnell und elegant mit dem vorhandenen Ebenen-Modell lösen. Sowohl für die Geschossbauteile als auch für die Räume und Ausbauelemente.

@Allplan
Ich habe diese Vorschläge bereits vor 2 Jahren Herrn Mikus und Herrn Steinhart geschickt.
Passiert ist nichts. Nicht mal eine Prüfung bzw. Einschätzung der Machbarkeit.
Vielleicht solltet ihr jetzt mal drüber nachdenken...

Anhänge (2)

Typ: image/png
246-mal heruntergeladen
Größe: 202,08 KiB
Typ: application/pdf
595-mal heruntergeladen
Größe: 327,54 KiB

Hilfreichste Antwort anzeigen Hilfreichste Antwort verbergen

Hi!

Patience is something that all ALLPLAN Users quite are used to. Saying that, on the other hand, there are moments when we lack patience.

For me all the excuses are some kind of ridiculous right now. Why? Simply because we hear it all the time for years now. You have just posted a few of them ...

Let's not be defeatist, choosing which improvements to develop first can't be easy, but I think everyone tries to do their best.
or
Allplan cannot react immediately.

We desperately need to see action!

The outcome is still the very same. With every new version we get newly designed functions that are just not finished. This status remains unchanged for years. We argue in this forum and (as for me) I argue on other channels as well. With no reaction. We offer help and support or even solutions (Jörg's work)!

It is time for a profound change in tactics. With all the development going on in and around the huge Nemetschek-Group, I think that all ALLPLAN Useres are obliged to some kind of reaction from the decision makers. But we don't get it! For years now ... and most likely for years to come ...

I do respect your opinion Betrand, but I must stress that my patience for the ALLPLAN development department is actually long gone. I write from the bottom of my heart in this forum, trying to be exact, objective, patient, understanding and polite but demanding and definite. With no reaction what so ever! I cannnot hear all the excuses any longer, any more. I am sorry!

For more than 20 years, I am an enthusiastic user, ready to help anyone with the software whenever necessary. Honestly, I must be able to expect the same behaviour from ALLPLAN. They are a by all means a service company!

However, if my collegue / forum user wants to know something about dimensions lines and my answer is about slabs - that actually symbolises the way most of the ALLPLAN Users must feel in terms of improvements. We ask for one specific topic and the get some completely contrary stuff.

With all the respect I can still manage to put up: It's a NO-GO !

Assuming that I am not the only long serving user of the programm that thinks that way, On monday I will point out to my team leader to skip all of our 13 licence as soon as possible. I will get in touch with my local dealer to find out a way to do just that. I am tired of it.
Let me get this right, I am not solely leaving because of the programm, I am leaving because of the way I am treated as a long paying customer.

I was polite in asking for answers here in this very forum in various posts.
Guess what!
You are right!
I did not get a single answer from any one.
What I did get were answers from collegues in austria, germany that I hit it right on the head. That is a poor reference for a self declared - industry leadinding company.

Summary:
Dear Bertrand, I appreciate your asking for further patience and accaptance for the developemnet of ALLPLAN, but I can't stand it any longer.
Without the input of Jörg and his ongoing commitment to help and improve the software (mostly without costs for the ordinary users) ALLPLAN would not even be as good as it is today!

The world of construction has taken a few turns in the last decade that ALLPLAN did not take at the same time. They are behind any necessary essential upgrades to the software. They have - sad but true - reached a point where the software in all its complexity and internal construction is no longer capeable of dealing with the needs of our daily work in the year 2023. I will not quote any of the shortcomings, because I have to accapt that this will not at all change any behaviour (or even the reaction) of the people in charge.

I am truely sorry for changing the topic here, Jörg! Trying desperately to get right back to the initial post ....

Dear Jörg!
As I said before, I support your input once again! I support it because it is profound, professional problem solving from someone who knows what he is doing. Thank you very much for pointing out - once again - what ALLPLAN would be capeable of, if the right people would do the right job!

Greetings, Martin

Bautechnik GmbH. | A-2100 Korneuburg | Raiffeisenstraße 1

1 - 10 (21)

Servus Jörg!

Meine Zustimmung hast Du für Deinen praxistauglichen Vorschlag!

Allerdings habe ich nicht die Hoffnung, dass Deine Ausarbeitung der Problemlösung auf Gehör stoßen wird, zumal Du selbst geschrieben hast, dass Dein Lösungsansatz bereits 2 Jahre liegt.

Ich denke ohne die Schlagworte Redshift und / oder Subskription tut hier niemand mehr etwas.

Schade!

Ich danke Dir trotzdem für Deinen unermüdlichen Einsatz!

Gruß, Martin

Bautechnik GmbH. | A-2100 Korneuburg | Raiffeisenstraße 1

würde das leidige Thema der Raumhöhe mit waagerechten Abhangdecken und schrägen Raumoberkanten elegant lösen. Sehr gut!
Steinhart ist nicht mehr bei Allplan, da wird von der Seite auch nichts mehr passieren.

kann mir nur vorstellen die Subskriptionen könnten als Druckmittel großer Lizenznehmer eingesetzt werden:

<konjunktiv>
Wenn Verbesserungen nicht umgesetzt werden, könnte ankündigt werden, dass die Subskriptionen verringert würden ;) 
</konjunktiv>

Viele Grüße
Florian

LinkedIn-Profil

www.vollack.de

Zitiert von: Nemo
@Allplan
Ich habe diese Vorschläge bereits vor 2 Jahren Herrn Mikus und Herrn Steinhart geschickt.
Passiert ist nichts. Nicht mal eine Prüfung bzw. Einschätzung der Machbarkeit.
Vielleicht solltet ihr jetzt mal drüber nachdenken...

I think these ideas are very pertinent and I also believe that Allplan has a number of shortcomings that need to be addressed. There was a time when what existed was less powerful, but everything worked properly.

On the other hand, Jörg, please be more indulgent with Allplan, it might help Allplan to listen more carefully to your good suggestions.
And since you know them well, having been under contract with them again this year for improvements, why don't you discuss things directly with them again and again, thanks to your experience as a user and your technical knowledge? Perhaps they don't have the time to re-read forum posts.
Let's not be defeatist, choosing which improvements to develop first can't be easy, but I think everyone tries to do their best.


Ich habe das hier im Forum gepostet, um Euere Meinung zu hören. Vielleicht gibt es ja noch einen besseren Vorschlag,
oder ihr haltet das Vorgeschlagene für zu kompliziert.

And since you know them well, having been under contract with them again this year for improvements, why don't you discuss things directly with them again and again, thanks to your experience as a user and your technical knowledge? Perhaps they don't have the time to re-read forum posts.

You may be sure that I sent this proposal today also directly to Munich and Bratislava. Unfortunately, I don't know all the PM there, or not all who have something to decide.

It's good to know what users think of these suggestions. Keep posting them on the forum.

Allplan cannot react immediately. Everyone is already busy doing something. Decision making is another matter. Humans always prefer to do what is easier and faster. And the decision maker wants the outcome to be achieved with the lowest cost. Sometimes it is not compatible or internal diplomacy is not convincing enough...


Hi!

Patience is something that all ALLPLAN Users quite are used to. Saying that, on the other hand, there are moments when we lack patience.

For me all the excuses are some kind of ridiculous right now. Why? Simply because we hear it all the time for years now. You have just posted a few of them ...

Let's not be defeatist, choosing which improvements to develop first can't be easy, but I think everyone tries to do their best.
or
Allplan cannot react immediately.

We desperately need to see action!

The outcome is still the very same. With every new version we get newly designed functions that are just not finished. This status remains unchanged for years. We argue in this forum and (as for me) I argue on other channels as well. With no reaction. We offer help and support or even solutions (Jörg's work)!

It is time for a profound change in tactics. With all the development going on in and around the huge Nemetschek-Group, I think that all ALLPLAN Useres are obliged to some kind of reaction from the decision makers. But we don't get it! For years now ... and most likely for years to come ...

I do respect your opinion Betrand, but I must stress that my patience for the ALLPLAN development department is actually long gone. I write from the bottom of my heart in this forum, trying to be exact, objective, patient, understanding and polite but demanding and definite. With no reaction what so ever! I cannnot hear all the excuses any longer, any more. I am sorry!

For more than 20 years, I am an enthusiastic user, ready to help anyone with the software whenever necessary. Honestly, I must be able to expect the same behaviour from ALLPLAN. They are a by all means a service company!

However, if my collegue / forum user wants to know something about dimensions lines and my answer is about slabs - that actually symbolises the way most of the ALLPLAN Users must feel in terms of improvements. We ask for one specific topic and the get some completely contrary stuff.

With all the respect I can still manage to put up: It's a NO-GO !

Assuming that I am not the only long serving user of the programm that thinks that way, On monday I will point out to my team leader to skip all of our 13 licence as soon as possible. I will get in touch with my local dealer to find out a way to do just that. I am tired of it.
Let me get this right, I am not solely leaving because of the programm, I am leaving because of the way I am treated as a long paying customer.

I was polite in asking for answers here in this very forum in various posts.
Guess what!
You are right!
I did not get a single answer from any one.
What I did get were answers from collegues in austria, germany that I hit it right on the head. That is a poor reference for a self declared - industry leadinding company.

Summary:
Dear Bertrand, I appreciate your asking for further patience and accaptance for the developemnet of ALLPLAN, but I can't stand it any longer.
Without the input of Jörg and his ongoing commitment to help and improve the software (mostly without costs for the ordinary users) ALLPLAN would not even be as good as it is today!

The world of construction has taken a few turns in the last decade that ALLPLAN did not take at the same time. They are behind any necessary essential upgrades to the software. They have - sad but true - reached a point where the software in all its complexity and internal construction is no longer capeable of dealing with the needs of our daily work in the year 2023. I will not quote any of the shortcomings, because I have to accapt that this will not at all change any behaviour (or even the reaction) of the people in charge.

I am truely sorry for changing the topic here, Jörg! Trying desperately to get right back to the initial post ....

Dear Jörg!
As I said before, I support your input once again! I support it because it is profound, professional problem solving from someone who knows what he is doing. Thank you very much for pointing out - once again - what ALLPLAN would be capeable of, if the right people would do the right job!

Greetings, Martin

Bautechnik GmbH. | A-2100 Korneuburg | Raiffeisenstraße 1

Dear Martin,

My messages were not apologies. They were observations, and I prefer diplomacy to fighting. I've known Allplan for more than 25 years, on the inside as an employee, as a partner and also on the outside as a user, as a supplier of additional solutions.
Basically, I completely agree with all of you, I could even be harsher and more critical. There was a time when the Allplan team produced a reliable, high-performance product with a constructive vision of the future. Successive changes in management, due in particular to the management of the Nemetschek Group and perhaps to certain major shareholders, have caused this trajectory to be lost. Some talented people have left. Those who remain can't do everything and have to follow the expectations of their superiors. That's the reality, and it will necessarily take time for the ship to find a better course. So, some will hang on, some will leave Allplan, some will create additions to make up for shortcomings or bring comfort...
Everyone has to follow their own path and make the best decisions for themselves. If another solution is better than Allplan and you can adopt it, do so with no regrets. At every moment, we must redefine our path to follow what suits us best.


And to return to the original subject, yes, the reference plans and rooms functions should be reviewed in depth. Adding functions that do the same thing but differently (!) is confusing and lacks scope. There's so much to do...


Ich unterstütze die Aussagen von Martin zu 100 %
Kapazität wäre vorhanden aber man programmiert lieber ein unbrauchbaren Flugmodus der alle nervt statt eines der vielen Problem anzugehen...

by the way - ist das die Forums Seite Deutschland, da spricht man deutsch und nicht englisch !

Und ich Unterstütze Nemos Wunsch - hätte man schon längst umsetzen sollen.....

Kritik an Allplan ist nicht erwünscht!
v.2024

1 - 10 (21)