Jump to content
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
Christiaan

Another reason for more parametric objects: IFC data

Question

Another little reason we could do with more parametric objects is so we're not lumbered with the job of manually tagging everything with IFC data.

Some examples that come to mind: balconies, balustrades, rainwater pipes/cutters/hoppers etc., metal and stone/concrete flashings and capping systems. These things are on every building we design.

(And, as always, while they should be parametric objects we should also be able to model them directly rather than relying on dialogue windows and the OIP.)

Share this post


Link to post

23 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
while they should be parametric objects we should also be able to model them directly rather than relying on dialogue windows and the OIP.

How would you (or anyone else reading this) propose this be implemented?

Is there some similar object, command or tool in Vectorworks that already behaves in a manner similar to what you're looking for? Something from another application as an example?

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Say, for instance, a rainwater pipe tool: instead of having to adjust height as a number in the OIP you would simply grab one end and stretch it, just like we can with a length of a Wall for example.

For offsets you would perhaps be able to add vertices like you can with the Reshape tool, with the help of some smart 3D snapping angles. You'd also be able to use a marquee to select the whole offset part of a downpipe and move it up or down along the pipe.

Of course the user would be able to refine all of this in the OIP. But they'd start off by modelling it directly.

You'd be able to attach it to a wall so it moves if the wall moves. Same with guttering, it would interact intelligently with the roof/fascia.

A hopper tool would also have direct modelling capabilities so you could model any design. And it would automatically punch a hole through the wall (a scupper), which the user could directly model the size of (as well as configure in the OIP).

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

It seems to me that a comprehensive set of powerful PIOs is the key to successful BIM. The cost associated with having to be "lumbered with the job of manually tagging everything with IFC data" is probably prohibitive for most firms, and so needs to be shared by all firms (through buying the software). Also, consistency in the application of IFC data seems unlikely unless it comes from the software companies - collaborating with each other (I'm thinking buildingSMART / IFC) - in the form of, you guessed it... a comprehensive set of powerful PIOs...

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Perhaps a solution could be an ifc section in classes!? Eg set an ifc definition for a class just like we set pen color, line thickness etc and all objects in that class get that icc definition. Just a thought, I'm a little out of my zone of comfort here......

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Perhaps a solution could be an ifc section in classes!? Eg set an ifc definition for a class just like we set pen color, line thickness etc and all objects in that class get that icc definition. Just a thought, I'm a little out of my zone of comfort here......

We're on exactly same wave length Vincent: http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=194172

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Some examples that come to mind: balconies, balustrades, rainwater pipes/cutters/hoppers etc., metal and stone/concrete flashings and capping systems. These things are on every building we design.

Solar panels is another common one these days.

And cladding panels.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Perhaps a solution could be an ifc section in classes!? Eg set an ifc definition for a class just like we set pen color, line thickness etc and all objects in that class get that icc definition. Just a thought, I'm a little out of my zone of comfort here......

We're on exactly same wave length Vincent: http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=194172

Perhaps this could even be integrated into Standard Naming when it gets (re)developed.....:

http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=194017&Searchpage=1&Main=39114&Words=standard+naming&Search=true#Post194017

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Perhaps a solution could be an ifc section in classes!? ......

We're on exactly same wave length Vincent: http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=194172

This sounds like a good idea. We already class everything and we class by structural or functional purpose. Combine this with the suggested overhaul of standard naming and ?voila? (as Wes would say), IFClassing and information becomes part of our default document structure. We need IFC to work in an efficient, quality assured manner that?s part of our existing workflow. Standard Naming combined with IFC tagging and data built into Vectorworks classes could do it.

Also, it would make sense to coordinate a Vectorworks materials library / resource into classes as well. It seems like a logical extension to an IFC tag to also have a materials tag that can define a class or sub-class as a material type as well, i.e. concrete, aluminium, timber, insulation etc. carrying defined material properties such as stress grade and R-Values. While we're at it, classes should also get separate graphic attributes for sectional verses plan representations.

It would be a good foundation for this:

I think there should be tools for each IFC building element and also each IFC services element.

If your suggestions aren't a viable approach to IFClassing, I hope we get an explanation as to why.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Archicad is a pretend/incomplete Modeller it isn't even a solid modeller...

Perhaps but it has better parametric object tools.....

Edited by Vincent C

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Clients couldn't care less about parametric tools.

True, but this forum isn't for your clients.

"Sure its easier to model (3D) and present images, it looks great...but in reality its not going to be built that way....

At least 95% of architects use ArchiCAD or Revit here (both are predominantly parametric 3D modellers) the last time i looked most of their buildings were being built using documents produced from these programs. What are you on about? For the sake of your clients you really should reconsider your priorities, you're missleading them for your own benefit!

Edited by Vincent C

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
.... no room for expensive (architectural) consultant fees.

Wow! That clients ignorant of 'our' business would have this view is disturbing but understandable, but that someone that's part of the business and presumably educated and intelligent have such views is scary......however i'll simply assume you're going for a low blow!?

Edited by Vincent C

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Honestly it sounds like StructuralBIMGuy or his clients aren't concerned with aesthetics. The argument he's waging is very one sided and probably entirely justifiable for civic parking garages.

I work in a completely different field but the end result is almost always a collaboration between aesthetics, function and cost.

KM

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Some of SBG's arguments are valid.

It's the repetitive nature and the blunt delivery I find the most tiresome.

Maybe a bit less "data" and more "presentation" is required in forum participation SBG?

Edited by Kizza

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Getting back on the topic, there?s a good idea here that may require a low overhead to produce a significant result.

I want to hear what they think on using Vectorworks classes to deliver IFC classing and Data. Classes already have a template for how IFC classing and data might be handled. The way texture by class works seems adaptable, objects can acquire their textures from class settings, while higher resolution attributes like h v offsets and rotation can still be adjusted for each object individually in the OIP. Couldn?t IFC operate similar to this?

If this were viable, IFC should also become more accessible in the OIP. Perhaps it could share space under the Data tab or maybe become a fourth tab i.e. Shape / Data / IFC / Render across the top of the OIP.

On the sidetrack, parametric tools, good or bad, was raised as a more efficient means to IFC classing. The problem with a truckload of parametric tools to serve up IFC, is that the Vectorworks team is a malnourished skeleton that?s been on a starvation diet for over a decade. Even with their recent staff additions, which probably have them in the range of 150 to 160 staff, they?re a fraction of the numbers behind the other BIMs. I?d like to see more and better parametric tools too, but I?m not holding my breath. They need to fix their QA, memory, graphics and modelling problems first. Parametric tools are excellent aids for concept / design development, but without massive investment, the parametric tools in Vectorworks are always going to be simplified representations.

Edited by M5d

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
At least 95% of architects use ArchiCAD or Revit here (both are predominantly parametric 3D modellers) the last time i looked most of their buildings were being built using documents produced from these programs

Vincent, I'm not dismissing your statement. It seems quite likely. But it reminded me of comment Petri made a few years ago (all stand, and raise a glass to Petri) that he could determine, by looking at certain buildings, which CAD was used during the building's design (now all be seated). I can't verify this, of course, but it seems logical that certain brand specific, PIO defaults or processes in a program would convey into the design work. The grand daddy "PIOs" predate CAD - the straight edge, compass and right angle templates. These definitely imprint on design of the modern built environment.

I'm medium rather than enthusiastic about the wish: Proper translation of PIOs from various CADs through IFC remains an important goal. I'm not against additional or more comprehensive PIOs with IFC tags in Vectorworks. But I'm definitely for further development of easier to use and more comprehensive tools with IFC tags for direct modeling, especially because the PIO often can't do the job.

-B

Edited by Benson Shaw

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
But it reminded me of comment Petri made a few years ago (all stand, and raise a glass to Petri) that he could determine, by looking at certain buildings, which CAD was used during the building's design (now all be seated).

Well I would agree to this 10 years ago, but don't believe that is the case anymore...most apps have become very capable (as have their users) in addition to this (and to my delight) many offices use multiple apps for one project.

But I'm definitely for further development of easier to use and more comprehensive tools with IFC tags for direct modeling, especially because the PIO often can't do the job.

-B

I agree! In fact I would prefer to see a system where tools are merged as much as possible. When I used Bentley many years ago I saw this happening, it really doesn't matter what tool you choose as long as you can draft/model what you need and can define what it is through classing or what ever.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
They need to fix their QA, memory, graphics and modeling problems first. Parametric tools are excellent aids for concept / design development, but without massive investment, the parametric tools in Vectorworks are always going to be simplified representations.

Can we add full Multiprocessor compatibility to that list M5d?

My Mac only ever uses one on VW in Activity Monitor App.

But Better 3D modelling tools are still at the Top of my list.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Can we add full Multiprocessor compatibility to that list M5d?

Definitely!

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Oh well, I hope they kicked the tyres on this before tossing it in the too hard basket / landfill.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I'll give you a practical parametric tool. Extrude along path style tool for much of what was mentioned at the top of this discussion. Drain spouts, caps, mouldings and trims, HVAC runs and probably thousands of others.

Being able to manipulate the extrude variables in the OIP would save a lot time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

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
Answer this question...

×   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.

Sign in to follow this  

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×
×
  • Create New...