Jump to content

Offsetting the rim from the jamb to make room for hinge in BIM.


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Wes Gardner said:

@Meret I don't believe that the "stock" doors/trim package offer this degree of detail.

 

Wes

Thanks, Wes! 
It's just weird because it basically means I can't pull any door details from the model. Doesn't that defeat the purpose? I'm still learning the advantages and disappointments of VW.

Meret

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Meret said:

Thanks, Wes! 
It's just weird because it basically means I can't pull any door details from the model. Doesn't that defeat the purpose? I'm still learning the advantages and disappointments of VW.

Meret

 

Why on earth would anyone pull door or window details from a BIM model.  Building sections, sure.  Interior elevations, absolutely.  But door jamb details?  Seriously, why would you do that to yourself?

Link to comment
  • 4 weeks later...
On 3/9/2022 at 11:09 AM, Meret said:

I am looking for a way to set my door trim (as specified in the Door settings) back from the inner edge of the jamb in order to allow room for hinges. I'm attaching a drawing showing which bit.

Thank you!

Meret

Screen Shot 2022-03-09 at 12.09.09 PM.png

Easiest to just model the door the way that you want.  I do agree that doors, windows, etc. should be modeled accurately instead of using antiquated symbols as if we were still drawing by hand.  

1673028390_ScreenShot2022-04-07at8_29_21AM.png.0df334446403758ed5445459ee08c688.png

Screen Shot 2022-04-07 at 8.28.36 AM.png

  • Like 2
Link to comment
  • 6 months later...
On 3/14/2022 at 9:57 PM, jeff prince said:

 

Why on earth would anyone pull door or window details from a BIM model.  Building sections, sure.  Interior elevations, absolutely.  But door jamb details?  Seriously, why would you do that to yourself?

No need to be snarky about it--I am new to BIM and I guess I was trying to use it as such, cutting sections in large detail etc. But yeah, I guess not.

 

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Meret said:

No need to be snarky about it--I am new to BIM and I guess I was trying to use it as such, cutting sections in large detail etc. But yeah, I guess not.

 

 

My apologies, that was not my intention.

New people tend to go down that rabbit hole of detail, you just have to know where to stop for your particular use case, which was the point of my question.

Link to comment
On 4/7/2022 at 9:34 AM, Ron Kwaske said:

Easiest to just model the door the way that you want.  I do agree that doors, windows, etc. should be modeled accurately instead of using antiquated symbols as if we were still drawing by hand.  

1673028390_ScreenShot2022-04-07at8_29_21AM.png.0df334446403758ed5445459ee08c688.png

Screen Shot 2022-04-07 at 8.28.36 AM.png

hello,

Was this modeled with 3D tools+symbols?

or was it though the door's OIP 

really good detail

Link to comment
On 3/15/2022 at 1:57 AM, jeff prince said:

Why on earth would anyone pull door or window details from a BIM model.  Building sections, sure.  Interior elevations, absolutely.  But door jamb details?  Seriously, why would you do that to yourself?

I think there is validity in this approach. Detailing derived from the model with Detail Callouts helps to avoid the classic "typical detail" that never exists problem; it helps to ensure that what you're detailing actually matches the geometry of your model and vice versa. And door architraves positioned accurately in the model provide the opportunity to place doors quickly while ensuring that they're not clashing with anything.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
8 hours ago, Christiaan said:

I think there is validity in this approach. Detailing derived from the model with Detail Callouts helps to avoid the classic "typical detail" that never exists problem; it helps to ensure that what you're detailing actually matches the geometry of your model and vice versa. And door architraves positioned accurately in the model provide the opportunity to place doors quickly while ensuring that they're not clashing with anything.

 

Would you use that approach on an international airport, large hospital, or high rise?  I think the approach varies with the level of detail desired vs required.

I might be inclined to go to the extremes for my personal residence for instance, but the economic value of doing so is likely questionable.

I think as objects get smarter, highly detailed interfaces will be easier to accomplish and they will be displayed quickly with proxies (which are really "typical details" in this brave new world).

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Christiaan said:

 

Why not? If a door jamb detail is required, the best way to produce it is to start with a background from the model, no?


The Vectorworks software can’t handle that much physical geometry, ebvrn eith the use of styles and symbols. Do you do mega  projects?  If so, have you not experienced problems with associated with high levels of detail in Vectorworks?

Link to comment
2 hours ago, jeff prince said:

The Vectorworks software can’t handle that much physical geometry, ebvrn eith the use of styles and symbols. Do you do mega  projects?  If so, have you not experienced problems with associated with high levels of detail in Vectorworks?

I think my comment about having details "match the geometry of the model and vice versa" was misleading. I didn't mean to suggest that the model should have to hold the same level of detail as details. I meant to suggest that outline geometry in the model should be positionally accurate. If I'm showing an architrave in a model I don't necessarily need to show it's exact profile, but I want it's width, thickness and position to be accurate. 

 

That's what I meant by matching the geometry of the model to the details. 

Edited by Christiaan
  • Like 4
Link to comment
59 minutes ago, line-weight said:

Doors are exactly the kind of thing that it should be possible to define parametrically to a high level of detail, and have that detail reflected in the geometry of any instance when desired.

 

That's because they are the sort of thing that is basically designed by a set of specification rules, and variations on a basic style, rather than individually as such. But you do then have to be able to check that each instance works in situ, aesthetically and functionally. That's one of the reasons we draw internal elevations - to check stuff like have we actually left enough room for architraves or what is that architrave design actually going to look like next to that window surround or whatever. So if you are going to draw them, might as well draw them accurately - it hardly costs a lot of computing power to offset a line by 10mm.

 

I agree with you.  I just wish there was a technology that kept Vectorworks from screeching to a halt on large projects with high levels of detail.  That's where the notion of proxy objects or visual LOD in object detail based on the distance to display, as in real time rendering & gaming.  It seems when Vectorworks has 1000 or more doors to keep track of things can get wonky.  As a landscape architect, I don't produce such things, but I do recieve buildings for context with high levels of detail sometimes and consequently have poked around in them to see how things behave.  Viewport updates on such models can be painfully slow.  It would be interesting to see how firms are developing large projects and managing such behavior to develop best practices.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Christiaan said:

I think my comment about having details "match the geometry of the model and vice versa" was misleading. I didn't mean to suggest that the model should have to hold the same level of detail as details. I meant to suggest that outline geometry in the model should be positionally accurate. If I'm showing an architrave in a model I don't need to show it's exact profile, but I want it's width, thickness and position to be accurate. 

 

That's what I meant by matching the geometry of the model to the details. 

 

We share the same strategy 🙂 Thanks for the clarity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
22 minutes ago, jeff prince said:

 

I agree with you.  I just wish there was a technology that kept Vectorworks from screeching to a halt on large projects with high levels of detail.  That's where the notion of proxy objects or visual LOD in object detail based on the distance to display, as in real time rendering & gaming.  It seems when Vectorworks has 1000 or more doors to keep track of things can get wonky.  As a landscape architect, I don't produce such things, but I do recieve buildings for context with high levels of detail sometimes and consequently have poked around in them to see how things behave.  Viewport updates on such models can be painfully slow.  It would be interesting to see how firms are developing large projects and managing such behavior to develop best practices.

 

I don't tend to do stuff with 1000 doors. But I don't usually find door objects slowing things down. More likely to be horrible mesh objects (things like sinks or toilets imported from BIM libraries for example). They definitely contain excessive detail, and I wish VW had a better way of dealing with them, although I feel it's also the fault of those who provide them seemingly without any understanding of how they are actually going to be used when inserted into a drawing.

 

(This was also true in the 2D era - horribly over-detailed window frame sectional profiles for example!)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
3 hours ago, line-weight said:

 

I don't tend to do stuff with 1000 doors. But I don't usually find door objects slowing things down. More likely to be horrible mesh objects (things like sinks or toilets imported from BIM libraries for example). They definitely contain excessive detail, and I wish VW had a better way of dealing with them, although I feel it's also the fault of those who provide them seemingly without any understanding of how they are actually going to be used when inserted into a drawing.

 

(This was also true in the 2D era - horribly over-detailed window frame sectional profiles for example!)

 

Toilets, and sinks, and furniture... oh my.

Inclusion of them will make LAs cry.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
15 hours ago, jeff prince said:

 

Toilets, and sinks, and furniture... oh my.

Inclusion of them will make LAs cry.

From my experience; 3d symbols are often best modeled in VWorks instead of importing from other sources (I have found restaurant equipment notoriously bad to import).  A properly modeled symbol using 3d solids and, taking advantage of the correct 'show detail' levels will dramatically decrease processing / rendering time.

 

  • Like 3
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...