Jump to content

Best practices for modelling alternative designs?


Recommended Posts

In design work it is often necessary to model two (or three or however many) versions of a plan or some other project feature to compare them visually, present them to the supervisor or the client and then choose which one of them to go forward with. It seems however that Vectorworks is not built with this idea in mind, i.e. one model file is supposed to contain only one version of an object, not alternative versions of it. This often creates problems while working on project. Are there any recommended best practices how to organize the alternative designs?

These are the options I have gone through, but none of them really work:

  • Splitting the alternatives into different files is possible, but cumbersome because it is complicated to compare the different alternatives to each other. Essentially they can only be compared by plotting and putting them side by side.
  • Creating separate classes turns into a nightmare-- there will be way too many to handle.
  • Creating separate design layers for the alternative designs seems like the best option. It becomes a hassle, if the alternatives need more that one design layer-- there will be 1-Plan-Alt_1, 2-Plan-Alt_1, 1-Plan-Alt_2, 2-Plan-Alt_2. Also, it is complicated to store these alternatives for later review, because layer organization soon becomes a mess with so many layers in there.

Theoretically it would be good to put all the alternatives into another file using the last option (creating separate design layers), with everything but the appropriate layer referenced into the file. This file can be archived and it will not clutter the layer organization of the up-to-date model, but it feels really hard to set up this file, especially if the model already has references, sheet layers etc. Is there a way to set this up fast? Are there some other options or VW features that I have missed?

Edit: Corrected some typos.

Edited by taavilooke
Link to comment

taavilooke,

My first thought was layers. When you're doing prelim layouts, layers would be the way to organize the "options". I've only done this on single residential dwellings so I'd imagine that it could get hairy for a large project. As the project progresses the unwanted options will fade away as it were and leave you with the options you want which means you can gradually remove those unwanted layers.

Cheers,

Link to comment

Yes, I came to Layers too.

I have to Visualize different versions so it is good to have everything in one file.

Normally you have a 3-digit Number of Classes but only 2-digit number of Layers,

so easier to control.

Using standard classes for versions geometry, each on its own Layer, you can easily

switch between these.

If versioning starts, I move concerning geometry parts to a new version Layer,

duplicate it according to desired number of versions and do the changes to each.

Once the decision for a final version is done, just re-assign the

normal (Story) Layer to the versions geometry again and delete all unused

versions Layers.

Link to comment

I also use Design Layers with Saved Views for multiple options. It does get cumbersome with all of the duplicated layers, but it's much better than splitting it into separate files. With the 'one-file, duplicated-DLs' approach it is easy to create copies of SLVP camera views and change the Layer visibility to show the different options.

As the design moves along and older options are no longer relevant, I save a copy of the file and delete the unused option Design Layers and Saved Views.

Where this 'one-file, duplicated-DLs' approach completely falls apart is if you are using Stories, at least this is what I have found in Vw2015, I do not know if it has changed in Vw2016:

  • To study different design options for remodeling a single-story building, for example, I create multiple Design Layers 'Mod-FL1-Opt A', 'Mod-FL1-Opt B', 'Mod-FL1-Opt C', etc that all have the same Floor elevation of +0'-0".
  • Because a Story can only have one Floor level type, only DL 'Mod-FL1-Opt A' can be part of that Story.
  • Subsequent 'Opt B & C' DL's cannot be part of a Story (because Stories cannot overlap) and therefore they cannot have Levels.
  • When you copy a Walltype referencing Levels to a DL outside of a Story it completely breaks down and all of the Wall Components collapse to zero height.

I would love to hear from someone at Vectorworks Inc. about what is the current 'Best Practices' method for Design Options using Stories & Levels in a one-file approach.

Edited by rDesign
Link to comment
  • 1 year later...

Found this thread whilst doing a search prior to making a wishlist request to do with duplicating layers, which in my case is something I do to cope with alternative options.

 

I too use layers, very similar to what rDesign describes above. And it's one of the reasons I've given up trying to use Stories.

 

It's also why I try just to have one layer for each floor level (instead of splitting into floor, wall, ceiling etc as seems to be the suggested method in VW tutorials). This means when I want to make an "Option B" it only involves creating one new layer for each floor level of the building. In fact I don't really see the benefit of putting floor slabs and walls in separate layers anyway.

 

Recently I have been considering a different way of doing things, but I've not tried it out in detail yet. My thinking is to use "visibility" classes.

 

So instead of making duplicate layers, I would make duplicate objects, wherever there were different options. Say the only difference between two versions is that a certain door is in a different location. Then I just create two versions of that wall segment. One of them I put in class "visibility_A" and the other in "visibility_B". This would be the top-level class for that object - which might mean it has to be put in a one-objectgroup, so that the object itself can still have whatever class it needs for other purposes. Then I control visiblility in viewports and saved views by switching on/off the visibility classes instead of layers. It seems this might keep the list of layers more manageable where there are lots of different options, and it would mean that you could create hybrid options (for example "option 1" as presented to the client or whoever would actually show a layout with door option A + window option A, "option 2" could be door option B + window option B and "option 3" could be door option A + window option B. This could be achieved using two visibility classes whereas at present I'd need 3 layer versions).

 

As with most things VW I suspect that putting this into practice might reveal some problem I've not thought of that would make it unworkable. Would be interested to hear any thoughts though.

 

 

 

 

 

(my connected wishlist request is here:)

 

 

Edited by line-weight
Link to comment

All 3!

 

I think it depends on the specifics and scope of the design options and project you are dealing with.

 

If you are doing 3 options of window sizes for a rear facade - maybe classes are the best way.

If you are doing alternate layouts for a floor plan - layers.

If you are doing different whole massings, with interior layouts - maybe you step to a files with shared background references.  

 

I used to get frustrated because there felt like no good way to do this - but then I began to think there was no good way maintain parallel related but different sets of design info - it is by its nature cumbersome.

  • Like 1
Link to comment

Hi, If we are doing a simple sketch option for a different plan option within a home unit one option is to create a new Class called option A, B or C and place a mask over the area to change then redraw/copy items to the new class so all different items including the mask are on same class. Simple and you don't have to think about turning off different classes. When the option approved i just copy and paste the items back onto their original classes.

Edited by Alan Woodwell
Link to comment
14 hours ago, Tom Klaber said:

 

If you are doing 3 options of window sizes for a rear facade - maybe classes are the best way.

 

 

 

In that case I'd still use layers. Lots of layers keeps most classes on by default and easier to manage. 

So, isolate the effected wall(s) on to new layer and then generate the options as duplicate layers.

 

Once the options are presented and decided you can save an archive copy of file then clean house in the working file.

 I wouldn't call it best practice it feels like there is a better solution.

 

With new xml text files, project sharing system and the like it feels like we should be in line to tools like GIT that the engineers to handling versioning in the code they use to write the software.

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
On 09/12/2015 at 5:45 PM, rDesign said:

 

Where this 'one-file, duplicated-DLs' approach completely falls apart is if you are using Stories, at least this is what I have found in Vw2015, I do not know if it has changed in Vw2016:

 

  • To study different design options for remodeling a single-story building, for example, I create multiple Design Layers 'Mod-FL1-Opt A', 'Mod-FL1-Opt B', 'Mod-FL1-Opt C', etc that all have the same Floor elevation of +0'-0".
  • Because a Story can only have one Floor level type, only DL 'Mod-FL1-Opt A' can be part of that Story.
  • Subsequent 'Opt B & C' DL's cannot be part of a Story (because Stories cannot overlap) and therefore they cannot have Levels.
  • When you copy a Walltype referencing Levels to a DL outside of a Story it completely breaks down and all of the Wall Components collapse to zero height.

I would love to hear from someone at Vectorworks Inc. about what is the current 'Best Practices' method for Design Options using Stories & Levels in a one-file approach.

 

 

Hi

Just getting to grips with vwx 2017. 

Anyone know if this issue has been addressed? I want to be able to model multiple options and also existing and proposed versions in the same file, but this doesn't seem possible if using Stories/Level types. It isn't possible (as far as i can see) to have different design layers on the same story/level type. Maybe this is now one is supposed to do it and I need a separate file for each design?

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
On 9.12.2015 at 6:45 PM, rDesign said:

Where this 'one-file, duplicated-DLs' approach completely falls apart is if you are using Stories, at least this is what I have found in Vw2015, I do not know if it has changed in Vw2016:

 

  • To study different design options for remodeling a single-story building, for example, I create multiple Design Layers 'Mod-FL1-Opt A', 'Mod-FL1-Opt B', 'Mod-FL1-Opt C', etc that all have the same Floor elevation of +0'-0".
  • Because a Story can only have one Floor level type, only DL 'Mod-FL1-Opt A' can be part of that Story.
  • Subsequent 'Opt B & C' DL's cannot be part of a Story (because Stories cannot overlap) and therefore they cannot have Levels.
  • When you copy a Walltype referencing Levels to a DL outside of a Story it completely breaks down and all of the Wall Components collapse to zero height.

I would love to hear from someone at Vectorworks Inc. about what is the current 'Best Practices' method for Design Options using Stories & Levels in a one-file approach.

 

 

Not sure if I got the problem correct ?

 

In best case I have only 1 Layer per Story, because it is the simplest.

In reality I mostly have more than 1 Layer assigned to each Story.

At least for the ground Floor. (Building + Landscape + Terrain + ...)

 

Or the same for different Design Versions, at least 1 Layer for each Version.

(Even for duplicated for each Story if needed)

And maybe 1 original Layer for all parts that all Versions have in common.

 

All of these Layers I need, will be bound to their Stories and all Plugin Objects on these

will work fine with their Story "Levels" (since VW 2016 only ?).

Or by legacy Layer Wall Heights, if you prefer.

Link to comment

Thanks for your response, Zoomer

 

The way that you use layers seems to be different to the tutorial videos, which seem to advocate using a different layer for walls, roof etc. That seems to help because you can use the top and bottom bounds for the layer you are using to determine things like wall height.

 

That aside, my issue is that I want to work on multiple options (on different design layers) that use the same stories and levels. I can't assign two design layers the same level type and I can't give two different stories the same elevation height. Maybe I am going about this the wrong way but rDesign expressed this more succinctly than me above!

 

I would love to hear from someone at Vectorworks Inc. about what is the current 'Best Practices' method for Design Options using Stories & Levels in a one-file approach.

 

 

 

Link to comment

i sometimes in this situation....if its a variation on a base design....make 2 copies of the original file and then alter each file so i don't get to mixed up , once i have completed the design changes i have then imported the design layers into the master file and then created my viewports.....i know i am probably doing it all wrong but i find this easier and less complicated.....i just name my files option 1 option 2 and so on..

it works for me but i know it's not the correct way

Link to comment
On 12/9/2015 at 0:45 PM, rDesign said:

I would love to hear from someone at Vectorworks Inc. about what is the current 'Best Practices' method for Design Options using Stories & Levels in a one-file approach.

+1

I don't think there is a good way currently. One non-ideal but practical method is to use one layer as the master and create duplicates of this to explore options, making whatever wall-height adjustments etc. that are needed due to the broken Stories associations. As ideas converge to a solution continue to update the master layer.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, MFW said:

Thanks for your response, Zoomer

 

The way that you use layers seems to be different to the tutorial videos, which seem to advocate using a different layer for walls, roof etc. That seems to help because you can use the top and bottom bounds for the layer you are using to determine things like wall height.

 

That aside, my issue is that I want to work on multiple options (on different design layers) that use the same stories and levels. I can't assign two design layers the same level type and I can't give two different stories the same elevation height. Maybe I am going about this the wrong way but rDesign expressed this more succinctly than me above!

 

I would love to hear from someone at Vectorworks Inc. about what is the current 'Best Practices' method for Design Options using Stories & Levels in a one-file approach.

 

 

 

 

Yes, I personally see no meaning in multiple Layers per Story in itself.

The only reason to distribute a Story's geometry further over Layers is for

organisational (visibility)

or

drafting aid (directly draw on a Layer Plane with different Z height)

purposes.

 

You can assign as much Layers to a single Story as you want.

All Layers will provide the same Story Levels in that case.

(You assign a (any) Story to a Layer in reality)

 

As it is now you can't create Stories that overlap in height,

(A pity for split Levels), because there currently is no way to select Levels of

any Story in your Plugins elevations.

But the Story Levels can exceed their Stories, and so other Story's Levels.

 

In the worst case, like a split level building,

you could create duplicate Story Level (with different names),

like "Top of structure L1" and "Top of Structure L2" together with Duplicates of your

Wall Styles or Plugins, to assign these to both of "split levels"

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Phil hunt said:

i sometimes in this situation....if its a variation on a base design....make 2 copies of the original file and then alter each file so i don't get to mixed up , once i have completed the design changes i have then imported the design layers into the master file and then created my viewports.....i know i am probably doing it all wrong but i find this easier and less complicated.....i just name my files option 1 option 2 and so on..

it works for me but i know it's not the correct way

 

I think the reason why I want to have everything in on single File is that there may come

other variants at another part of the building or decisions with changes already made in

other Stories, while still needing these previous variants,

so I don't want to need to synchronize those changes over 2 or more Files

Edited by zoomer
  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

I tend to agree that there isn't one best way to approach options inVvectorworks.

 

I'm going to stick up for the 'save a copy as' option and have different option files. One of my favourite things about Vectorworks compared to other CAD/ BIM programs is the ease with which you can open two files and copy and paste objects between files.

 

But before I 'save a copy as', I think twice about creating an option, ie. is it necessary, could I discuss this with the client instead, is there a more appropriate way of communicating the option, eg. a felt pen and paper and sketching, scanning, and then importing onto a sheet in Vectorworks, but more and more I find that using 3d views, eg. Web view link sent to clients means that options can be discussed and developed more intuitively with the client without the need to produce drawings and models of each option. 

 

Link to comment

Options or Variants are very annoying ;)

But I have to do that daily.

 

The last two weeks I went for a new branch in C4D.

Now I regret it as I meanwhile have done so many changes also needed for the main file.

But already can't remember which and where I made all these changes :D

Thank god the VW file includes all versions.

 

 

EDIT :

Ah, I am lucky, I didn't delete any of the old things, just visibility changes,

I can go on with my latest branch 9_9

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...