If one works like SU in 3D with shapes, one may arrive at a BOX that's starting to give an idea of the concept and that BOX may then be made into walls that then supports the Door & Wall PIO's. So I think the process needs a little work to achieve a seamless workflow & no, I'm never leaving my pencil behind, but I was to have more fluid process. Here's what I'm getting at: They need to sketch in the computer its just a different type of pencil, but pedants will find it difficult with anything in life. Aim at the top (the Boss) its costing him money, unless he is running a charity I am sure he will see the reason and bash them around the ears.If its a big organisation and these guys blend into the background at mid level management you may have problems but aim at the one who hold the purse strings.
, at least get somersetting drawn with real walls etc. But hit them with the " you draw it once like this and someone else has to waste TIME which is MONEY to the boss and they will soon see that why draw it twice. I understand their Luddite mentality i see it all the time. If they are after a concept draw a box and not walls. Its a mind set, get them to stop thinking of the lining etc and just draw a wall with no components etc You can always change the wall to a style later. I guess I am preaching to the converted here.
Why draw 2 lines 6" apart when with one stroke you can draw the 6" wall that allows you to place in the doors windows and the wall has height. The program is only a KlaberHi this would appear to be the old adage that its hard to teach an old dog new tricks and they wont learn. And if none of this works, do what gets the job done. Since I am always looking to document as I go, I prefer my 2d work to look good.Īnyway good luck and have fun. But a lot of folks on here tend to use this technique for everything. I tend to use it for more fine-grained design, or special sorts of objects that are not so generic. The solid modeling stuff is a little less intuitive, and it doesn't always look great in plan. (Be sure to delete after a certain point because they will slow down your model) We use a lot of hybrid techniques where we might have hand drawn site plans mixed with 2d-3d linework. VW is cool because you can always import the sketches, PDFs or whatever and model with them/over them. Throw a couple of floors, doors, roof races, or slabs, and you can do something that approaches a building. I like working with walls because they join, and move together if they are joined you can build specificity into them as you need to. Start with any wall, delete all the components, until you can adjust the width directly in the object info palette. If you prefer working with walls, you may want to start by making them all generic: exterior 12" and interior. That can help you do generic massing models that directly relate to the program. Your spaces can also be thought of as extruded boxes that can stack. Under the AEC command, I then create walls from spaces. If I am doing detailed test fits, I organize space objects in plan and play with all the boxes. If you are doing something a bit more space plan / program driven, there are a bunch of ways you can work. Rhino is great with curves or Sketchup is great with textures and very basic massing. If you are doing blobs and sculptural Zaha Hadid type stuff, you might want to work in a slightly more user-friendly 3D program and import solids as you need them. I guess it depends on how 3d you need your 3D to be. I find it's fairly easy to design in 3d in VW. I'm not finding any info on this in Help or Service Select, but I may be missing something. VW isn't as fluid as Sketch-up in working up concepts, but it would be worth skipping using SU, or our concept sketches, even given the limitations or the 3D tools' interfaces if one could use the information without having to basically start a fresh. I get that one can't just draw an amorphous 3D object then have VW spit our working drawings but it seems to me though there is a step missing.
Doors & windows even with some kind of generic openings don't get created so there's that.
Extracting a 2D poly from a Face that has openings representing doors and windows results in a wacky mess, while a 3D Polygon extracted from the 3D object doesn't result in either an accurate or useable wall at least at this point. I'll cop to my lack of time on tools I've used these tools many times over the years, but I don't make use of them daily, so it's not second nature.
Thanks bcd, but that's the process that I'm following.Īs I say the interface for much of the 3D modelling tool sets are not really as straightforward, or user friendly as the rest of the programme is.