Phased Projects

[Drake]

I am working on a new template for our office. A lot of the work we do is phased work. All the phases need to be included in one plan set. This includes walls that may not exist in phase 1, are built as part of phase 2, and are existing in phase 3, heck let's just assume that part of the wall is demolished in phase 3. The way we work is class based. We have a small set of layers (3) for each saved view (notes, plan, texture) typically. The layers are mostly used to insure that items do not obscure items they should not, but do obscure items they should (for instance a note might be obscured by a pattern if it is not 'pushed forward') We have a large set of classes which determine the appearance of the items that make up the drawing. So a wall on Plan-Wall-2x6 would look differently than a wall on Plan-Wall-Exist. The wall will be on Plan-Wall-2x6 in phase 1 but should look like it is on Plan-Wall-Exist when showing the phase 2 plan. Short of making a copy of the wall I do not know how to make it look different in phase 2. Consider that phase 2 will also have walls on Plan-Wall-2x6 which are part of phase 2.

I am sure I have not shared enough info, but I wonder if anyone else is in a similar position. If you work on phased projects I would like to know how you control the appearance of items as they change status from phase to phase.

[Jonathan Pickup]

i can think of a few ways to do this. one is to break up the phasing into separate files, then Workgroup Reference them as DLVP's. his would give you class overide options for each phase, so you could show the walls one way on line plan and so on.

[Jonathan Pickup]

you could set up different files for each phase, or folders for each phase if you had several people working on the project.

[brudgers]

In my opinion, classes are not the way to approach this.

Co-spatial layers and viewports are a much better option.

Look at Alexandria Laundry Lofts Demo http://www.nemetschek.net/bim/projects.php

There are no nonstandard classes used for Existing, Demolition, and New Construction.

For multi-phased projects, each spatial division just needs more co-spatial layers (e.g. mod-floor-1-exist, mod-floor-1-phase 1, mod-floor-1-phase 2, mod-floor-2-phase 1, mod-floor-2-phase 2...)

Use sheet layer viewports to adjust the display. If your annotation is overly complex, you might also want to have separate annotation design layers for reusablity.

Edited August 18, 2009 by brudgers

[Stan Rostas]

With Layers you can only adjust the color of everything on that layer or grey it out, you have no control over any object Attributes so Drake would have to adjust his expectations to just Greyed line work for the differentiation. In the Brudgers scenario you would need all the classes he says you do not need as an effect on one class in a Sheet Layer Viewport effects all the Classes of that type. The only workaround would be to create cropped phased Sheet Layer Viewports on a single sheet so the class overrides would effect only that phase.

Jonathan's suggestion would work with class overrides except these class overrides do not show up in Viewports on Sheet Layers with Vectorworks 2008. It sounds like Drake is not using Sheet Layers so this may not be an issue.

The only issue with the multi-file scenario is it adds management complexity and Wall Join issues. Layers has the same issue with Wall Joins.

Now with Layers and internal named Design Layer Viewports on their own layer you could do this all in one file applying class overrides for each Design Layer Viewport per its intended use, thus when Drake changes something on one of the Mod Layers it would update all the Design Layer Viewports still imposing the class overrides. This would be less to manage but would inhibit multi user effect of the information.

Choices, Choices.

[brudgers]

Why can't internal design layer viewports with over-rides be used with cospatial layering...should such a level of complexity be needed?

Am I missing something?

BTW, In US architectural practice grey for unaffected existing construction is about as standard as anything gets.

[Stan Rostas]

Drake's firm may have differing expectations(some firms use dotted lines for indication of phases think AutoCAD for a second), though I am inclined to agree with you and keep it simple with just greying the phased layers.

Those Design Layer Viewport Overrides will not appear in Sheet Layer Viewports if he chooses to publish his documents from there rather than from a saved view.

[Jonathan Pickup]

When you create a viewport in Vectorworks 2009, there is an option to Retain Design Layer Viewport Overrides, so it would work if you have Vectorworks 2009

[Jonathan Pickup]

Sorry, just saw they only have 2008. Maybe a reason to upgrade?

[brudgers]

Drake's firm may have differing expectations(some firms use dotted lines for indication of phases think AutoCAD for a second), though I am inclined to agree with you and keep it simple with just greying the phased layers.

Those Design Layer Viewport Overrides will not appear in Sheet Layer Viewports if he chooses to publish his documents from there rather than from a saved view.

I think the biggest issue they're facing is the use of a class based approach. Classes tend to proliferate much faster than layers.

There's better precedent for layers going back to pin-bar.

BTW, grey for existing in AutoCad has been very common in the US since the first DesignJets.

Edited August 19, 2009 by brudgers

[Drake]

I really appreciate the help. Thanks guys.

I think that having 2009 would make things easiest.

[Chris Rogers]

Now that we are running 2011, is there any new thought on the way phasing is managed, or is the consensus still to use Layers to do it as per the discussion above?

[Dieter @ DWorks]

Now that we are running 2011, is there any new thought on the way phasing is managed, or is the consensus still to use Layers to do it as per the discussion above?

or use a combination of grouping and classes, that way, you can have more flexibility on the drawing order.