Layer Name Extensions

[Anonymous]

Is there some weird control or restriction on what type of extension you can add to a layer name?

I am trying to group certain layers together via the extentions but for whatever reason I cannot use the same extension on different layers, sometimes I can use 4 or 5 characters, sometimes I cant use any characters and on other occasions I get one layer to take an extension but it is random as to whether I can use the same extension on other layers.

I'm sure this is another newbe oversite, so hopefully someone here can open the keys to the kingdom.

Example of what I am trying to do:

Layer Name/Extension:
Walls (Spindles) Stairs
Slabs (Railing) Stairs
Slabs (Stair Treads) Stairs

by using the same extension, I can easily and quickly sort all the layers that relate to my staircase (if I can only get it to work)

PS, I realize Layer combinations can do this, but I am trying to achieve a complex organizational structure, so having the extension option working like I want it to wil be of great help for what I am trying to do.

Thanks

[Djordje]

Off the top of my head: make sure the name does not extend beyond the archaic 27+3 limit ?

[Erika Epstein]

vincon2 wrote:

Example of what I am trying to do:

Layer Name/Extension:
Walls (Spindles) Stairs
Slabs (Railing) Stairs
Slabs (Stair Treads) Stairs

Regarding creating layers, you will have far fewer layers if you drop the tool used to create the part and just use the name of what you are creating.

spindle.stairs
railing.stairs
tread.stairs

Also, when typing in layer names, type a period and then the extension and everything after the period is automatically made an extension.

Also, keep your layer names short enough that you can read the entire name and extension in the info box. This will save you and your coworkers a lot of time when a quick glance at the info box suffices rather than having to stop and scroll ...

HTH

[Aussie John]

I have to ask the question why do you need so many layers just to create a stair? basically all you need it 2 layers- what you see on plan and what you see in 3d views. If you have additional plan views add an extra layer.

I have never unstood the need to have layers based on the construction elements. Who needs to know if it is a slab or a roof.

All my layers are basically based on the scale that the view set will use or whether it shows up in the 3d views but not the plans.

[Anonymous]

I just made those names up to illustrate that I was using wall, slabs, etc for various stair parts.

I use a separate layers for all of my stair components because it gives me greater flexibility when sorting and creating my interactive schedules.

Because I am a homebuilder, I want my plans to automatically quantify all the components that I will have to estimate.

Most architects aren't concerned with this, so my method doesn't apply to them.

The extra time to model and organize my drawings is more than compensated for by aall the time I save estimating, not to mention the unbelievable accuracy I can derive from my schedules

[Aussie John]

fair enough but I think the element ID is probably enough for sorting an interactive schedule

[Anonymous]

I'll do some thinking on that, I come from autocad and developed a familiarity and comfort level with layers so I may not be realizing how I could achieve the same goals using different tools.

Do you use interactive schedules much?

I use the layers to filter what is seen on my schedules, can the ID be used the same way?

Can you use 27 characters in the ID?

It seems like it was a lot less characters, which made it difficult to name (I also want the names not to be cryptic, because on my schedules I need a subcontractor to be able to easily understand that I need a stair tread and not get confused by an abbreviation.

[TomWaltz]

vincon2 wrote:
I just made those names up to illustrate that I was using wall, slabs, etc for various stair parts.

I use a separate layers for all of my stair components because it gives me greater flexibility when sorting and creating my interactive schedules.

Because I am a homebuilder, I want my plans to automatically quantify all the components that I will have to estimate.

Most architects aren't concerned with this, so my method doesn't apply to them.

The extra time to model and organize my drawings is more than compensated for by aall the time I save estimating, not to mention the unbelievable accuracy I can derive from my schedules

For most architects, your system would be insane. For your needs, it sounds like it works perfectly. I'm impressed with your patience to manually build stairs!

While you COULD use IDs, the layers give you a preset list of options and reduce the risk of typos when entering the IDs.

You can imagine if you accidentally type "wodd" instead of "wood", and the scheduler only looks for "wood"

[Anonymous]

Its really pretty easy and not very time consuming.

1. I set up a stnd tread/riser/cove and save it off to the side in my standard template (with appropriate layers set up).

2. Then, I use a stair tool to calculate the rise, run and tread qty for my particular application.

3. Then I adjust my sample riser/tread/cove to match the rise needed.

4. Then I select the tread, riser and cove and apply the multiply and elevate and wallah!

The multiply and elevate takes a little getting used to, but once you get the coordination to make it work, its like riding a bike.

As far as ID's versus layers..you bring up a good point that was a concern of mine. If I use a unique layer name then its easy to always use that layer, if I use an ID, I have more manual input which leads to the greater possibility of an error of the type you mention. However, I have found it pretty useful to create special schedules that I use to cross-check my information and quickly review key data to make sure I don't have any silly typos.

Using ID's may be a possiblity but I doubt it because I also like to model several different views. If everything is crammed into one layer, it makes it hard to do custom views. For every ying there is a yang and I'm still trying to figure out what the yings and the yangs are.

I've only been using this program for about a year, so I have a lot more to learn about schedules that may change the way I use layers and ID's. So far I am extremely impressed with the scheduling capabilities and LOVE the fact that floorplans, elevations, sections and schedules all reconcile to each other automatically. That alone should make every architect in the world buy and use this software.

Tom, I see that you are an Archicad trainer and GDL Guru, are you available for consultation and custom object making?

If so, please let me know how I can get in touch with you.

Thanks for your input

[TomWaltz]

vincon2 wrote:
That alone should make every architect in the world buy and use this software.

They are too brainwashed by the great Automated Drafting Table.

Tom, I see that you are an Archicad trainer and GDL Guru, are you available for consultation and custom object making?

Yes, I am.

If so, please let me know how I can get in touch with you.

You can contact anyone on the forum through the "PM" icon at the bottom of any post they make. If you click on this, you can type a private message for just that person.

When you sign into the forum, along the top of the screen you can see any Private Messages you may have. In your Profile, there is a setting to receive an email any time you have a PM so you know right away.