Perspective: Working in a Model Means You Have to Move Your Feet

If you were offered free tickets to a movie, but you have to sit on the front row all the way over to the right side of the theater, would you still want to go?  What about the very top row of a baseball stadium down the third base line?  Would you rather watch a musical from the last row underneath a balcony by the exit or from the front row of the balcony?  It’s the same show, but obviously where you are sitting will affect the experience. 

When physically surveying a building, it is better to walk around and get up close observations than to stand at one end of a hallway and just guess what is there.  When constructing a project, the installer should have the mobility to move around the space to properly place and connect the components.  Why, then, do users of a 3D model not think that they have to be aware of their location in a building model when exploring and modeling content?

2D AutoCAD is based in an environment where the user location is not going to affect the drawing.  The leap into Building Information Modeling through Autodesk Revit forces a user to now navigate a 3D environment.  However, most beginning users don’t think of the effects that the User Point Of View (POV) will have on what is seen or created.  You are not simply creating drafted lines to represent the design content, but are actually modeling some 3D representation of that design content.  Where you are virtually standing will impact the location of the content and how well you are able to see it.

The most obvious instance of the User POV impact is when working with Sections.  The POV is the entire Section line as a plane looking in the direction of the section view.  Adding to existing model elements will allow new content to be modeled at the existing point.  Add new content and it will be placed on the Section line, because that is where the user is virtually located.

It is best to work perpendicular to the content being modeled.  Plan views are not as important as Sections or Elevations.  If the Architect has decided to locate a building wing at 17° from the rest of the building, then Sections should be rotated 17°, 62°, 107° etc. when developing the systems.

Since the Model can contain the entire Building, it is also important to have the appropriate depth of a view.  Views too deep can quickly become dense with content.  “The shallower the Section; the deeper the Content.”  Working in an Elevation or Section requires only seeing what is necessary to know where the content is modelled and its surrounding environment.  Too shallow and the view won’t show enough.  Too deep and the view shows too much.  Basically, when working in a 3D building model, make sure you have the best seat in the house for the show.

  

-Craig

www.ModelingDynamics.net

Photo Credits:

http://www.jdbaseball.com/pictures/cleveland-indians/nose-bleed-seats.htm

http://sandiegotheatres.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/17_Civic_Theatre_Interior_05-02-72dpi.jpg

The Way Things Were: Settling For Mediocrity

The biggest challenge we may be facing is the need to adapt to the technology around us.  I am sure that there were amazing wagons being designed and built when the automobile first hit streets.  Stories can be told over the radio, but it sure is nice seeing them in black and white or maybe even color.  As a child, I remember our first cordless home phone.  You could talk on the phone in your home and not be attached to the wall in the dining room.  My children will never know what a home phone looks like.  Stay mad at MTV for not showing music videos, while you search YouTube for the current hit song stuck in your head.

In every facet of our lives, things are constantly changing.  We can choose to live with existing technology and be happy.  How much extra work are we burdening ourselves though?  When I watch a video of a robotic arm cutting wood to length and then splitting it for firewood, I can’t help but think of the poor guy with an axe.  He works very hard to get the wood prepared, but takes ten times as long and lies down with a sore back when it’s all over.  I’m not just talking about wasted time in physical labor.

I remember getting my first TI-85 Graphing Calculator.  Our school teacher wasn't entirely sure what to make of them.  The problem was that the students quickly realized the power of the devices in saving time and double-checking math.  I began to write my own executable programs to perform problems that provided a result based upon variable inputs.  I would write out the math, step-by-step, to show that I knew the process.  However, using the calculator to rework the problem was cheating?  A short time later, teachers were telling us to format our calculators in hopes that we would not ‘cheat’ on exams.  Obviously, the calculator was a tool and I was still responsible for knowing the material.

Spreadsheets quickly became a great tool for developing ways to perform repetitive calculations.  Engineering can involve many varying possibilities.  Why spend many days hand calculating the information when it can be done in a spreadsheet or specific program in hours or less?  Now imagine that those calculations have a direct effect on the design documentation.  What does that mean?

Drafting is truly an art.  Taking an idea and developing it on paper with pencil is not easy.  Representing the idea in 2D based on three dimensions takes a trained eye.  Now we are modeling in 3D and trying to find ways to document the 3D into 2D to represent the 3D.  But are the 3D models, created manually, taking just as long as the man with the axe?  Wouldn't you want the robotic arm helping out?  

Some people have accepted BIM and 3D modeling because it was required in order to get the project.  The problem is there isn't any benefit to a 3D model that is manually developed just to produce documents.   Why limit yourself to a manual process when there is the potential to automate it? Why not use modeling content that is designed around the entire industry? Why do it the way it was done last year, only because that is the way it was done last year?  Isn't it beneficial to spend some time finding a quicker way that will save more time in the end?  Why accept mediocrity and not continuously push the capacity to perform work in a more accurately and timely manner?

-Craig

www.ModelingDynamics.net

Image Credits:

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/cordless-telephone-pictures.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TI-85

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO77ms-eeTY

Standards: Buying Into BIM Without Busting Open Your Wallet

Revit is a tool used to help the development of buildings from conception through construction.  There is no magic button or miracle macro that can take a design and make it happen while you sleep.  Not yet at least.

Revit is a great tool that is meant to help shave hours off project designs by standardizing some aspects and automating tasks.  If the user only uses Revit to draft the design in 3D and has nothing set up in templates or other preferences, then this tool will easily burn through the fee of a project and the team will wonder why they even bother.  It isn’t until the team builds the framework for their design that the time savings begins.  Develop Templates and Preferences that can be implemented into a project.  The Leap of Faith is to invest time into this process that will save more time in the end which then saves money.  

Beyond the Project Model Settings, the Model Elements used in a project will also determine how efficient the design progresses.  One idea is to have basic, generic 3D Families that represent selected equipment regardless of any specific manufacturer.  Simple cubes and cylinders that carry basic properties can be used initially.  In the Schematic Design, the basic families and drafted schedules based on note blocks can be developed to rapidly produce simple plans for discussion with the building owners.  As decisions are made, the families can be swapped out with more accurate Custom or Manufacturer content and Live Schedules.

How is this possible? Autodesk has published a Standard Library of Shared Parameters, yet barely anyone knows about it.  The other problem with this Library is that the Shared Parameters carry generic names that could already exist in a company’s own established library.  That led to the creation of the Master Labeling Convention and its use in the Master Library of Shared Parameters.  The best reason to adopt this standard is that many major manufacturers are already using this library in their product representation.  Having the Master Library preloaded into a Project Model helps identify which Parameters are included when Washing the Shared Parameters.

One issue that is preventing a building being developed within one model through the entire process is how the different users need to use that model as the building is developed and constructed.  The conceptual design is not as concerned about every hanger and bolt as it is with how the systems perform and connect.  Designers are more focused on the performance of the building systems and use developed content that focuses on that aspect.  The problem is in the real representation of that content, which is almost entirely useless for the team tasked with building the design.  Keep the design simple and let the contractor do what they do best.  As time passes, and content becomes even further developed, we may see a day when designers are using families and setups that provide design feedback as well as material accuracy.

There is a lot of available content developed for use in Revit.  Look outside your office before busting open your wallet and trying to do it all yourself.  Recognize which content is built around a purpose of community development rather than isolation.

-Craig

 www.ModelingDynamics.net

Simplistically Complex: A Modeling Leap of Faith

Solving problems in Revit tends to be a simple solution to a seemingly complex and confusing problem.  As technology gets more involved in our lives, we may think we have become more complex.  Jumping from pencil to CAD seems like an easier leap now than CAD into BIM is currently requiring.  For generations, we have been trained to visualize the 3D design and develop 2D drawings.  With BIM, we can truly model in 3D what we are visualizing in 3D.  The problem is that we are still holding on to the 2D representation, because that is how it’s been done traditionally.  Don’t look at the monitor and think in 2D.  Don't draft for the purpose of simply developing construction documentation.  The screen is a window out into a virtual world.  Visualize the design and create it in the model.  What you see is 3-dimensional and should be envisioned as such.  Allow the documentation to occur after the model has been developed.

Problems in life can seem too complicated to solve and overwhelming with no end in sight.  In reality, the issue can probably be searched deeper to a simple problem that has plagued all people for millennia.  At our core, we are dealing with psychological desires that will impact our decisions.  When looking at the problem, don’t necessarily think about how to prevent the symptoms, but look deeper to find the root cause and make the change there.

When it comes to troubleshooting 3D models that have developed some form of difficulty, most cases are solved by one or two options somewhere in the settings for the model environment or a model element.  Fixing the symptom is like manually hiding the problem element and hoping that it will stay away.  It is more important to find the root of the visibility problem and to deal with it there. 

There is a lot involved with modeling an entire building, yet be able to isolate certain levels or systems.  Add in the options to exclude or hide elements so that the views are automatically controlled without the need to develop each view independently.  It is a delicate balance between relying on the system settings and being able to negotiate those settings when problems develop.  The immediate decision is to manually draft content for the sake of saving time and working with the level of staff available, but the results will lead to longer production time and staff development stagnation. 

Growth in staff and capabilities rely on the BIM modelers making the commitment to learn the virtual environment and using it to their advantage.  The clues are there, but it takes a bit of courage to make that first step.  Indiana Jones was faced with many challenges in The Last Crusade[1].  One of the most simple and complex problems may have been the Leap of Faith.  Mr. Jones stood at the edge of one cliff with the need to get to the other side, across a deep gorge.  His clue, “Only a leap from the Lion’s head shall he prove his worth.” From the start, the task looks impossible with no way of ever getting across.  After the first step in faith, Indiana realizes that he just needs to walk the path that he didn’t initially see.  Once he is across, he looks back and sees how easy the path was to cross and continues his mission with a smirk on his face.  

So are you standing in front of the first step, not sure about where to start, or across the bridge looking back at how easy it is to know the steps?

-Craig
www.ModelingDynamics.net

[1] Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) Steven Spielberg, Harrison Ford

Model Phasing: Time Travel without the Danger of Butterfly Wings

 Almost every story involving the idea of time travel includes the concept that events or lives will be altered by the occurrences being changed from how they originally happened.  Travelling back in time brings the risk of exposing an event that could alter the path that originally happened.  Going into the Future could reveal the long-term effects of one seemingly meaningless event, such as a butterfly flapping its wings[1].  Many times, the main character travels to the past to try and change one event that only opens a Pandora’s Box of cascading effects.  In Terminator 2: Judgment Day[2], the characters knew there would be a catastrophic event that was going to happen and their goal was to try and stop it.  The hope of changing the future was shattered by Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines[3], when the events that were to happen on Judgment Day became inevitable and were destined to eventually happen no matter what was done to try and stop it.  Passing through time in Revit can be done without fear of having any drastic effects in the timeline of that model.  In fact, it can be more damaging to try and represent Phasing without using Phases.

A lot of work in AutoCAD is based around manual selection of layers and other characteristics of lines that were needed to visually represent the scope of work in a view.  To go from an Existing view to a New Construction view may have meant copying all the work and changing the lines according to line type assignments.  One advantage in Revit is to assign when every model element is created and demolished as it is modeled.  When model elements are properly assigned to when they exist, the Existing view can be changed to a New Construction view simply by changing the Phase assignment for that view.  That advantage is lost when users cannot relax control of the line weight assignments and continue to manually control the line properties.  The adverse result is manually changing the properties of the model elements in order to alter the depiction of what phase that view is presenting.

With Revit, it is important to develop the model, not the view.  When developing the model, create content according to the properties of the model.  As the properties are altered by view, the model content will update respectively.  Don’t develop views in order to get the sheets to look right.  Manually altering properties with the view aesthetic as the primary focus will be detrimental to the overall development of the model.  If there are concerns with getting the sheets to look right, the first attempt should be to experiment with the view settings in general.  Manual drafting in views may seem like a short-term solution, but it will add time to the scope of a project.

When using multiple phases in a project, there is a tendency to lose where elements have been placed.  When looking for the missing model element, be sure to check what phase(s) the model element exists in and what phase the current view is assigned to.  It is possible that that element is not visible because it hasn’t happened yet, or already has been demolished in the timeline of the model.  If the view is set in the future and the element has already been demolished, then that element will never show, despite any changes to Visibility Graphics, because that element no longer exists.  If the view is set early in the project and the element is to be created later, then that element will never show, despite any changes to Visibility Graphics, because that element does not yet exist.

Travelling through the time of a project can be done quickly and easily without any need for a certain velocity timed exactly to a lightning strike.  You don’t need a phone booth.  You don’t need a space ship or black hole.  You don’t need a watch.  You won’t find random zoo animals running through the streets.  You don’t even need some mysterious gate to pass through that spits you out in another time and place.  You can even keep your clothes on.  It’s as easy as changing the view phase assignment.  No, really.  You see the model as it exists in the point in time you are in and you can go back and forth through time and not have any impact on the events that have taken place or will take place.  That has to bring a small amount of comfort.  If you do decide to change when an element is created or destroyed, then it will automatically be updated in corresponding views based on the properties of that element relative to the phase assignment of the view.  That is only if you have let go and allowed the model to manage the element properties.

-Craig

www.ModelingDynamics.net

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect

[2]Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) James Cameron

[3]Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003) Jonathon Mostow

Library Models: Storing and Accessing Developed Content

Efficient use of Project Modeling in Revit heavily relies are a strong foundation of standards and content.  There isn't much that can be done out of the box with Revit.  It can take several months to a year of content development in order to get all the components developed and working right.  By that time, there may have been improvements in the equipment selections by the manufacturers, thereby making some of that content outdated.  Some design firms may be moving to very simplistic representations of equipment; whether that Revit Family is a cube or a generic presentation of the model element.  The problem there is in the 3D representation of an element intended to represent the spatial requirements of actual equipment selections.

The manufacturer may provide the family, but then it probably doesn't function with a Company standard other than to give the 3D geometry.  A company can choose to organize all its content internally to where the files work beautifully together, but are worthless when using any externally sourced material.  That can lead to an isolation effect where content updates are difficult to maintain.  You’d think that relying on externally sourced content would mean giving up any hope of achieving model elements that can communicate throughout a model.  To do so would mean there has to be some form of universal standard that is not meant to represent any one firm, manufacturer or method of modeling.  The MASTER SHARED PARAMETER LIBRARY and LABELING CONVENTION are designed to do just that.  Providing a broad standard where internal content can work side-by-side with externally sourced content.

So, what kinds of model content are being referred to here? Revit Families, Live Schedules and Tags by Category that extract information from the Model Elements.  What’s a ‘Live’ Schedule?  That is a term for a Schedule in Revit that is populated by Model Elements in the Project Model that is performance data driven by conditions in the systems of that model.  The Revit Families built around the Master Library are developed to work in conjunction with the Live Schedules to drive the data and information throughout the model.  The Tags by Category Annotations are designed to extract that information based on what is tagged and provide it in plan views for ease of documentation.  Properly formatted Tag Families require very little custom formatting.

Revit Families can be preloaded in a Template or organized in the Library Folder.  It is easy to know where one is saved, if you are the user that saved it.  Finding a family, and not being the person who developed it can be the true test of folder organization.  Another hindrance to using File Folders for families is not having a good thumbnail preview of the family.  If you don’t know the name of the file, it can be hard to find the right one without opening up multiple families.  

Having a visual method of searching for content, organized in groups by category also helps locate the desired content.  A Library Model is a Revit Project File set up for Worksharing, that contains all of the company and department content loaded into it and is visually searchable.  Instances of model elements are placed in Views and Details can be organized in Drafting Views.  Model Elements and Schedules can be tested in the Library Model for function and standard aesthetics.  To get a family from the Library Model into a Project model, either 'Edit Family' and 'Load Into Project' or simply use the Operating System Clipboard (Ctrl C, Ctrl V).  Drafting Views and Schedules can be transferred using 'Insert View From File'.  More efficiently, Sheets can be developed with common content for quicker and clean transfer of content.  Pulling Sheets using 'Insert View From File' will carry across all Drafting Views and Schedules assigned to the sheet.

To keep the Project Template file size down, most content that is exclusive to one discipline or not used every project can be organized in the Library Models and transferred as needed.  Utilizing a Library Model will also provide a means for many personnel to provide content into the model for Standards development and control of those Standards.  Apologies for not having many photos or screenshots.  Please accept this cute baby bunny rabbit instead.

-Craig

www.ModelingDynamics.net

Schedule Maps: A Journey through a Live Schedule

There once was a time when it was necessary to open up a folded piece of paper that explained what the roads were in a town and even across the entire United States.  This item, commonly referred to as a map, would require some level of user understanding.  Once the correct position and required direction were understood, the next step was determining how to get to the desired destination.  With modern technology, you can be told exactly where you are, which direction you are headed and even the best route to get to your destination pending options such as avoiding tolls or highways.  You don't normally ask anyone for directions to where they are anymore, just the address.

A Live Schedule is a term used to distinguish a Revit Schedule that is referencing live data from model elements in a project model.  When it comes to developing a Live Schedule Standard, it is critical for colleagues to understand what the Fields are for a particular Live Schedule and a basis for how it is formatted.  The term, Schedule Map, is used to describe a line sheet that documents what Shared Parameters are used in populating the Fields as well as some of the Basic Properties such as how it may be Sorted or Filtered.  This allows the user to see the destination and find a way to get there.

It helps to have one, or a few people, involved in developing the standards for the Live Schedules, but it is even more important that those few people are not required every time a schedule needs to be added to a project model.  The Schedule Maps are meant to be documentation to provide guidance for any member of the team to see how the Live Schedule is formatted.  That should save time in a project by allowing the editing of the family, when needed, to be done without constantly checking if it will work in the schedule.

This sample Schedule Map reveals how a Live Exhaust Fan Schedule is developed.  The top is a rough visualization of the field headings and which ones are grouped together.  The Schedule Fields provide the list of Parameters needed for the schedule, including optional or hidden fields.  The Blue Parameters are from the MASTER SHARED PARAMETER LIBRARY and are known Shared Parameters from the Autodesk Shared Parameter Library.  Those parameters in Blue should be found in the most common Manufacturer provided families, allowing for the Schedule to be populated in those fields without any modification.  The Purple Parameters are from the Master Shared Parameter Library that are loaded as Project Parameters for this particular model, but are not necessarily needed to be Project Parameters.  These are commonly used Fields that don't normally exist in Manufacturer families.  Finally, this Live Schedule is filtered by Mechanical Equipment where 100Type contains EF and is sorted by 100Mark in ascending order.  

This Exhaust Fan Schedule Map is not meant to be identical across multiple companies and doesn't need to be.  The most important aspect of the Schedule Map is the list of Blue Parameters, that are known Shared Parameters in use by most of the Major Manufacturers.  As long as the Shared Parameters are there, the aesthetics can be altered by company and not affect the population of data in the Live Schedule.

-Craig

www.ModelingDynamics.net

https://maps.google.com/