Pros & Cons of using a Model file and separate individual Sheet files with referencing?

[jpkna]

We are making the change to 3D after decades of 2D vectorworks experience.  We used to always use separate .vwx drawings for each Sheet, and would like to continue doing so to make the transition easier.

 

Is there any reason not to use a model file containing 3D geometry and data, and then a separate file for each Sheet, with the model file referenced in?

 

In particular I foresee some issues with Titleblocks, revisions, publishing to PDFs.

 

Does anyone have experience with this workflow and can advise?

[Tom W.]

15 minutes ago, jpkna said:

We are making the change to 3D after decades of 2D vectorworks experience.  We used to always use separate .vwx drawings for each Sheet, and would like to continue doing so to make the transition easier.

 

Is there any reason not to use a model file containing 3D geometry and data, and then a separate file for each Sheet, with the model file referenced in?

 

In particular I foresee some issues with Titleblocks, revisions, publishing to PDFs.

 

Does anyone have experience with this workflow and can advise?

 

I personally would find that quite an annoying way to work + can see no good reason for doing it. Just seems a lot of extra work/hassle for no benefit. I would hope that transitioning to having a 3D model + all the drawings/sheets derived from it in one place would be a very nice experience, not something to avoid! There are plenty of circumstances where referencing is necessary/beneficial but I'm not sure this is one of them. Can you explain a bit more why it is important for your office to continue having one sheet per VWX file?

[shorter]

None whatsoever.

 

We do it all time.

 

No issues with titleblocks, revisions, or publishing.

 

The issues you will have is deciding how to name things and how to manage the project, and how disciplined your staff are.

 

We have our particular way of working, and have had no reason to change.

 

The benefits of segregation are many.

 

(Of course I would say all this wouldn't I, because we support practices set up Vectorworks for working in large teams on large projects, and have over 25 years experience of doing so.) 😉

Edited January 14 by shorter

[shorter]

Of course, it depends on how many are in your team.  If it's just you, then it could get annoying if you cannot see the benefits. 

 

More than one, segregate and use referencing. 

 

If not, keep it all on one file because it is unlikely the model will get too big.  If it does then I would suggest segregation.

 

There is some loss of functionality, but nothing that cannot be overcome.

[shorter]

ps

 

When you say 'individual' sheet files, you don't mean one drawing per file, but files set up with similar drawings, e.g. a file full of GA plans?

[Tom W.]

14 minutes ago, shorter said:

ps

 

When you say 'individual' sheet files, you don't mean one drawing per file, but files set up with similar drawings, e.g. a file full of GA plans?

 

I assumed it was literally one file per 2D drafted sheet.

[shorter]

18 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

 

I assumed it was literally one file per 2D drafted sheet.

 

oh no.  i wouldn't do that.  on the other hand, you have to be careful exporting dwg from a file containing multiple sheets.

 

if you did go for one drawing per sheet a la microstation, it is still possible to manage the titleblock, revisions and publish from separate files.  it takes a bit longer, but when we did this in 2d it took on average about a minute to generate 30 pdfs.  not so now with section viewport updates etc.

 

#swingsandroundabouts 😉

[jpkna]

35 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

I assumed it was literally one file per 2D drafted sheet.

 

this is what I meant but am open to suggestions if this is a terrible idea.

 

53 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

Can you explain a bit more why it is important for your office to continue having one sheet per VWX file?

 

Key issue is making the transition to 3D as easy as possible.  There is ~10 people in the office and projects usually don't involve more than 3 people.  

 

Many people here have been using a 2D workflow for years and are most comfortable using a separate file for each drawing.  We have folders with prefixes for Survey drawings, Layout drawings, Details, Schedules, Sketch drawings - when making a new drawing in any of these folders we simply use the next number available in the list of files in the My Documents folder.  Issues arise now when some sheets & drawing numbers are hidden inside the 3D files with multiple sheets, and we have had people using the same drawing number for two different drawings.

 

I suppose a big reason is using both 2D and 3D drawings going forward - if we assume the 2D drawings are done in separate files to the sheets from 3D model, then how do we coordinate that in our current system?  If it is simply a matter of discipline regularly updating a master list of drawings and numbers then this is something that we have to look into more, but is a significant change to how people here have been working for many years. 

 

I suspect there is a big conversation for us to have about the transition to 3D.  I recognise that it demands significant changes in many aspects of our workflow including drawing production and document management/filing system.  But while I am the most familiar and comfortable with 3D VW, I am also the most junior person here having joined less than 1 year ago as a Part 2 graduate and am still learning about how the office functions.  It is kind of falling to me to oversee the transition to 3D and persuade them of the benefits, as well as making it as easy as possible and staying on top of design work.

 

Thank you both for all of your replies and info, I really appreciate it.

[Tom W.]

24 minutes ago, jpkna said:

Many people here have been using a 2D workflow for years and are most comfortable using a separate file for each drawing.

 

But now you will be splitting each 'drawing' across two files: the 3D model + the sheet. So it won't be quite so comfortable as won't you be skipping between two files every time you see something on the sheet that needs changing in the model? In the same file you can edit the model directly from the sheet. Plus I am forever duplicating sheets to create new ones e.g. existing > proposed or floor plan > services plan etc. which won't be an option.

 

Can you experiment privately + gauge for yourself whether the pros of working in a single file outweigh the cons of disrupting your management system?

[jpkna]

20 hours ago, Tom W. said:

But now you will be splitting each 'drawing' across two files: the 3D model + the sheet. So it won't be quite so comfortable as won't you be skipping between two files every time you see something on the sheet that needs changing in the model?

 

this is true - but we are reaching the point with one of our models that it is quite large and slow and I think we should separate it out to speed it up, where we will have this issue anyway.  Is it not similar to flipping back to the design layer from the sheet layer to make changes though?

 

 

20 hours ago, Tom W. said:

Plus I am forever duplicating sheets to create new ones e.g. existing > proposed or floor plan > services plan etc. which won't be an option

 

Presumably we could just duplicate the .vwx file to make a new sheet with the same viewports etc?

 

 

20 hours ago, Tom W. said:

Can you experiment privately + gauge for yourself whether the pros of working in a single file outweigh the cons of disrupting your management system?

 

This is the plan.  In my opinion we do need to rethink our management system to fit a 3D workflow - otherwise it is not taking advantage of the full capability of 3D.  But I suspect it is more complex and all encompassing than my bosses and colleagues are expecting.  

[E|FA]

7 hours ago, jpkna said:

I suspect it is more complex and all encompassing than my bosses and colleagues are expecting.  

You will need 100% buy in from the principal(s).  The transition will be disruptive and "waste" many billable hours.  I transitioned from a similar 2D workflow to a 3D workflow on a much smaller scale (I'm a sole practitioner), and it wasn't fun. I advise starting by taking a completed project and redrawing it with a 3D workflow as a proof of concept and to get all of the settings, Styles, Viewports, etc in place.  You don't want to start thinking about office standards on a live project in a multi-person environment on the fly.  

[shorter]

On 1/15/2025 at 7:42 PM, E|FA said:

You don't want to start thinking about office standards on a live project in a multi-person environment on the fly.  

 

I disagree.

We do this quite often with practices who have started something and it has failed.

Quite often a project going wrong is a good time to seek help and get things done properly.  In fact, it's almost the best time, as long as there are not too many drawings.

 

It would take 2 weeks to reconfigure a project, but the payback is that once reconfigured, you get that time back within the first few days, rather than continue with a project that is wasting everyone's time.

 

I do agree with the sentiment, however, that "You will need 100% buy in from the principal(s)."

It is doomed to fail if the Directors fail to see the commercial value of whatever you do, whether that be a re-configurartion, or training and support from a third party.

Once you can demonstrate that the time saved would be one less person, for example, costs can easily be justified.

[jpkna]

Another thought - can you put data tags e.g. door tags on referenced geometry?

 

@shorter I believe you once mentioned to avoid nesting viewports as there can be issues with visibility settings.  How does the segregated workflow tackle this?

[Tom W.]

35 minutes ago, jpkna said:

Another thought - can you put data tags e.g. door tags on referenced geometry?

 

Nope.