Jump to content
Tom Klaber

BIM - Taking the Plunge - Advice?

Recommended Posts

you've got he answer from peter cipes referring to the walls' joints. nobody said it'd be easy, no other app is flawless, either.

on the other hand: the faster you can cope with 3d the better off you are. in 5-7 years 2d will be a scarce minority.

rob

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, lineweight (née col37400) said:

There are also basic issues with creating proper floorplans in roof spaces.

This is an understatement.  Creating proper floorplans of roof spaces from the 3D model is next to impossible.

1 hour ago, gester said:

in 5-7 years 2d will be a scarce minority.

I like your optimism. Exactly what I said when we started with MiniCAD more than 20 years ago. True 3D seems to be always 5-7 years away.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post

@Thomas Wagensommererbim is a paradigm change. you can't compare it with simple drawing desk change from analog to digital. better get along with it before it's too late :)

Edited by gester

Share this post


Link to post

@gester Sorry, you dont do the original poster a favour by pretending it is a simple matter of "get along with it". Yes, If you are prepared to waste a lot of time for workarounds, you can do very simple or small projects. Other than that, vectorworks needs substantial improvements. 

 

On a different note, maybe I am wrong? If so, show us how we are supposed to do roof spaces. I am eager to learn. Several thousand square meters please, with multiple levels. Construction drawings.

Edited by Thomas Wagensommerer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Thomas Wagensommerer said:

This is an understatement.  Creating proper floorplans of roof spaces from the 3D model is next to impossible.

I like your optimism. Exactly what I said when we started with MiniCAD more than 20 years ago. True 3D seems to be always 5-7 years away.

 

:D

Well to be fair Richard D's core idea of hybrid drafting, in that the 2D drawn language has always been 3D in the designers mind and the software could learn that language, was a big reason to be optimistic.  To me True 3D is always going to be 5-7 years away for the simple reason I can't get things built in 3D, even the robotic systems we have today almost all convert the 3D model to a series to thin planes.  

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, gester said:

you've got he answer from peter cipes referring to the walls' joints. nobody said it'd be easy, no other app is flawless, either.

on the other hand: the faster you can cope with 3d the better off you are. in 5-7 years 2d will be a scarce minority.

rob

 

Well, the answer from Peter Cipes was that joining walls doesn't work properly without manual patching-up and workarounds, and in fact that it works even less well in 3d than 2d.

 

I'm not quite sure what your point is - we should just accept that stuff doesn't work properly and get on with inventing our own time consuming workarounds, instead of trying to communicate to VW the things that don't work for us in day-to-day real life practice?

 

My comment about the problems with wall joins etc was in response to you saying that for most buildings everything can be done fine with the buildings pallette tools. I just don't think that's true. Even if you believe that thanks to the long awaited paradigm shift the quality of 2D output is soon to become an irrelevance - there are still many problems with the way the standard tools generate the 3D model, especially beyond a schematic level of detail.

Share this post


Link to post

@lineweight

the 2d view is like a camera view in a film - it's only important what's within it, and it doesn't matter how you achieve it. if it's patching, so be it, but at the end of the day the plans go to workers on the building site or the factory. you all (thomas wagensommer, too) still seem to be thinking in 2d. the future is the modelling where you can calculate the schedules, materials, and energy. 2d plans are only for dimensions. the people at the building site don't care about the beauty of the plans, they care for their correctness and exactness.

rob

Share this post


Link to post

and another thing: the level of detail should be schematic as long as it's necessary. there's no need to model that much, and in the end parts of the model will be replaced with the workshop models by manufacturers and suppliers. don't get that obsessive about exact 3d geometry. it may change the next day you've modelled the presumably last version of it.

Share this post


Link to post

@gester - designing buildings is what I do for a living. I know very well what level of detail is required at each stage of the process, and I know what formats people will currently accept that in. The facts are:

- there is absolutely no way a 3d model only - however information-rich it might be - is currently going to be accepted at any stage of the process by any of the people I work with and need to share information with. Not clients, not regulatory authorities, not tender estimators, not contractors, not the people working on site or doing fabrication off site.

- therefore, good quality 2D drawings, as the primary and definitive documentation of a design are absolutely necessary for all projects I currently deal with, regardless of whether I am "thinking in 2D" or not.

- the shortfall in the quality of that 2D output that VW can generate is not to do with "beauty" but with legibility and ambiguity

- to the very best of by knowledge Vectorworks cannot produce these drawings from a 3D model at the moment, without significant patching-up and manual intervention

- to the very best of my knowledge Vectorworks cannot produce a 3D model that describes any project I work on, even at schematic level, using the standard tools only. Many elements simply have to be modelled from scratch..

 

When I say "to the very best of my knowledge" that means that I fight for many hours with VW on a daily basis to get it to do what I need, I have the most current version of the software available, I look at all the tutorials and documentation I can find, and I ask for advice on this forum where I still come to a dead end.

 

If anyone wants to respond to any of the several quite specific issues I've raised by telling where I am missing something, then I am all ears and ready to listen to any advice that lets me do my work more efficiently. If it becomes clear that I have overlooked solutions on account of being an idiot, so be it. But I do believe that the problems that are being discussed on this thread result from limitations in VW's capability to fully match its users' real-world requirements, rather than the user base being incompetent, unwilling to change workflows where changes can be practically made, or lacking understanding of what's required in the process of the design and construction of buildings.

 

 

Edited by lineweight (née col37400)
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Matt Overton said:

Tom,

I saw this today and maybe useful for finding allies in your offices conversion to BIM.

http://www.archdaily.com/796478/not-ready-for-bim-here-are-5-reasons-you-may-be-wrong

 

I saw that.  Forwarding to the office. 
The real question is as @lineweight (née col37400) says - is VW really up to the task.  I have done BIMy things - but kept it 2D.  I have done some useful renderings in VW.  But I question if it has the capabilities now to do both.  
I was at the Summit and listen to lectures from people who do full on 3D - but I really would like to see a full example set of files to examine - really examine what you should expect to get out and what the best practices are.  Short of these example files, I think we are going to be making it up as we go.

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, lineweight (née col37400) said:

@gester - designing buildings is what I do for a living. I know very well what level of detail is required at each stage of the process, and I know what formats people will currently accept that in. The facts are:

- there is absolutely no way a 3d model only - however information-rich it might be - is currently going to be accepted at any stage of the process by any of the people I work with and need to share information with. Not clients, not regulatory authorities, not tender estimators, not contractors, not the people working on site or doing fabrication off site.

- therefore, good quality 2D drawings, as the primary and definitive documentation of a design are absolutely necessary for all projects I currently deal with, regardless of whether I am "thinking in 2D" or not.

- the shortfall in the quality of that 2D output that VW can generate is not to do with "beauty" but with legibility and ambiguity

- to the very best of by knowledge Vectorworks cannot produce these drawings from a 3D model at the moment, without significant patching-up and manual intervention

- to the very best of my knowledge Vectorworks cannot produce a 3D model that describes any project I work on, even at schematic level, using the standard tools only. Many elements simply have to be modelled from scratch..

 

When I say "to the very best of my knowledge" that means that I fight for many hours with VW on a daily basis to get it to do what I need, I have the most current version of the software available, I look at all the tutorials and documentation I can find, and I ask for advice on this forum where I still come to a dead end.

 

If anyone wants to respond to any of the several quite specific issues I've raised by telling where I am missing something, then I am all ears and ready to listen to any advice that lets me do my work more efficiently. If it becomes clear that I have overlooked solutions on account of being an idiot, so be it. But I do believe that the problems that are being discussed on this thread result from limitations in VW's capability to fully match its users' real-world requirements, rather than the user base being incompetent, unwilling to change workflows where changes can be practically made, or lacking understanding of what's required in the process of the design and construction of buildings.

 

 

 

i'm doing it for a living, too. but i'm not talking about 'now', 'currently' nor 'at the moment'. i'm talking about the future, which is close by the door, not light years away. you are still living in 2d world, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, gester said:

 

i'm doing it for a living, too. but i'm not talking about 'now', 'currently' nor 'at the moment'. i'm talking about the future, which is close by the door, not light years away. you are still living in 2d world, sorry.

I think that @Tom Klaber started this thread looking for some advice on what's realistically possible at the moment in the real world, not in a speculative future.

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Tom Klaber said:

@lineweight (née col37400)I really would like to see a full example set of files to examine - really examine what you should expect to get out and what the best practices are.  Short of these example files, I think we are going to be making it up as we go.

 

Same here! I'd like to see those telling us that it all fairly much works provide some actual files that we could look at.

 

I certainly feel like I'm making it up as I go.

 

I am fortunate that I'm currently a one-man band so only have to lead myself through the maze. The thought of being responsible for working out a system that a whole office can use and transition to reasonably smoothly gives me a headache.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, lineweight (née col37400) said:

I think that @Tom Klaber started this thread looking for some advice on what's realistically possible at the moment in the real world, not in a speculative future.

 

 

and i've given the advice: switch to bim completely for all projects, especially the smallest ones, just to practice it. and after a few years it'll profit. what else do you want to hear?

 

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, gester said:

 

 

and i've given the advice: switch to bim completely for all projects, especially the smallest ones, just to practice it. and after a few years it'll profit. what else do you want to hear?

 

Some practical advice that will actually help people to achieve that in the real world.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

assign all alphanumeric data to any building element, and model as long as possible generic things. saturate the data while consulting with all other stakeholders, also with the construction company representatives. and convince the owner to have more time for macro bim and try to get him focus on the overall target cost, and how bim and ipd may help him maintain it.

Share this post


Link to post
On 04/10/2016 at 1:09 AM, Tom Klaber said:

I saw that.  Forwarding to the office. 
The real question is as @lineweight (née col37400) says - is VW really up to the task.  I have done BIMy things - but kept it 2D.  I have done some useful renderings in VW.  But I question if it has the capabilities now to do both.  
I was at the Summit and listen to lectures from people who do full on 3D - but I really would like to see a full example set of files to examine - really examine what you should expect to get out and what the best practices are.  Short of these example files, I think we are going to be making it up as we go.

 

Hi Tom,

 

Am late to the party. Sorry.

Your directors saying, "We are going all BIM," sounds like it could end in tears. Some thoughts – :

  • Start with a smaller project, with a couple of key team members. Have some distinct goals (Eg what are your deliverables? What are your expectations of your consultants deliverables? What does the client expect? What is the reason for going to BIM? Big BIM, or Little BIM? What do you want to get out on of it? And so on.). 
  • Train up those key team members. Have those members move on to train others in the next phase of BIM rollout. 
  • Use Vectorworks parametric hybrid objects as much as possible (Space, Wall, Window, Door, Roof, Roof Face, Framing member, Slab, Column, Stair, and so on). Use hybrid symbols, or auto hybrid objects if the parametric objects are too limited. Use components (think of them as materials, having hatches/fills in plan and section, and textures in 3D).
  • If text is attached to an object, then it can go in the design layer, but if not, put it in annotations. 
  • Learn to export to IFC, and use IFC for checking consultant drawings. 

On best practices, there is so much more to say. But for now, all the best. It will be a challenge but worth it. Cheers.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Vectorworks biggest problem IMO is the lack of real construction methods being reflected in the building model ie roof not having all building elements in its construction (trusses, purlins, fascia, gutter) therefore when you cut a section a great deal of overwriting is required to properly reflect what is to be built.

this applies to almost all elements

 

on the plus side the I hear the site model is not bad compared to other programs :) 

Share this post


Link to post
On 30/09/2016 at 11:11 PM, gester said:

@zoomer, lineweight

3d solids is a bad way to start bim. you have to use standard elements, and only in extreme cases when it's not possible you use _your own_ solids

Gester, if that were true then why would anyone bother to buy VW designer. apart from the fact that standard elements limit design capabality (the tail wags the dog) e.e. the stair plugin handrails variables are very limited and slightly clumsy. We HAVE to be able to assign IFC data to home made blocks (symbols). to that end while working on a data centre recently I earched in vain for a computer server on the IFC dropdown list. That became a discussion thread in the LinkedIn group VW BIM & design software. would you adam n eve it - a computer is IFC = ifcElectricApplianceType, so cannot be found anywhere in the list using the correct keyword (computer).

VW's marketting manager Rubina Siddiqqi posted this extremely helpful link that Jacob Block at technical support didn't seem to know about.

http://download2cf.nemetschek.net/www_misc/2010/Sharing-Your-Model-with-IFCv2.pdf

what josphh sent me was a very useful simple text list of IFC codes that can at least be searched

http://www.buildingsmart-tech.org/ifc/IFC2x3/TC1/html/alphabeticalorder_entities.htm

One would hardly dare assign custom IFC codes because they will invariably be wrong. Entity Relationship Modelling employs a mathematicians mindset of 'implict' ordering, not explicit. What chance of me correctly assigning 'ElectricalApplianceType' to a computer symbol ?? it wouldn't make sense to an architect because that word string doesn't contain the essential keyword, that yields all so vital search results.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Paul Hodson said:

on the plus side the I hear the site model is not bad compared to other programs :) 

Site model is excellent. watch other programs struggle to import topographic surveys! generally archicad users just don't bother, so we get site plans and design proposals totally uncoordinated with survey info. guess what - someone like me has to redraw the whole site in 3d because the dumb default is to assume all sites are flat. how many times have i seen that. what annoys me is that those lazy architects get paid for shoddy work and my salary is depressed because work has to be done twice over.

Share this post


Link to post
On 13.10.2016 at 6:36 AM, renardruse said:

Gester, if that were true then why would anyone bother to buy VW designer. apart from the fact that standard elements limit design capabality (the tail wags the dog) e.e. the stair plugin handrails variables are very limited and slightly clumsy. We HAVE to be able to assign IFC data to home made blocks (symbols). to that end while working on a data centre recently I earched in vain for a computer server on the IFC dropdown list. That became a discussion thread in the LinkedIn group VW BIM & design software. would you adam n eve it - a computer is IFC = ifcElectricApplianceType, so cannot be found anywhere in the list using the correct keyword (computer).

VW's marketting manager Rubina Siddiqqi posted this extremely helpful link that Jacob Block at technical support didn't seem to know about.

http://download2cf.nemetschek.net/www_misc/2010/Sharing-Your-Model-with-IFCv2.pdf

what josphh sent me was a very useful simple text list of IFC codes that can at least be searched

http://www.buildingsmart-tech.org/ifc/IFC2x3/TC1/html/alphabeticalorder_entities.htm

One would hardly dare assign custom IFC codes because they will invariably be wrong. Entity Relationship Modelling employs a mathematicians mindset of 'implict' ordering, not explicit. What chance of me correctly assigning 'ElectricalApplianceType' to a computer symbol ?? it wouldn't make sense to an architect because that word string doesn't contain the essential keyword, that yields all so vital search results.

 

yes, we have to be able to assign ifc data to anything. but the thing is that architects are lazy and sometimes high-nosed people (although i'm one of them), forcing them to assign manually anything is a bad way to start bim. bim should be advertised as a pleasant way of designing, not as a programers' job. that was my point.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

another thing: we have in v2017 ifc4 functionality with a reference view export, the editable design transfer view export is still missing.

 

and one remark on free-form objects with ifc data: we are still not able to model such walls with many components (we don't even have slanted walls), and marionette's abilities have borders where standard objects are at their limit - we can't combine the ones with the other ones. i still see the free-form world separated from shapes created with standard building tools. 

rob

Edited by gester

Share this post


Link to post

yes gester, spot on. that's fine IFC is work in progress if you like, while we get the hang of the taxonomy, or until someone posts an expanded searcheable list, or rather a tree of both entities and property sets, then i could have found my 'computer' electricalappliancetype much quicker. i don't mind becoming a novice entity relationship modeller at all, ERM has a certain ring to it, might go well on my CV !

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
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.


 

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...