Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


17 Good

1 Follower

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    architect / 2d-animator
  • Homepage
  • Location
    poland / austria

Recent Profile Visitors

1,634 profile views
  1. cove.tool is supposed to connect to vectorworks via plugin to be released this march. 1. is this already working? 2. is it available also for localized versions of vectorworks? rob
  2. here's my take on the connections between ifc structure, bsdd, classification, product identification and digital supply chain... rob
  3. ...here's the other part (attachment) general rule is: 27 roof (as the overall class for the roofs) 27-some roof 1 (which makes an indent) 27-some roof 2 the roof components are in the 47 group.
  4. we use sfb system in our polish vectorworks localization (this is a 1959 swedish system which is widely used in the benelux countries, especially in the netherlands). the codes base on numbers, and the exterior walls are like '21 exterior wall some description', or '22 interior wall ssome description', or '31 opening in the exterior wall some description', '27 roof some description', a.s.o., according to the table below (sorry, i haven't found it in english, and it's the part of the whole). the system is pretty straightforward, it bases on the overall building structure, but has been examined and abandoned by the uk subjects while working on their classification, which became uniclass 2015. of course, you can use any classification system (including your own), but the presence of this option alone gives vectorworks an edge, when it comes to the mapping of the codes and guids. rob
  5. such container would be a separately required (by polish law) site development plan (which is in a 1:500, or sometimes 1:1000 scale). this plan is in world coordinates (required by the authorities of the infrastructure planning), and with true north orientation, as opposed to the edifice models that are in 1:50 or 1:100. the edifice models are referenced in the site model, and all changes in storeys are handled separately for each building. i use such a workflow for years, but i will listen to other options. rob
  6. @jmanganelli afaik the iesve is a costly application. similarly is (was?) with the ecodesigner star and its integration with archicad, where both licenses were necessary. isn't it the case with revit and iesve? i think that vw users are in need of a fast and reliable energy calculation tool, at best within the aplication and its price. the next step might be an integration with something bigger, but the energos level is pretty good for the designed calculations. not everyone can afford professional energy calculation applications. rob
  7. @ilimatiare currently the wip work (iso 19650:1, cde environment) is supposed to be carried out in one technology standard for a particular branch. every shared work piece (export) is a noneditable information, and as ifc is supposed to be managed in the asset delivery on the building site. if you try to do it now, it may be disappointing, but as said: one branch (architect / structural engineer / mechanical designer a.s.o.) should each one use one specific data format for their piece of work. in the future the wip work is the same, but we will have an option to work on the pure geometry from the ifc in the dtv (editable design transfer view) mvd mode, regardless if it's the wip/shared/published part of the bim process. buildingsmart's decoupling (complete separation of geometry data from the alphanumeric for the ifc) is underway... the british bim level 3 is a common work on open formats in the iot environment.
  8. we now use the sfb system from the design express localisation versions (dutch, french and polish have the same classing setup). as soon as the polish classification system is ready (currently we work in the polish chapter of the buildingsmart int'l on it - the priority is the emerging cci system based on the danish ccs and swedish coclass) it'll replace the sfb in the pl vectorworks version. we give it some 2 years... the integration of the building classification system in the bim authoring app is essential - otherwise the digital supply chain is not possible. the digital supply chain integration is a 3-step procedure: 1. the objects in the 3d model are placed in the classification codes. the ifc export drags the classification codes with into the ifc models. 2. the ifc guids are being mapped to the bsdd guids (bsdd = buildingsmart data dictionary - a martix to map all classifications between them, and with the ifc) 3. the gtins (gs1 product codes) are being mapped to the bsdd guids via digital link. thus the delvered products and materials know where they are to be built-in into the physical asset, based on the model information. this connection remains for the management stage of the asset (at best as the digital twin). remember: the uk initiated the process of building a digital twin of the whole country... as for the digital supply chain: check out the dscibe (digital supply chain in the built environment) and digiplace, both started last year. rob
  9. coming back to design layers - i use many of them for each storey. there are a few reasons: - in the project sharing you reserve and check out objects by layers at best. checking by objects themselves might wind up chaotic. - the grouping of similar objects per design layer (e.g. slabs, walls, furniture objects, spaces or installations) helps better visibility control of the objects in the various display options. - the choice of layers for ifc exports is pretty straightforward, compared to setting up classes' visibility for these exports. i always model slab construction separately from the floor layers, but both are on the same design layer. as for classes - they should correspond to the classification system, e.g. omniclass in the north america, uniclass in the uk (they have the uniclass 2015 classing system in their vectorworks' release). so the classing of the design layers is not recommended in such a system unless you have one design layer for a storey (also not recommended - why then stories at all?). rob btw: i avoid 2d elements in the 3d space - all possible 2d's are in the annotations of the sheet layers.
  10. @Zeno a mesh is a halfway, but it helps, as you point out. what do you use for the conversion: meshlab or some commercial app? rob
  11. leed and breeam analyses base on the same energy calculations, maybe with the exception of the imposed proprietary rules, but it's an overlay. the results may be different, although the starting point is exactly the same. let's not get crazy about the official energy standards 🙂 rob
  12. @jeff prince generally you're right, but sometimes exact measures are necessary for the built-in professional equipment, like e.g. in the healthcare (even movable beds require there particular room for manoeuvring) or in the heating rooms. but, most of all, exact measures are required for digital twins of the physical assets, where the operational phase usually lasts decades. you never know how exactly modelled your asset should be for certain actions. if you don't need it today, you might need it in two months or years. unfortunately we still don't have reliable solids, automatically generated from point clouds. another thing are the as-built models, where the native models for ifc export are being checked against the point cloud surveys, an example of such application being bim & scan®'s autocor(tm). the designer's professional liability is at stake... rob
  13. @Diego-Resuelvectorworks you can also draw polygons in the plan view (2d) on point cloud basis, and then convert them to walls (create objects from shapes’ tool)... or draw walls directly in 2d. rob
  14. @Samuel Derenboim yeah, the polish certification document for the usage permit is formally standardised. - the first page is the overall information of the building with the graphic display of its energy performance (enclosed is some older version before the tightening of the energy performance demand - the change is in the scope spread on the graphic ribbon - in this case the building doesn't comply with the requirements). the software can handle dwg imports, but not ifc models, so the calculations take approx. 90-95% of the creation time (a pretty cumbersome task, especially calculating walls and openings, depending on geographic directions), the rest is the adjustment of the installation systems. energy calculations are similar for all energy certification standards, what matters is the overall result, regarding particular requirements. - second page is the description of the installation systems - third page is the calculations with improvement recommendations - the last page is the guides and notes - usually left as it is. the certificate is valid for 10 years, and the creator is liable for any claims within this period. there's also a possibility to buy insurance for this scope, along with the professional designer's insurance. is it somehow similar in the u.s.a.? hth, rob
  • Create New...