Hello friends! Can someone help me with the following?
I’m trying to create a building section of my building but the fill feature is obstructing the view into my building. If you notice the attachment,
, the walls are filled in correctly.Does someone know why this is happening?
Thank you in advance!
First, please upload your model. This will help us discover the solution.
In the meantime I am thinking the room space is a being read as a solid volume.
Is the section plane slicing through the thickness of a wall (a wall that runs left-to-right in this view, from the ramp to the picnic tables)?
I just noticed that conversely, your patio roof is not filling, do you desire the patio roof to fill the section cut?
Most likely, the patio roof geometry is not creating a solid volume. Are you using groups/components for the different elements of your model?
Ahhh, the roof patio is a group. Perhaps I need to ungroup it? (Uploading file to this post, mind letting me know if you don’t see it?)
[Link Removed]
Yes TDahl, the section plane is cutting through two walls that are going from left to right.
The patio roof group can be corrected by adding a face to the edge of the roof facing the building (redrawing one of the edges inside the group is enough.
The interior is more complex. The geometry is forming many closed loops and the interior volume is not recognized as an “empty” space for various reasons (there are some reversed edges, the glass is single face, etc. Cannot pinpoint the exact reason yet, but, for instance, hiding one of the glass panes makes it behave.
Edit: the easiest way to make it work better is to make the glass panes into groups
In looking at your model, I see the following:
Your pavilion is loose geometry. Your windows are single lines. Therefore the room space is filling as a volume. I suggest you organize all individual items into separate components, starting with:
a) Floor System
b) Walls
c) Roof
make your windows 3d elements as components.
As @Anssi just noted the solution to your patio roof (showing the advantage of each element being a separate group/component)
These changes, should be very helpful in you achieving your modeling goals.
Thank you for that @Anssi, I will take a look at that. Also, thank you @Lindsey for the tips. Will implement.
I agree with Lindsey here. You sort of model yourself into a corner if you make a building as complex as this without using components and groups. Any change you need to do is likely to be more tedious and you risk creating unwanted odd angles and triangles when all the parts are clinging together.
If you slice through the bulk of a solid wall, the section cut would reveal the solid featureless interior of the wall, yes? Here is a simple model showing the effect I’m describing. There are two instances of a solid component consisting of a few wall-like shapes. One instance has a section plane cutting right through the interior wall. The orange-colored section fill (representing the interior material of the wall, where the studs etc. would be located) naturally obscures whatever items might reside in the further room.
Good point, but in this case the section cut is clearly in the interior of a room.
But that does help me learn plenty. Thank you for your input @TDahl.
Here is an example with what you will be able to achieve.
Everything you see is either in a group or a component.
(Two notes: 1) This model is still in SU17, 2) the cross hatching is from Skalp)
However, the challenges and opportunities are the same with SU18 and section fill.
One thing which I think always helps is to continuously check that the ‘Entity Info’ Panel reports that the various elements of the model are either Solid Groups or Solid Components, as the model progresses.
I’ve got into the habit of always creating groups and components for every element of the construction.
Mike
This is great. I’ve tested this and it is definitely much better to use groups/components. As to not start over, I simply colored the shapes black within the walls to make it appear like a section plane. I look forward to applying your suggestion in the future. Thank you! @Lindsey @MichaelSiggers
This topic was automatically closed 91 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
