BIM, the Stair Tool, AIA Document E202-2008 & Jeff

[digitalcarbon]

the question of how much to model and how much should a parametric tool do is a good one.

ARTICLE 3 in the AIA Document E202-2008 (it's free) outlines 5 Levels Of Development for a model.

LOD 100 - Overall building massing indicative of area, height, volume, location, & orientation.

LOD 200 - Model Elements are modeled as a generalized systems or assemblies w/ approximate quantities, size, shape, location, & orientation.

LOD 300 - Model Elements are modeled as specific assemblies that are accurate in terms of, quantity, size, shape, location, & orientation.

LOD 400 - same as LOD 300 but with complete fabrication, assembly, & detailing information.

LOD 500 - Model Elements are modeled constructed assemblies actual & accurate in terms of, quantity, size, shape, location, & orientation.

with the above order of things before us we can now ask "where is the stair tool?"

if we have a LOD 400 mindset then the stair tool is a disaster.

if we have a LOD 200 mindset the the stair tool is ok.

jeff, would it not be best to focus a little more on flushing out any loose ends for LOD 200, being able to do standard stair types really well?

LOD 300 and higher are going to be hard to do because we are getting into specific assemblies.

is the stair tool to model specific items i would get from a manufacturer? i don't know.

hence, it would seem reasonable to expect that all parametric objects should take us to LOD 200 and do a good job at it, in 2d & 3d. maybe some parametric tools could do LOD 300.

once we get into LOD 400 & up, it is custom modeling.

Idea:

maybe the stair tool could have LOD tabs. when i am doing a massing and want to block out a stair then i go to tab LOD 100. this would give me a way to block out a stair w/ basic info.

then tab LOD 200 allows me to enter in more info. LOD 300 even more.

[panta rhei]

Well, your proposal has no relevance to the majority of users. If anything, I'd like to see VW's tools be less US-centric & McMansion-focused.

[islandmon]

The LOD tab is an excellent idea and is easily implemented via Classes.

Specific detailing of the sub-assemblies is usually based on the Shop Drawings provided by the fabricator which can then be programmed into VW, as required.

[Jeffrey W Ouellette]

Mike and Petri,

There is NO need for pre-adolescent name-calling here.

Petri,

Our distributors in many of our international markets do take it upon themselves to provide their users with sets of tools that more closely reflect their localized needs.

We are always working to "internationalize" our content and tools as much as possible, but with so much in the application, there is a lot to cover in a very short period of time.

Things will improve.

[Jeffrey W Ouellette]

Sorry, but I think in light of Petri's concerns the LOD idea is too US-centric.

There is a lot of work that can and needs to be done to the stair tool. The poll is just one thread among many to get a handle on what work, when and how much, how soon.

If we fix the stairs to meet the original design spec, then

I think everyone (except Petri) will be mostly pleased.

But any tool, any parametric tool, can only cover 60-90% of the "standard" cases of a object/concept without becoming unwieldly in its interface and programming. At some point the plug-in object becomes a framework for more detailed 3D work; work that is very custom or "one-off".

[panta rhei]

M

Petri,

Our distributors in many of our international markets do take it upon themselves to provide their users with sets of tools that more closely reflect their localized needs.

Indeed they do. The issue is that non-US users (according to Sean Flaherty maybe a couple of years ago this means two thirds) have to pay for the US-only tools and content. The (only?) useful features of VW Architect (compared with Fundamentals) in Finland are wall styles (the mechanism, not the styles provided), rotated plan, DTM and two-way worksheets.

However, we have to pay for door, window, stair, space, ceiling grid, elevator, escalator, column, roadway, parking spaces, property line, issue manager and so on. And then we have to buy the local tools to replace those. Without the mentioned stuff, surely VW would be a good deal cheaper?

In effect, non-US users are subsidising the US (architect) users quite heavily. Without our money, the extra price for Architect would be maybe twice what it is now. Why can't Americans pay themselves for the features they need?

[islandmon]

Why can't Americans pay themselves for the features they need?

Haven't you heard ...? We are in a severe Liquidity Crisis and need to borrow more $$$ from Finland, et al. in order to subsidize the construction of more McMansions to satisfy the quest for the elusive American Dream.

[Christiaan]

Here's my suggestion on the matter:

http://techboard.nemetschek.net/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Board=12&Number=111129

[panta rhei]

Why can't Americans pay themselves for the features they need?

Haven't you heard ...? We are in a severe Liquidity Crisis and need to borrow more $$$ from Finland, et al. in

Ahh, we'd be more than happy to lend you a fistful of dollars..

[panta rhei]

Here's my suggestion on the matter:

Goodonyamate!