Jump to content

ericjhberg

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    581

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ericjhberg

  1. ericjhberg
    In our office, I call this the "Ideal Linear Workflow" knowing that ideal isn't yet achievable. If there is a master model, it the deliverables can all be chained to it. That way you just spend time designing and building the model, not creating one-off products that have to be redone every time the model changes. This is BIM, but even beyond that...Ideal BIM. It is nice to hear people's experiences with this. I guess another question that this raised for me is...what, if anything, can we as practitioners, help shape the mold we are adhering to? What can we do to influence or educate stakeholders, Cities, agencies, contractors, and any of those other entities that are holding us back?
  2. ericjhberg
    I couldn't agree more! Thanks Robert.
  3. ericjhberg
    Thanks for the input...I almost completely agree. I know that the traditional methods aren't going to disappear anytime soon. We work with jurisdictions that seem like they will be the last to ever try anything new, but I do think the concept is interesting and I also think that the technology has picked up momentum towards actually achieving something like this. I am also interested to see how the proprietary race affects the standardization efforts. It seems that there is a great deal of money to be made in getting there first, but no one platform can truly claim that they are there yet. OPENBIM is an interesting idea, but as mentioned above, it currently relies on IFC, which I agree is currently lossy and buggy.
  4. ericjhberg
    I was reading another post (LINK HERE) and it starting veering into an interesting territory, so rather than clogging up the bottom pages of that feed, I thought I would start another with the subject matter more clearly defined. 2D vs. 3D vs. BIM? It seems to me that the potential of BIM and digital technologies is taking us away from traditional project documentation and delivery methods. 2d plans, sections, details, elevations, etc. are still the currency that we deal with on a day-to-day, and I have noticed that many of the posts and troubleshooting that is happening on this forum are dealing with ways of translating often complex 3d digital design work and details into traditional 2d plans or visa versa, taking 2d linework and starting the process of taking that to the 3d level. VW tries to make this easy, but at the end of the day, I often feel I spend more time trying to make 3d read in 2d than if I just drew it in 2d to begin with. 3D DIGITAL DELIVERY The real reason for this post is to float out the idea and to see if people have any experience or are looking to start...digital delivery. What I mean by this is, rather than delivering traditional plan set full of 2-dimensional drawings, are we heading to a world where we communicate with 3d models? With the advent of 3D PDFs and augmented reality/immersion as means of sharing design, is it possible that we will be entering a world without paper where everything is decided and built from a digital 3d model? WHERE ARE WE GOING WITH THIS? I'm interested to hear what people's experiences are with BIM and digital delivery. What are the things holding this up? What will the standards be? Getting cities and jurisdictions on board seems like the largest hurdle since paper plans have always been the media of record.
  5. ericjhberg
    I am also wondering if this is somehow tied to another random phenomena that I have noticed... When using the stake tool on a site model to identify spot elevations, sometimes I will get a return of 0 immediately adjacent to a correct value set to the surface? It is almost like there are holes of data missing within the site model that don't register in the send to surface command or in the stake object command? I should note that the surface of the site model appears correctly, no holes.
  6. ericjhberg
    Not always, sometimes. For example, I am working with 3d polys currently. Many of the same exact size. My methodology of sending them to surface works on some, but sometimes, the very next, almost identical, object will not...?
  7. ericjhberg
    Agreed, and I am currently doing just that...but, for some reason, within a number of objects sending to surface (834 to be exact) only some are working while others stay at 0. Why some and not others? The site model covers the entire scope?
  8. ericjhberg
    Well said Robert @rowbear97, well said. I would also add a request for a feature to explode tiles similar to the post about exploding tiles. If we could use tiles to map a particular pattern over an area and then either explode it or do a quantity calc based on the number of repititions, we could get close.
  9. ericjhberg
    I've definitely noticed the problems with sending groups to surface, so I try to ungroup everything prior. Doesn't mean it will work though, as I have learned. The CPU thing is interesting since graphics processing shouldn't have any affect on a process working or not, but it may have something to do with crashes.
  10. ericjhberg
    And again, not everytime...just sometimes. I cannot seem to determine the mitigating factor either. Site model size doesn't seem to have anything to do it. I have had success with extremely large/complex site models, and failure with very simple site models.
  11. ericjhberg
    Doesn't matter, it happens on anything. Site models, extrudes, 3d polys, roads, site modifiers, plants, symbols, etc....
  12. ericjhberg
    We often work with site models to visualize projects and there has always been an issue with sending items to the surface. Sometimes it works and other times, no matter what I try, it doesn't Curious if anyone has determined best practices for this or experienced the same issue and have a work around?
  13. ericjhberg
    When trying to map an aerial photo to a site model there has to be a better way that through the creation of a renderworks image texture for the aerial and then mapping it to the surface. It is inaccurate, cumbersome, and quite frankly a stupid way to do something seemingly quite simple. There should be a way to take an existing geo-located aerial photo and "DRAPE" it over a site model.
  14. ericjhberg
    Ah, I'll let others chime in. We are in landscape architecture, and for our industry, it is probably the best software out there for BIM or BIM-approximate. For architecture you obviously have other options to consider (i.e. Revit...etc.)
  15. ericjhberg
    Which industry are you in?
  16. ericjhberg
    The trick here will be with Annotations... 1. You will want to draw lines, or individual polygons, for each length. Make sure that they are placed in a class or layer that will serve for database isolation. 2. As suggested above, give each line/poly a name (i.e. Exit Path 1, Exit Path 2, etc.) 3. Create a worksheet for your Length Report (you could also use the Create Report... tool for this, but it will require similar steps and customization as the create worksheet method anyway) 4. Select a row and switch it to a database header instead of a spreadsheet. 5. In the criteria, use it to isolate the location/name of your items (i.e. class = 'chosen class name', or layer = 'exit paths', etc.) 6. The resulting numbers should equal the number of individual paths drawn 7. In one the column you decide to be the NAME column, enter the formula =N 8. In the column you decide to be the LENGTH column, enter the formula =length, plus format the database header cell to be a number with chosen decimal precision, and if you decide to have a unit, add it to the suffix 9. Format worksheet around chosen organization 10. Annotate drawing to correlate line names with graphic (this is the unfortunate part of this workflow, I wish there were a way to annotate objects with their name or other record attributes) Hope this helps.
  17. ericjhberg
    Actually =L will not return the length, it will return the layer. =length will return the length...
  18. ericjhberg
    You are correct. You have to create a record format with the fields material, finish, description, and anything else you may want to categorize. You are incorrect in that you have to "reload/replace" all of the symbols. You simply have to add the record format to each of them. In your worksheet, with the data summarized by symbol name, you can simply type in the material, finish, description, etc. into the worksheet. By doing this, the worksheet will distribute the correct data to all of the objects summarized within a given database header row and with the record attached.
  19. ericjhberg
    I use the NURBS roadway tool to create complicated site modifier 3d polys with precise vertical gradients along curved paths, swales, and anything curvilinear that requires intricate vertical grades.
  20. ericjhberg
    I would also like to know Tom's original question, is there a way to explode tiles (and or hatches) for that matter, leaving the resulting linework behind? Could be useful for other workflows as well.
  21. ericjhberg
    Agreed! And Jim, while you're submitting a request for Chamfer, can you integrate a dual dimension capability. The current 3d mode only allows for a symmetrical chamfer, but it would be awesome if you could do something more like the 2d chamfer and specify two different distances along each face.
  22. ericjhberg
    I have started doing this process with 3D details. Creating section viewports and exploding them to reintroduce into the 2d detail file. Definitely not idea BIM workflow, but one way of incorporating 3d elements into construction details. I think, in the ideal world, that everything, details included would be object based. This means that, in Robert's example, if I spent the time detailing a specific planter in one project based on the 3d model, that the associated details, worksheets, specs, and any other information would somehow come with it. Imagine if you could standardize your materials and symbols so that everytime you add or update a feature in you model, the associated information also updated somewhere too. Finding a way to link construction details, technical specifications, and any other object specific data has the potential to be the most dramatic time-saver workflow.
  23. ericjhberg
    Yes, I have found that, while the library within VWorks is fairly comprehensive, it is missing some equipment, such as root watering systems. That being said, you can use the RWS bubbler spec (Rainbird 1401? or Hunter PC bubbler) as the basis for creating a new library element. Creating a new element is fairly simple. My large question for issues like this is, when in an office with multiple users, is there a way to create a library that everyone can share? So far in my explorations it seems to only be user based and not workgroup based. I hope that there is a solution for this soon.
  24. ericjhberg
    I also feel like text might be the weakest tool in all of Vectorworks and I have brought this issue up a number of times, so I hope this thread gets more traction that my previous attempts have. Some of the basic features that text should have in Vectorworks include: Auto-bullet / Auto-number list - I mean if you can do it in the forum, you would think you can do it in the program...it would be even nicer to take this farther with the creation of list styles that could support multiple hierachies (i.e. Item 1, Item 1.1, Item 1.1.1). Think sheet specifications! Auto indent - No brainer. I shouldn't have to TAB in every line, inserting tabs everywhere into a paragraph, to get a basic indented paragraph. When you change the size of the text box, you have to do it all over again. Columns - I am starting to feel like I am reinventing the wheel here. Link or Chain text boxes - For multiple page, multiple columns layouts, the ability to insert text and have it spill over into linked text boxes through out the document, dynamically, so as one text box is modified the text moves throughout the document accordingly...think InDesign Ability to Import/Reference a Word Doc - Almost everyone uses it, so again, why reinvent the wheel. Create the ability to link to or reference a word doc into a text box so that it maintains Word formatting. Smart Links - I want the ability to create a hyperlink type text that connects the text to an object, sheet layer, viewport, drawing label, or something. For example, Matchline callouts. If I have multiple sheets with multiple matchline callouts on each, I would love if the text "MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 1.01" could have the ability to change when all of a sudden Sheet 1.01 becomes sheet 1.06. THIS IS BIM and it's so strange to me that a program that claims to be a BIM leader lacks this seemingly basic functionality. If I insert a reference to something within my Vectorworks drawing, it should be dynamic as a baseline. As I have mentioned in several previous posts, text handling is the most basic symptom of what I feel is a far more comprehensive condition. Tools within Vectorworks are developed to a baseline and considered DONE, time to move on and create something new...to a baseline. I'm not asking for perfection, but first base is a long way from home plate. My hope is that these forums can help us all move the needle a little, even if I have to result to nagging. Thanks@JimW for all you do to make us feel heard.
  25. ericjhberg
    In addition to the several other wishlist items for site models, it would be awesome to have the ability to keep the fill color for the 2d site model to none and still have the ability to have the 3d site model fill solid. Currently, if no fill is assigned to the site model, despite any graphic over-rides set for its 3d properties (i.e. separate classes and properties), then the 3d site model will appear in wireframe, no matter what. The reason for this is because the 2d site model can be used for contours, which often needs to graphically appear above hardscape or flat work, turf, landscape areas etc in order to convey the grading concept...so you set it to no fill and it works beautifully...until you enter 3d and see a wireframe site model. Just another practical use of the tools that should be accomodated for.
×
×
  • Create New...