Demo plan best practices

[Chris Rogers]

(2D work flow question, probably applied to 3D as well). Has anyone worked up a best practices presentation for dealing with existing construction, demolition, drawings, and new construction? I've tried several methods, and nothings seems to be as simple as it should be. I end up creating Existing, Demo, and New Layers for each level of a building. I create Existing, Demo, and New Wall Types. I create Existing, Demo, and New Classes for 2D objects. 

 

Autoclassed objects like windows and doors are a perpetual pain also. It feels like the entire process is a series of cumbersome workarounds at the moment. Surely someone has an elegant solution?

[Jeff Prince]

I find Design layers to be the most useful.
 

You can use data visualizations to get things to look the way you want instead of making a ton of classes and respective wall types.  There is a tutorial on Vectorworks University that walks you thru the workflow, it’s very good.

[Chris Rogers]

I use design layers extensively, but when a client repeatedly changes the design during the evolution of a project, you are left with multiple instances to edit....but thank you for pointing out the tutorial. I'll review it and see if it has any new process for me.

 

 

Edited February 2, 2022 by Chris Rogers

[Boh]

I usually create separate existing and proposed models, this means whenever the design changes I always have an existing to revert to, which is often just a copy and paste from the extg into the proposed.

 

For demo, this is really just an existing drawing which shows what is to be removed and what is to stay. This could possibly be done with data viz though I haven't tried that. I find just marking up an extg plan in vp annotations works really well. No need for separate demo layer. 

[Jeff Prince]

21 minutes ago, Chris Rogers said:

but when a client repeatedly changes the design during the evolution of a project, you are left with multiple instances to edit....

 

There is no avoiding duplication in this case, making design layers critical for managing everything in one file.  Fortunately, as Boh pointed out, existing is existing.

 And iterations are iterations 🙂

[E|FA]

I am in the process of trying to handle this case by keeping a single Class & Layer and Wall Type, but adding a custom Record with Existing/Demo/New, and then use Data Visualization.  It's still a work in progress, and I'll try to report back if/when I get it working.

[zoomer]

2 hours ago, Boh said:

I usually create separate existing and proposed models, this means whenever the design changes I always have an existing to revert to, which is often just a copy and paste from the extg into the proposed.

 

For demo, this is really just an existing drawing which shows what is to be removed and what is to stay. This could possibly be done with data viz though I haven't tried that. I find just marking up an extg plan in vp annotations works really well. No need for separate demo layer. 

 

 

Good that it is demolition ....

It may be good for Feng Shui but I would die if I had to work in one of the left

"non-cubicles" Offices  ....

[Tom W.]

10 hours ago, E|FA said:

I am in the process of trying to handle this case by keeping a single Class & Layer and Wall Type, but adding a custom Record with Existing/Demo/New, and then use Data Visualization.  It's still a work in progress, and I'll try to report back if/when I get it working.

 

If you use Data Viz presumably that doesn't allow you to hide demolished Walls etc, only change their appearance?

 

I use the Jon Pickup method of having 'Walls-Existing', 'Walls-Demolished' + 'Walls-Proposed' classes. My 'Wall-Demolished' class has a dashed orange line + orange-coloured texture. I draw the existing walls in the 'Walls-Existing' class then reassign the ones that are being demolished to the 'Wall-Demolished' class. Or use use Split Tool to cut walls in half + only assign the relevant part to the demolished class.

 

Doors + Windows in walls that are being demolished are also assigned to the 'Wall-Demolished' class so they take on those attributes.

 

New walls are drawn in the 'Walls-Proposed' class.

 

In this way, I can create a demolition plan or 3D view showing which walls are staying + which are going by making the existing + demolished classes visible. Or with the existing + proposed classes visible + demolished class invisible I can show the proposed building.

 

To show an 'as existing' plan I use class overrides to give the demolished class the same attributes as the existing class.

 

I have 'existing', 'proposed' + 'demolished' or 'removed' classes for all sorts of other objects as well.

 

This doesn't help with needing to incorporate different design options in the model of course, that's a separate matter + a bit of a headache in my (limited) experience. I tend to develop the model in a linear fashion, saving new iterations of the file at milestones in the design process + keeping a record of what I've done (in a spreadsheet), so that if I need to go back + pick up the model at an earlier stage + take it in another direction, I can easily do so.

[Tim Harland]

We also use layers (retained, demolition and new), with layer colour overrides in our sheet layer viewports, and retain a separate 'existing' plan than we can refer back to if things get messed up from too much changing back and forth between retained and demolition. We tend to stay in 2D for refurbishment projects though, doing the same in 3D is a real pain.

At early stages we often just mask the existing until we are are more certain if the demolition is really happening.

We don't use classes because you need triple the number and we already struggle to manage our existing classes, we also often have class systems defined by our clients. The biggest problem is when we export DWG's and there is no way to distinguish between the different states - for that purpose the class approach is definitely better. there is definitely no good system in Vectorworks at the moment, if you have well set up saved views it can function ok. I did here whispers that there was a new approach to demolition being developed but I haven't seen any evidence of it yet...? Hopefully something like the Archicad renovation filters:

https://help.graphisoft.com/AC/24/INT/index.htm#t=_AC24_Help%2F050_ViewsVB%2F050_ViewsVB-122.htm

[Hans-Olav]

There was a tread a while ago using recordformats and DataVis. I searched but couldn't find it. 

The idea was to create a popup record with existing, new and demolished as choices, then add it to the objects needed. With a couple of viewports it was possible to illustrate the different states whiteout having to add a lot of new classes or wall styles. Maybe some others remember the discussion?

 

[Tom W.]

You can create a Record that has a 'Phase' field with the pop-up values 'Existing', 'Demolition' + 'New-Build' or whatever. Then attach it to the relevant objects + select the appropriate value depending on whether that object is existing or new or being demolished. Then you can use Data Viz like you say to highlight those objects on the design layer or in VPs to illustrate graphically their status.

 

But the advantage of using 'Existing', 'Demolition' + 'New-Build' classes instead (or as well?) is that it allows you to make the 'Demolition' class invisible so that you can proceed with the model + take it through to completion: the existing architecture + features are all there in the model for bringing back to life if required - and for producing 'as existing' + 'demolition' plans of course - but more importantly they can be hidden so that you can present the finished article.

 

I have never needed to create dedicated 'existing' or 'demolished' wall styles: the walls are what they are (i.e. based on their construction) + the same style can be existing, demolished or proposed depending on the class it's assigned to.

 

I'm sure there are other benefits to using Data Viz however. If it's a large complex project with multiple phases of demolition/construction then Data Viz is going to be the best way to organise that + most easily illustrate graphically the different phases. Plus no doubt having records attached will help reporting on those phases should you need to. But I'm sure you're still going to need a 'Demolished' class in order to completely hide the removed features...?

 

The only stumbling block I have is Doors + Windows which when inserted in a Wall can't be made invisible (or rather the hole can't). So I end up creating symbols or auto-hybrids to fill a removed door/window for the 'proposed' drawings or to fill a proposed door/window for the 'as existing' drawings...

[Chris Rogers]

Reading all these comments, I hear everyone saying "Yeah, I work around the problem by X." Seems like having a phase field added to the Object Info pallet could create a really powerful tool set for renovation projects. I'd love to be able to switch a wall from New  (all components visible) to Existing (solid white, grey, black, etc) or Demolition (dashed lines with solid fill) without creating and swapping out three wall types and having them live on three different layers (2D workflow) simply to make managing the graphics possible.

[Boh]

9 hours ago, Tom W. said:

 

I have never needed to create dedicated 'existing' or 'demolished' wall styles: the walls are what they are (i.e. based on their construction) + the same style can be existing, demolished or proposed depending on the class it's assigned to.

I’m with Tom on this. We typically use timber frame construction so with our wall styles we simply have the frame component use the wall class fill. So if the wall is placed in a Wall-Extg class the frame fill will be grey and if it’s placed in a Wall-New class the frame fill will be black.

 

On trying to simplify extg/demo/new I have tried most of the ideas suggested here and by far the simplest and most efficient way for me is as I posted previously where I just put a red hatch over items to be removed in the vp annotations of extg plans/elevations. No demo classes needed, no extra demo design layers, no special record formats, Just a bunch of polygons in vp annotations that are quick and easy to edit as the design changes. Sometimes it’s really good to be clever about how to draw stuff but in this case, for the work we do, basic is best!

 

I do need to have an extg model seperate from my proposed model, however that is useful for reasons apart from just for demo drawings.

 

Another tool that I don’t think was mentioned in this thread is vp class overrides. I use these occasionally to distinguish new from extg. For example on my general site plans I want new and extg kerbs to look the same however on my civil site works plan I need to distinguish between them. To do this I have a Kerb-Extg class and a Kerb-New class with identical class attributes. I use polygons to draw my kerb lines ensuring their object attributes are all by class. So all the new/extg kerbs look the same. In my civil site works plan I override the class attributes of the new kerb class to give it a thicker line and a hatch fill. I also place the legend for this plan in the vp annotations so the new kerb graphic in the legend takes on the same vp class overrides.

[Tom W.]

On 2/5/2022 at 8:20 AM, Tom W. said:

The only stumbling block I have is Doors + Windows which when inserted in a Wall can't be made invisible (or rather the hole can't). So I end up creating symbols or auto-hybrids to fill a removed door/window for the 'proposed' drawings or to fill a proposed door/window for the 'as existing' drawings...

 

On this point I forgot to say that I've noticed that WinDoor has a 'Wall Existing' feature that allows you to designate a WinDoor object as removed from a Wall or as a new door/window in an existing Wall, which I'm hoping deals with the problem I describe of needing to show Walls before + after doors/windows have been added/removed in the same model.

 

Just got another 3 hours of WinDoor videos to get through before ready to start using it... 🙂

 

[Ron Kwaske]

On 2/2/2022 at 10:04 AM, Chris Rogers said:

(2D work flow question, probably applied to 3D as well). Has anyone worked up a best practices presentation for dealing with existing construction, demolition, drawings, and new construction? I've tried several methods, and nothings seems to be as simple as it should be. I end up creating Existing, Demo, and New Layers for each level of a building. I create Existing, Demo, and New Wall Types. I create Existing, Demo, and New Classes for 2D objects. 

 

Autoclassed objects like windows and doors are a perpetual pain also. It feels like the entire process is a series of cumbersome workarounds at the moment. Surely someone has an elegant solution?

I put ALL items that are existing under one class labeled 02 Existing Conditions - General (this includes everything from walls to fixtures).  And then as I begin to demo items I change the class of that item to a Demolition class.  eg:  a section of wall that needs to be demo-ed:  I break the wall in the locations I want it removed, and change the class of the piece I want removed from Existing Conditions to Demolition.   

 

This then allow me to easily create a demo plan by turning the demo class on.  For new work, I leave the existing conditions class on, turn demo off, and begin modeling new.

 

hope this helps. 

[rDesign]

On 2/4/2022 at 9:20 AM, Hans-Olav said:

There was a tread a while ago using recordformats and DataVis. I searched but couldn't find it. 

The idea was to create a popup record with existing, new and demolished as choices, then add it to the objects needed. With a couple of viewports it was possible to illustrate the different states whiteout having to add a lot of new classes or wall styles. Maybe some others remember the discussion?

 

Maybe it was this thread you were thinking of?

 

[builtra]

On 2/5/2022 at 12:20 AM, Tom W. said:

You can create a Record that has a 'Phase' field with the pop-up values 'Existing', 'Demolition' + 'New-Build' or whatever. Then attach it to the relevant objects + select the appropriate value depending on whether that object is existing or new or being demolished. Then you can use Data Viz like you say to highlight those objects on the design layer or in VPs to illustrate graphically their status.

 

But the advantage of using 'Existing', 'Demolition' + 'New-Build' classes instead (or as well?) is that it allows you to make the 'Demolition' class invisible so that you can proceed with the model + take it through to completion: the existing architecture + features are all there in the model for bringing back to life if required - and for producing 'as existing' + 'demolition' plans of course - but more importantly they can be hidden so that you can present the finished article.

 

I have never needed to create dedicated 'existing' or 'demolished' wall styles: the walls are what they are (i.e. based on their construction) + the same style can be existing, demolished or proposed depending on the class it's assigned to.

 

I'm sure there are other benefits to using Data Viz however. If it's a large complex project with multiple phases of demolition/construction then Data Viz is going to be the best way to organise that + most easily illustrate graphically the different phases. Plus no doubt having records attached will help reporting on those phases should you need to. But I'm sure you're still going to need a 'Demolished' class in order to completely hide the removed features...?

 

The only stumbling block I have is Doors + Windows which when inserted in a Wall can't be made invisible (or rather the hole can't). So I end up creating symbols or auto-hybrids to fill a removed door/window for the 'proposed' drawings or to fill a proposed door/window for the 'as existing' drawings...

i do this as well.. usually in design what i do is save the existing model in a seperate file.. then cut walls and work on the main model .. usually its not a headache to make changes since i jus turn off demo layer as i work on proposed.. then final approval i double check everything