Elevations in a BIM environment

[Markus Barrera-Kolb]

I've seen a number of threads about generating elevations in a BIM environment, but as a newbie and 2D AutoCad convert I'm still scratching my head. I probably don't want to spend the time to build 3D models that include all of the detail that will be needed for the final elevations (or sections), and I doubt that an automatically generated elevation will have very legible line weights, which is very important to us. (As an aside, I so far find 3D work in VW quite counter-intuitive, particularly after spending time with SketchUp.) However, if I supplement an elevation within a VP's annotation space, then all of that additional information is unique to that VP, correct? That breaks the draw-it-once theory, because I can't duplicate the VP elsewhere and have it auto-update from the original VP, right? If I could use a section-VP on a DL, then the supplemental line-work could be referenced by as many SLVPs as desired, but it doesn't seem that this will work. Any advice?

[CipesDesign]

Well, yes and no. You can duplicate a viewport and all the original data will update in each duplicate. All "annotations" are unique to a particular viewport, however if you duplicate a viewport with annotations then those annotations are also part of the duplicate. One of the great powers of VectorWorks is that you can choose from many different workflows. And you need to play around with it until you find the one that best suits your needs.

[Markus Barrera-Kolb]

Thanks Peter - that's what I thought: the annotations would copy, but then be 'static' in the subsequent VPs. Would it be possible to use separate DLs for each elevation view with separate DLVPs, each in a different view orientation, and then draw the supplemental 2D info over those? That way each of the 'complete' elevation views could be referenced onto sheets via SLVPs (in as many different places & scales as desired). Like you said, it seems like there are lots of possible workflows, which I guess is VW's strength and/or weakness, depending on what you do with it.

[CipesDesign]

I'm not sure whether that specific method will work (I am an avid 3d modeler). But try it. You'll know right away ;-)

[Markus Barrera-Kolb]

Well, it looks like when I try this approach, I can get the 2D information to show up in the SLVP when I check "Project 2D Objects", but what's bizarre is this: even if I select "Open GL" or "Hidden Line" as the VP background render mode (foreground turned off), this results in all of the model lines being visible (doors, walls, windows, through the whole thing), and all of the 2D stuff that I drew on the design layer in FRONT view, though visible, is flat on the ground, i.e. visible as a single horizontal line, even though the SLVP is also in FRONT view. The relationship between 2D and 3D in VW is a complete mystery to me, I have to admit. In the manual it says regarding the "Project 2D Objects" option: "Select to display 2D objects in a viewport with a view other than Top/Plan" - but what good is that if they just appear on edge? VW may just not be able to do what I want...

[brudgers]

If you look at 2d design layer information in a front view, you will just see lines.

Look at 2d design layer infromation in top/plan.

OpenGl will probably ignore 2d design layer information as will hidden line.

You may be able to see the 2d information you want by using the foreground renderer as well (two renderings of the same information is the reason for its existance).

I have been finding that "annotating" a flat eleation over the underlying model in a SLVP is moderately productive.

If you draw the 2d elevation on a Design layer, working in top/plan and tracing over DLVP's looks like a good way to go...

Edited June 20, 2008 by brudgers

[Jeffrey W Ouellette]

OK, I am going to beat the "Best Practices" drum again!

Markus,

Take a look at the Alexandria Lofts file on the BIM in Practice website. This will give a an idea about using the model and viewports to generate elevations. You don't have to add extensive detail to the model, you can "punch" it up in the annotation mode of the Viewport on the Sheet Layer.

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

[rDesign]

After reading Jeffrey's comment above about punching up elevations through VP annotations - I finally got around to watching the Architect Training CD's I got when I bought version 12.

While punching up the elevations/sections in the VP annotations with 2d elements does work graphically, this approach breaks the whole concept of 'draw it once' that is at the heart of BIM (which I believe is the point that Markus was making).

Any changes to the 3d model won't be correctly reflected in the VP elevations until also going into the VP annotations and manually revising the 2d elements.

Tim

[Markus Barrera-Kolb]

Tim's quite right: I'd love it if the 'punching-up' part of it could be referenced multiple times as well, in keeping with the 'draw-it-once' concept. My experience with BIM is very limited, and I don't know if any of the CAD products out there will yield a final drawing from a 3D model with line weights that would satisfy me, but it doesn't seem like it would be an impossible task.

I suppose it's the odd relationship between 2D and 3D information in VW that makes it impossible to punch up a 3D view with 2D information in design space (and then reference it with SLVPs).

Brudgers, when you talk about drawing a 2D elevation on a DL in Top/Plan view, you're talking about manually constructing/projecting the elevation from the plan info in DLVPs, correct? That's basically how I'd done it for years in plain old AutoCad.

[brudgers]

Brudgers, when you talk about drawing a 2D elevation on a DL in Top/Plan view, you're talking about manually constructing/projecting the elevation from the plan info in DLVPs, correct? That's basically how I'd done it for years in plain old AutoCad.

Actually, I was imagining a different workflow in which one could use a DLVP and set the view of the DLVP to front and then trace on top of it.

After reading your comment, I actually tried it and of course it doesn't work, since the DLVP cant have a different orientation than the design layer...so you're essentailly back to annotating in a sheet layer viewport or some other workflow.

It is possible to do something similar by setting a front view in one group of design layers, turning off stack layers and then switching to plan view on the tracing layer.

but it doesn't seem viable.

Essentially, you're either modeling or annotating. If you have a large amount of repeated 2d detailing, then making a symbol of it makes the most sense.

[Markus Barrera-Kolb]

Actually, I was imagining a different workflow in which one could use a DLVP and set the view of the DLVP to front and then trace on top of it.

Yup, that's exactly what I tried to do and wasn't able to, and I think you're right: this essentially puts me back to annotating. It seems like with VW's current capabilities that's the only way to 'punch up' or 'flesh out' your model to make it more complete and read better in 2D. Does anyone have any experience with other BIM systems regarding this issue?

[mike m oz]

Brudgers your suggested workflow will work with the Model View tool (you will need to add it to your workspace first - the visualisation tool setout is a good option).

It is a much undervalued and therefore underused tool which provides the capability to have different model views on the one Design Layer. You could then trace over it as you have suggested. Another alternative is to use Convert Copy to Lines using the Hidden Line Rendering option.

If you do the latter I would suggest copying the result to an empty file and using Vectorbits Optimise Drawing to tidy up the results. This will allow you to get rid of duplicates and compose small segments of lines. http://www.vectorbits.com/VectorBits/vectorbits/vectorbits.html

[Markus Barrera-Kolb]

Brilliant! That's exactly what I was looking for. Now any supplimental 2D info can be referenced by as many SLVPs and at as many scales as I like, and I'll only have to draw it in one place. Jeffrey, if you're reading this, why is this workflow not encouraged? Is it expected that the elevations generated from the pure 3D model will be complete & legible enough, or that a complete set of schematic design, design-development, and construction documentation won't have more than one representation of any given elevation anyway?

...now if there was only a similar way to add stuff to sections...

[Markus Barrera-Kolb]

One thing that's curious is the little tidbit at the end of this training video:

http://download2.nemetschek.net/TechTips/Stack_Layers/Stack_Layers.html

According to this information, it is possible to use the "Display 2D Objects on Active Layer" option in the "Stack Layer Options" to be able to add 2D elements to the layer while viewing the stacked model in a view other than Top/View. However, from what I can tell, it is impossible to then reference the resulting information (stacked model PLUS added 2D information) in a SLVP. When I try, I can only see the 2D information in Top/Plan view, but that of course displays the model from the top -- similar to the method that Brudgers tried to too, using a DLVP. But at least Mike's method using the Model View tool works!

[brudgers]

Thanks Mike.

It makes perfect sense that the tool exists to support a non-sheetlayer workflow.

Am I correct in understanding that the view orientation of a layerlink (such as is created by the "model view" tool) cannot be changed?

This is to say that if I set the model view to front, I cannot change it to left later on.

I'm not griping (this time), I just couldn't figure out how to do it.

[mike m oz]

You get one shot at getting it right with the Model View tool. If you don't you have to delete it and start again.

If Design Layer Viewports had this view functionality they would be perfect for your needs. Unfortunately they don't.

[brudgers]

Thanks, that's what I thought.

The difference makes sense...DLVP's will be oriented to the design layer.

Layer links will maintain a consistent orientation relative to the design layer.

The model view tool is probably perfect for my revised needs.

[Markus Barrera-Kolb]

Just as a follow-up on my current experience with using layer-links generated by the Model View command as underlays for fleshing-out elevations on a Design Layer:

As it turns out, if you change the Z-value for one of the design layers once you've created the layer link with the Model View command, the link for that layer is not moved accordingy. In my case, the links are in a side-view (Front, Left, Right, Back), so the Z value correlates to the Y value in the current layer's Top/Plan view, which is where I'm drawing the additional elevation stuff.

It's not a difficult problem to fix: I can either edit the group created by the Model View command and move the linked layer in question to the correct Y value, or I can creat a whole new link using Model View and replace the previous one.

As long as one is aware of this issue, this still seems like a great way to flesh-out a model in 2D for which you may not want to spend the time to fill in all the details in 3D (aside from the whole line-weight issue). Then the completed elevations can be referenced by as many SLVPs as you like.