How to Handle New / Proposed vs. Existing?

[billtheia]

I'm a new convert to VW from ACAD. I'd like to find out how all of you handle new / proposed vs. exsiting work.

In ACAD, I had separate files that I'd xref together. It looks like I can do the same thing in VW using layers. Unfortunatley, the "Model Setup" doesn't create these layers for me so I'll have to create them myself each time unless I set up a template file. I like the idea of using "Create Standard Viewports" to add drawing sheets as I need them. WIll I still be able to do so if I use template files?

Another option appears to be using classes to separate new from existing. This creates trouble for me because I intend to use AIA Layering Standards (which do not appear to contain any provision for new vs. existing.)

Or I could use wall types for each new and existing but this seems to be the worst possible solution because it only helps with walls. It doesn't help me separate other items like window, plumbing fixtures, stairs, etc.

I guess my last option is to not separate them at all but I've been separating these things so long that I don't know what to make of this idea.

So, what do you folks out there in VW-land do?

[islandmon]

Let's not forget the power of Work Group Referencing of the Existing into the New.

[billtheia]

I knew I was leaving something out. I haven't done any Workgroup Referencing yet. I guess that this is really the closest thing to ACAD xref. I assume that this will limit my ability to use associative dimensioning. Are there other issues that I should be aware of with this approach? Will I still be able to cut live sections and create VP elevations and wall sections?

[bclydeb]

Billtheia,

My office does a lot of remodels to existing buildings of all sorts, sizes & historicity.

We have a standard file - called a Stationery file in VW, for each project type. e.g. 1 story, 2 story, Tenant Improv., etc.

In the organization of these files we have set the standard to use the Mod-Floor-X layers that VW sets up as repositories for the existing building walls and features.

Similarly for existing plumbing, electrical when necessary, roof etc.

We us the "Create Standard Viewports" menu to add auxiliary plans and sheets to the project file, load our customizable "boilerplate", most commonly encountered details and resource library items. The do a File and pick the "Save as stationery" option into the standards folder. When we do a File>New for a project, we pick the from stationery choice and open the appropriate stationery (think template) file. This comes in initially as an "Untitled" which we change to the project file name at the first Save. The stationery file remains untouched and ready for reuse.

We can return to the "Create Standard Viewports" menu to add even more auxiliary plans, elevations etc. and sheets to the project file without affecting the template. The template is editable to add stuff to it should you choose. Just New> Stationery, load the file and when saving, save as either a version of the template file (keep both stationery files) or overwrite the original to maintain a consistent office standard.

For most projects all work resides in one file. I could spend a large amount of time coaching you through our procedures to overlay the new design, mark the demolition on the existing conditions, then cut to a demolition layer and change to demolition class, etc. etc. While designing the new we use classes to separate scheme A from Scheme B and to make components and symbols appear, become grayed out or disappear in various views, perspectives and sheet views.

Thus we can combine the existing together with demolition to create an as-built, show demolition on the demolition plan distinctly from the grayed out "existing to remain" and then show existing to remain (also subdued because of how we do wall styles) with the remodel or addition, in all flavors of scheme A, B, C, etc. as we have need to do so. Everything is drawn only once and the various options and layer class combinations are done by creating Views (sets of design layers) and Sheet Viewports with appropriate mix and match settings.

Workgroups do not figure in all of our work, but some projects seem to lend themselves to using workgroup file references. Typically these are serial projects for landlords where we are modifying tenant spaces as the tenants change, or we are doing work for industrial or R&D buildings where production lines or labs change and in all cases we need to maintain legacy records to the deep dark past.

By the way - Workgroup Referencing is similar to ACAD but has some simplifications and advantages. Associative dimensioning may not work with WGRs like you would hope. (I admit I haven't tried that.) But you can snap and overlay accurately over the ref. layers. It is also possible to meld all or some of the WGR file layers & classes into the working file, which then makes the workgroup layer an actual part of the file.

I hope this helps you some.

[jfmarch]

the approach i take is similar. what i do is setup a seperate file for all my as-built work. in this way i can always have the latest survey information for the existing structure that is separate from the new, i can model the existing cleanly, and control any demolition aspects quite effeciently. i also use stationary files for this work where i have modified vw's classes to clearly indicate whet is existing. for example, Door-Exst, Window-Exst, Wall-Exst. i like to be able to control the appearance of the existing stuff this way. i also modify the layer names such as Mod-Floor-1E. this file is also good as a stand alone for doing area calculations, facility management tasks, and issue for any consultants.

then i creat a new file that will be where i draw all the proposed stuff. i simply wg ref the required layers from the referenced survey file into the propsed target file. i have found it to be the simplest way to organize existing and new drawings. i hope this helps...

[billtheia]

Are you able to do live sections and VP elevations with a WG Reference?

[jfmarch]

since sections & elevations are from the model layer link on the targey file, yes.

[PrimeEdge]

Billtheia,

We work with these situations all of the time and thus were able to create 000 Project which has all of the standard files included for most of the situations. This is quite a bit of work but well worth the effort in the long run. The key is to think through your design process and understand that not all features available are best for your situation. For example, sometimes we prefer to use single file and sort data using overlays and other times it is better to use separate files. You will need to understand all of these features in detail to make the right decision, nevertheless. I personally am very adamant about the standard being followed by all of the office personnel and pretty much can open any project to start working without a delay. This is invaluable when creating and working with as-built drawings.

Dmitry Shkipin

Prime Edge Asbuilt Services

442 Post Street, Third Floor

San Francisco, CA 94102

Toll free: (888) 497-5320

http://www.primeedge.com

[billtheia]

Thank you all for your responses.

I'm still hashing through this and have a couple more questions.

1. How do you all export files for consultants?

My engineers all want ACAD files. It seems like separating existing/demo from new by using layers will complicate my export process. I'll need to send two ACAD files for each floor unless I also create separate classes for existing/demo and new work and then merge layers with layer linking or design layer viewports.

2. Do you use auto-classing?

It looks like I won't be able to use auto-classing if I have separate classes for existing/demo and new work. It also looks like auto-classing slightly conflicts with demolition work because windows, walls, and other auto-classed objects can't be moved to a demo layer with auto-classing turned on.

[Peter Eichel]

Ask your engineers if PDF's will work for them. If so then invest in Adobe Acrobat Pro which can be had for a reasonable price via software outlets. You can enable a comment function which allows anyone using the free Adobe Reader to add comments and such to the file you send them. Otherwise export VW's sheet layers when you convert to AutoCAD format (assuming you have all the necessary and properly configured viewports). I'm still waiting for Nemetschek to enable the redline feature in their viewer version, an oversight that should be corrected ASAP!

I've always thought of auto-classing as a learning tool for new converts. It's essential to grasp VW's layer & class concept. When you do, it's not needed.

[Christiaan]

We're thinking of ditching Acrobat Pro for Preview 4 in Leopard. Printing in Acrobat is overly complex and has helped waste an inordinate amount of paper in our office.

Not that printing from Preview was very in good in Tiger but it seems they might have nailed printing in Leopard... finally.

[billtheia]

Thanks for the recommendation, Peter. Unfortunately, my structural engineer really wants an ACAD file that can be easily referenced into his drawings. I'll look into exporting sheet layers but I think that, ideally, I'd just send simple 2d plans for each floor. I don't really need to "round trip" drawings - rather I need to be able to send simple backgrounds that can easily be updated by my consultants.

As far as auto-classing is concerned, it is certainly useful for newbies and I also believe that it is necessary to understand classes and layers but I think that it can also be a timesaver and it can help prevent items from accidentally being placed on the wrong layer. So, you NEVER use auto-classing? Interesting...

Thanks again for your response.

[Peter Eichel]

Actually, I used auto-classing until, like you, I needed a demolition plan and I couldn't place the windows & doors in the proper class. Auto-classing doesn't help to prevent items being placed in the wrong layer, it places them in a pre-defined class and the current layer when enabled.

As for your engineers, make sure your not doing their work for them, if you know what I mean.

[billtheia]

Yeah, it's a shame that VW doesn't handle demolition very well. I guess that they assume we all work on new construction.

Sorry for the incorrect use of "layer" in my previous post. I meant class. Old ACAD habits die hard.

I certainly take your point about doing my engineers work for them. That can be a tough one. Whether we like it or not, the easier we make it for our consultants, the less likely mistakes are to be made. An ounce of prevention really can be worth a pound of cure. Luckily, I don't work on really large projects (yet) so sending simple, clean backgrounds isn't really all that difficult.

[Bill Russell]

There are some very interesting ideas here. Can anyone share their files or graphic examples? Thank you.

[brudgers]

Look at alexandria laundry lofts:

http://www.nemetschek.net/bim/projects.php

NNA uses co-spatial layers for new and existing.