topic Re: Phased permit sets in Documentation

Phased permit sets

Anonymous — Tue, 28 Jan 2025 11:08:33 GMT

Is there a Graphisoft recommendation for how to manage a phased model? The first phase is "foundation only" and the second phase is "shell". The revision drawings for the first phase will be occurring while the second phase design development drawings are being worked on. What is the best way to coordinate all information and exit the process with a "complete" model?

Re: Phased permit sets

Anonymous — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 21:26:29 GMT

I think I found a post called "Pacakges while keeping into in1model" (sic) that covers my question. It's from 2008, but I don't think there are enough changes to ArchiCAD that there's more information... Does anyone know otherwise?

Re: Phased permit sets

Anonymous — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 06:10:22 GMT

I'd have to know more details to make a definite recommendation, but one way that comes to mind is to do phase 1 in one file, link that into the phase 2 file and so on.

Re: Phased permit sets

Erika Epstein — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:51:20 GMT

Ted, if its what I think, Graphisoft put that out a couple years ago and I don't believe it is still supported. It was pc only, and intended for smaller projects.
Matthew's approach is a good one to follow.

Re: Phased permit sets

Anonymous — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:08:37 GMT

(Erika) I think I recall what you were referring to and not only was it PC only, but I thought I heard it was geared toward residential projects and/or schematic design...
(Matthew) I'll post what you wrote in May '08 because I think it's very helpful. Tomorrow, our office is having a debrief on the pros and cons of our most recent phased project model files, so I'll post better details of landscape of our spaghetti (if we're lucky, it's a single type of pasta)...

Re: Phased permit sets

gpowless — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 11:50:27 GMT

Phased modeling?

I would have a problem with phasing the models of any design since design is basically top down, where construction is bottom up. Unless the entire model design is complete there are too many liabilities that could slip through the cracks.

I do understand the need for phased construction and that details can be developed as construction moves along, but seriously, building a building before the construction documents are substantially complete is a dangerous game.

Re: Phased permit sets

Anonymous — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:59:58 GMT

(gpowless) I sympathize with your perspective, but if an owner asks you to, do you turn the job down?

Re: Phased permit sets

gpowless — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:18:48 GMT

Ted wrote:
(gpowless) I sympathize with your perspective, but if an owner asks you to, do you turn the job down?

Yes.

There are principles of design and construction that do not get compromised. One of them is that you cannot determine the loads on the foundation if the upper storey design is not finished. Another is conformity with all building codes and regulations (would you provide a design not in conformance with the (a) Building Code?). Lastly, I do not risk my licence for anyone. There isn't enough money to cover the loss of reputation or the damages they WILL seek against you if there is a building failure.

One last thing. For every Joe that wants to short cut you short and force you into questionable practices there are 10 who are content to comply with the code and respect timelines. I suggest that if you maintain your principles you have far more to gain than by compromising them once and those who respect our profession will still give us the work.

Re: Phased permit sets

Anonymous — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:41:05 GMT

(gpowless) So (with ArchiCAD) would you then draw two separate tenant infills, occurring simultaneously in the same building, in two separate models? And therefore never have one model that shows everything within the building? Or would you charge one client for drawing the information twice?

Re: Phased permit sets

jclewis — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:20:31 GMT

We 'phase' our projects more often than not, but you do need a handle on the whole building to do so. Most of the time advantage come from the permitting process: it takes us 8-10 weeks to get a full permit, but only two weeks to get a foundation permit. And TIs can be added later.

Our process is: model as much of the project as needed in order to engineer the foundations and provide whatever else the permitting authority may require (in our case, structural floors plans and elevations as well as foundation details). When this task is completed and printed, save that model under a new name (PROJ-FNDN) and archive it.

Then return to the original model and finish the full permit plan set.

For TIs, reference the full permit model into a new model and complete the TI. There are various approaches to multiple TIs. We generally keep them separate, which means that we never have a single model of the entire project, but we seldom need one. If you want the entire project in one file, I would reference each TI into a shell model (do not include nested modules and be careful of 2d annotation, which will add confusion).

Re: Phased permit sets

gpowless — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:02:55 GMT

Ted wrote:
(gpowless) So (with ArchiCAD) would you then draw two separate tenant infills, occurring simultaneously in the same building, in two separate models? And therefore never have one model that shows everything within the building? Or would you charge one client for drawing the information twice?

Certainly how one handles tenant improvements may vary. But I wold have completed the base building first and added tenant improvements after. If the owner was also a tenant he would be charged for the base building and the improvements under one job. Subsequent tenants would be charged separately for each finish.

Re: Phased permit sets

Mark Wallace — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:08:13 GMT

I do ‘phased’ projects similar to jclewis’s method and Tenant Fitouts like gppowless too.

Over the years, I’ve found the modeling process ‘evolutionary’ as the design is developed. The single model existing in time as the master-design doesn't quite work as advertised. A single model reference in the form of documents for the Owner or Contractor maybe, but the Architect & Consultants would see their own design of that model differently.

Design & documenting projects w/ArchiCAD usually results in a series of models as the process unfolds or the design program dictates. ArchiCAD can handle this approach in so many different ways which is probably why GS stopped publishing ‘how-to ‘s as while ago.

Archiving or saving the project-model at specific points in the design process has been SOP, even before computers & CAD. If the design changes, retrieving a file is easier than re-modeling the project from scratch – even with ‘cutting & pasting.’

I use ‘find and select’ a lot on Tenant Fitouts to make the construction elements that are previously constructed look like ‘existing walls.’ That and layer management are key to managing involved designs. I’ve had projects were the Owner was marketing the same space to several tenants at once!

The real key is keeping your project-model files viable as the upgrades come along, but that's another topic.

Hope this helps…..
_______________________________

Mac G5 Dual 2.3 Ghz, 1.5 Gb
Mac OSX.4.11
ArchiCAD 12 2782 USA Full + 11, 10, 9 & 7

Re: Phased permit sets

gpowless — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:32:33 GMT

Of course this is where Modules shine. Being able to modify a tenant space without affecting the master model makes perfect sense.