Expanded ID?

[Mats_Knutsson]

Hi,

We are thinking of a complement to the ID field. Other software use a swedish classification system. A wall should thus have ID=W1 and classification A27C. Any other countries that have similar situation?

Regards,
Mats

[Anonymous]

Mats,

We have a standard for ID's, indeed. It's based loosely on the Architectural Graphic Standards' "Building Elements" classifications. Up to four letters and a space allowed for the classification, then the rest is user definable. For instance:

SITE_ is for site stuff... like 'SITE PVMT'

FNDN_ for foundation... like FNDN SLAB, FNDN FTNG, FNDN STEM, FNDN WALL..... and so on.

FRAM_ for framing

ROOF_ for roofing elements (finishes, flashings, etc.. NOT framing).

CABS_ for case work.. and moldings, typicaly.

EQPM_ for equipment.

PLMB_ for plumbing stuff.. like fixtures, etc.

MECH_

ELEC_

COMM_

and so on.

It's important for us because we use the ID's to filter model elements in our schedules and lists. To us, ID's are used to augment our layer methodology, and they share some of the same naming conventions.

My observation on these things, like layers, is to use a military style system, which names things from general to specific. That way, it's easy to cut stuff up into clearly defined groups with the detail of the the divisions becoming progressively finer as the name grows in length.

Hope that might spark an idea for you.... It could be done many ways. That said, the military methodology has served us well on not only Archicad, but other programs that utilize layers and unique ID's for elements, such as AutoCAD, photoshop, etc.

[Anonymous]

So far I haven't had a need for unique wall IDs. This will probably change once we start elevating and scheduling individual wall framing. Most often the wall IDs are set to their type (usually the composite name).

If you need both unique IDs and wall types you can schedule both values.

[Mats_Knutsson]

Thanks both for your insights! We'll delve into this. Military structure + architect is not often like milk and honey. The larger more advanced offices do fine while the small/one person company either relies 100% on the standard localized templates or they go completely wild with ArchiCAD and gets the job done in their own unique way.

[Anonymous]

Military structure + architect is not often like milk and honey.

How so? Think about it... Any soldier would tell you the first thing to fail in battle is the plan. As such, they've gone to great lengths to create a uniform system that allows the plan to change, while still maintaining a consistent form of communication among the ranks. I think the analogy is ideal.

Not arguing, but just wanted to offer that perspective.

When I was in Arch school, I worked as a draftsman and estimator for a company that did a lot of government / military contracts. The agencies all had iron-clad drafting standards that were really interesting... They were fully scalable from a dog house to a laser testing facility. They were well thought out... like some guy sat in a cave in Tibet for a decade and had it all worked out to the last detail. It worked well, and it taught me a lot about setting up drafting / CAD standards.

This has nothing to do with the creative process - design is a separate discipline from production, in my eyes. As another poster noted in another topic (rather bluntly), if the principals aren't fully up to speed on the production software, they shouldn't get involved in the production, other than checking the output of the production crew to insure it is communicationg their design intent (which usually rapidly erodes as the construction process begins!).

Really, the most important thing, in my opinion, is to use identification systems that work from generals to specifics. That was the main kernel of wisdom I gleaned from years of doing work for giant agencies who would have drawings being interpreted by people who might never meet and in vastly differing settings.

Just an observation.

[davide]

it would be interesting if someone sent an file.tpl for example. i'm trying to create my standards template, and i'd like to see how people works with archicad. davide

[Anonymous]

Davide,

I'd be willing to send you mine... but it would be a Version 9 .PLA file.. is that okay? I'm pretty sure Version 14 would load it, but of course you'd have to generate your own stuff on the layout side. Let me know if you'd like it, and I'll wrap it up and send it.

[davide]

i'd like it. thanks
i've seen your web site and I've seen your project: very nice, i'm studying how you drawn it.
davide

[Anonymous]

Davide,

Browse over to the 'Links' page on my website, it's at the bottom of the page. I also put a link to my entire GDL library.

Enjoy!