Jump to content

Specific questions about "Architect"


Recommended Posts

Hi, I'm new here. I'm a long time AutoCAD user and I'll be getting my first VW (Fundamentals) lesson tomorrow so that I can start doing some contract work with a new company. The company has been a long time VW (and Mac) based firm and there was some talk about them trying Revit in the future, but I'm wondering if they might be more open to upgrading to VW Architect instead. I've used AutoCAD ADT/Architecture and I would prefer not to go backward into the flatland of 2D. It may be a while before I know VW well enough for it to be useful to download the trial version of VW Architect.

So here are my questions:

1. Is it possible in "Architect" to use your model as your elevations as you would in Revit? Is this advised? Or would you do a projection off the model and then go 2D from there? This is how I do it in AC by the way - it's a good way of working that gives a lot of flexibility, but it doesn't update automatically.

2. Same basic question as above, but for building sections.

3. Is it possible to create custom 3D Doors and windows, as you could in Revit or are you pretty much tied to the content provided by VW as you are in AutoCAD ADT/Architecture?

From what I see VW Architect looks superior to AC Architecture in many ways, but I really like the idea of having just one model where all views are updated automatically like in Revit. I think I could do that in AC right now, but then I'm limited by the objects available for doors, windows etc. and I would be forced to do a work-around by doing a "wipeout" over that area in the in layout/paper space and draw 2D stuff over the area that didn't come out right. That's OK I guess, but I would be doing that a lot in A.C. if I tried to use the model as my elevations etc. - not so much in Revit because of all the content available.

Thanks for any input

Link to comment
  • Vectorworks, Inc Employee

Hello!

Yes you can do all those things in Architect, You do not have direct access to the Door and window tools in Fundamentals however if you bring one in from the resource libraries you can edit the settings to make what you want.

The idea is to build your project and then use your viewports and sheet layers to give you your elevations sections etc etc Of course you may want to add in extra detail such as DPC etc

Let me know if you would like a demo

Link to comment

Well, it definitely sounds like VWA has an edge on AutoCAD Architecture, which I was very impressed with at first and then started to experience all of the 3D limitations with it. If I go more or less full time with this company I'm sure I will push to either upgrade to Architect, or go with Revit. Revit would have a much bigger learning curve for the company, but it might pay to be on the industry standard, and it looks like it's going to be Revit here in the U.S.. I do like the idea of not being a AutoDesk drone though.

After I learn Fundamentals, I'll definitely be checking out a demo of Architect.

As a follow up - I find that almost everyone using ACA seems to use some of the bells and whistles, but only to speed up doing basically a 2D design. I think this is partially because that's just what people are comfortable with, but also because of the software's limitations.

So do people using VWA tend to use the full 3D functionality more or still revert back to 2D most of the time?

Edited by CAD Driver
Link to comment
As a follow up - I find that almost everyone using ACA seems to use some of the bells and whistles, but only to speed up doing basically a 2D design. I think this is partially because that's just what people are comfortable with, but also because of the software's limitations.

So do people using VWA tend to use the full 3D functionality more or still revert back to 2D most of the time?

I am seeing many architects and drafts people still doing 2D because they don't want to learn the bim/3D stuff because they don't want to invest, and thats the main reason why there are still too many that only do 2D. As I'm experiencing myself, it does pay off on the long term. I do allmost everything about the drafting in 3D and in the first stage, it doesn't save you time. But later on in the project, when you need to alter stuff etc... It does pay off!! Plus there is less chances for mistakes. It does ask for a lot of patience to get to know the new way of working and it can be frustrating, but hold on and you will be fine.

I'm doing BIM projects for several years now, and with every project, I add something to the process. I'm currently so far that when I draw my plan views, I got all my elevations, sections and even interior shots. Although the sections aren't at the point of being for constructions plans, but they do the job for all the rest. We just add some basic details through symbols.

Link to comment

I would not draw a dog house without doing it in 3D. Consider that all of your decisions about the model, once done in 3D, are there for you to review for accuracy. I've just completed a complex upper story addition. I've been back to the 3D model many, many times to assure myself that I've got the correct assemblies of floor to wall to roof in order to provide clear instruction to the plans examiner, the lumber supplier, the truss manufacturer and the job superintendent. I know it works. I have the evidence.

The tricky part is deciding which path to take on how to best extract info from the model and when to stop drawing in 3D. There are huge variances in how Vwks users use the program and you'll see lots of opinion in these pages on how to do that with little consensus. And that's OK.

I agree with DWorks in his posts above.

Tom

Link to comment
The tricky part is when to stop drawing in 3D.

That's a very very good and valid point! I had many problems with this because I wanted everything like it will be build, and I mean everything. But at the end, some things will never show up or they show up only once. So it isn't always need to draw it all or to draw all the details. Once I convinced myself to stop doing this, my bim drawings became much better and clearer. The thing is that you need to keep in mind that a drawing is still a representation of the real stuff.

Link to comment
I had many problems with this because I wanted everything like it will be build, and I mean everything. But at the end, some things will never show up or they show up only once. So it isn't always need to draw it all or to draw all the details.

Showing up isn't the only reason that we need to model things though. Sometimes we need to be able to model things so that we can schedule them without having to add our own layer of data. A pretty good example where VW falls short on this is the window tool.

Link to comment
Sometimes we need to be able to model things so that we can schedule them without having to add our own layer of data.

I have always tried to get as much data out of VW as possible, but it just isn't reliable. The only data we can get out thats correct are areas like spaces and counting symbols etc... All the other things aren't well enough. So I totally agree with you that VW really falls short here. But from what I got to understand, the next version would have a major update on the worksheets, so lets hope it really is better to get material take-offs. But as long as VW doesn't do it right, there is no need to model everything.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...