cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
2024 Technology Preview Program

2024 Technology Preview Program:
Master powerful new features and shape the latest BIM-enabled innovations

Wishes
Post your wishes about Graphisoft products: Archicad, BIMx, BIMcloud, and DDScad.

Layers AND Granular Management

Aurasphere
Expert

So having layers has it strength for global management via combinations but exceptions for visibilty create headaches

 

Granular management (like the other package starting with "R") is also great but looses logical grouping and global management prowess

 

We need both

 

I kind of do it now when using the 3d window and detailing...you can turn off individual elements using (def) alt+F5

 

Why cant this be applied to floor plan where granular items can be switched off but still maintaining the power of layers?

 

 

Aurasphere_0-1710460028879.png

Aurasphere_2-1710460048526.pngAurasphere_3-1710460080332.png

 

There are a lot more stages in this detail, but you get the idea. There are no layers involved, they are just views with element/objects hidden by alt+F5

WE NEED THIS FOR THE REST OF AC!

 

Cheers 

 

 

 

 

Mark Wesse
AC26 | Win10 | Since v6.5r
Architerion - Architectural Systems Developer
Aurasphere - Acoustics
Building Biology - Human Compatible Architecture
"--- Every time...do it better ---"

14 REPLIES 14
jl_lt
Ace

I stand by what i have said before: If something shows that shouldnt , or viceversa its because its in the wrong layer or its layers hasnt been created. 

 

But criteria based visibility, as described by other users, specially but not limited to by @thesleepofreason and @DGSketcher  would provide what you need 

 

 

As mentioned by @jl_lt - a criteria based approach would provide the granular functionality you need without compromising layer based work flows. For 3D the functionality is basically already implemented, just not for what and it's actually needed it. For 2D - much groundwork seem to have been done for design options, but once again not for what's it needed. There is a wish for it and discussion: Element Visibility Control .

It should also be noted that hide selection in 3D be a lot more useful if it wasn't for the flawed implementation Issue, Hide Selection in 3D.

furtonb
Advisor

Granular management (like the other package starting with "R") is also great but looses logical grouping and global management prowess

 

You can abuse worksets in Revit to act similarly as layers, so you actually have very good control over your elements (only works in workshared files).

odv.hu | actively using: AC25-27 INT | Rhino6-8 | macOS @ apple silicon / win10 x64

Ill check it out.

 

There are a couple of questions to ask because the context of use is subject to wide variability eg

How is the user applying BIM?

How is the divergence of model and presentation, quantity survey etc undertaken, if at all?

What level of BIM detail is the user applying? ie is it an actual physical model

 

While the idea of layers being " If something shows that shouldnt , or viceversa its

because its in the wrong layer or its layers hasnt been created. " might be ok for fairly light undertakings, it would be good to know

 

How much info is in your model?

How much communication are you undertaking? ie breadth of disciplines.

 

Do you have some benchmark models you have done eg BIMx to have a look at? Would love to see how you are doing it.

 

Im only doing resi atm but I would hope that it would far simpler than setting up criteria as far as I can see, the example of the 3d hide etc (if it were complete) bypasses all that

 

Without dynamic control, the amount of data required for the model just doesnt fit without the layers being exorbitant and the question of few rules/many exceptions vs many  rules few exceptions become so rigid and then adding layers into a document that is already set for many combinations etc...well its all just so messy

 

We extract comprehensive BOQ so the model is necessarily detailed/wysiwyg but when systemised, its not that big of a deal, although it horrifies new users...after a while they barely notice...but layers are always the biggest burden

 

This list (120) is about as tight as I can get it...after reviewing many templates of others, paid and free, couple of tweaks along the way but I def would like to see how others are going about it...always something to learn. Im intending to update classifications and cross link as much as possible

7191 DOC: NOT - Detail 1:1.dnd /s
7192 DOC: NOT - Detail 1:10.dnd /s
7193 DOC: NOT - Detail 1:2.dnd /s
7194 DOC: NOT - Detail 1:20.dnd /s
7195 DOC: NOT - Detail 1:5.dnd /s
7196 DOC: NOT - Detail 1:50.dnd /s
7201 DOC: NOT - Dimensions - Detail.dnd /s
7202 DOC: NOT - Dimensions - QA.dnd /s
7200 DOC: NOT - Dimensions.dnd /s
7210 DOC: NOT - Grid.dng /s
7225 DOC: NOT - Labels & Text.dnl /s
7215 DOC: NOT - Mark Up (h).dnm /h
7220 DOC: NOT - Marker - Detail.dnm /s
7221 DOC: NOT - Marker - Elevation.dnm /s
7222 DOC: NOT - Marker - Internal Elevation.dnm /s
7223 DOC: NOT - Marker - Section.dnm /s
7224 DOC: NOT - Masking Lines & Fills.dnm /s
7226 DOC: NOT - Titles & Layout.dnt /s
7654 DOC: PLN - APZ Plan.dpa /u
7240 DOC: PLN - Blackline Plan.dpb /u
7241 DOC: PLN - Drainage & Waste Management Plan.dpd /u
7655 DOC: PLN - Driveway Plan.dpd /u
7242 DOC: PLN - Electrical Plan.dpe /u
7243 DOC: PLN - Elevation/Section O/L Plan.dpe /u
7244 DOC: PLN - Excavation Plan.dpe /u
7645 DOC: PLN - Finishes Plan.dpf /u
7646 DOC: PLN - Floor Plan.dpf /u
7647 DOC: PLN - Internal Elevations Plan.dpi /u
7648 DOC: PLN - Landscape Plan.dpl /u
7649 DOC: PLN - Roof Plan.dpr /u
7656 DOC: PLN - Shadows.dps /u
7650 DOC: PLN - Site Analysis Plan.dps /u
7651 DOC: PLN - Site Plan.dps /u
7652 DOC: PLN - Slab Setout Plan.dps /u
7653 DOC: PLN - Sub Floor Plan.dps /u
7621 DOC: REF - Certificates & Reference.drc /s
7622 DOC: REF - Draft Aids (h).drd /h
7691 F&F: EXT - Appliance & Accessories.fea /s
7692 F&F: EXT - Fittings & Fixtures (h).fef /h
7731 F&F: INT - Appliance & Accessories.fia /s
7732 F&F: INT - Fittings & Fixtures.fif /s
7700 FLOOR: EXT - Finish.fef /s
7702 FLOOR: EXT - Tiliing.fet /s
7741 FLOOR: INT - Finish.fif /s
7751 FLOOR: INT - Frame & Sheet (h).fif /h
7750 FLOOR: INT - Frame & Sheet.fif /s
7761 FLOOR: INT - Tile & Trim (h).fit /h
7760 FLOOR: INT - Tile & Trim.fit /s
7831 GLZ: INT - Shading Devices (h).gis /h
8132 JNRY: INT - Cabinetry (h).jic /h
8131 JNRY: INT - Cabinetry.jic /s
8133 JNRY: INT - Shelving & Joinery.jis /s
8291 LINING: EXT - Soffit.les /s
8332 LINING: INT - Ceiling.lic /s
8333 LINING: INT - Wall.liw /s
8381 MDL: DET - Model Detail 1 (h).mdm /h
8382 MDL: DET - Model Detail 2 (h).mdm /h
8383 MDL: DET - Model Detail 3 (h).mdm /h
8384 MDL: DET - Model Detail 4 (h).mdm /h
8404 MEP: ELEC - Alarms.mea /s
8401 MEP: ELEC - Lighting.mel /s
8400 MEP: ELEC - Power.mep /s
8403 MEP: ELEC - Solar.mes 
8402 MEP: ELEC - Wiring.mew /s
8440 MEP: HVAC - Air Con & Heating.mha /s
8502 MEP: PLM - Plumbing (h).mpp /h
8501 MEP: PLM - Plumbing.mpp /s
8503 MEP: PLM - Rainwater.mpr /s
8511 MISC: QTY - Quantity (h).mqq /h
8531 MISC: SEO - Modelling (h).msm /h
8551 MISC: UTL - Misc.mum /s
8552 MISC: UTL - Trash (h).mut /h
8411 MKT: GFX - Furniture.mgf /s
8412 MKT: GFX - Perspective.mgp /u
8891 REF: EXT - Master 01.rem /s
8892 REF: EXT - Master 02.rem /s
8893 REF: EXT - Master 03.rem /s
8971 REF: IFC - Architectrural.ria /s
8972 REF: IFC - Civil.ric /s
8973 REF: IFC - Electrical.rie /s
8974 REF: IFC - Hydraulic.rih /s
8975 REF: IFC - Mechanical.rim /s
8976 REF: IFC - Terrain.rit /s
8901 ROOF: EXT - Accessories.rea /s
8902 ROOF: EXT - Cladding.rec /s
9001 ROOF: PLM - Fascia/Gutter/DP.rpf /s
9033 ROOF: STR - Frame (h).rsf /h
9071 SITE: LSC - Driveway.sld /s
9068 SITE: LSC - Fencing.slf /s
9069 SITE: LSC - Paving.slp /s
9070 SITE: LSC - Retaining.slr /s
9066 SITE: LSC - Tree and Plant.slt /s
9151 SITE: SUR - Anaylsis.ssa /s
9152 SITE: SUR - Boundary Lines.ssb /s
9153 SITE: SUR - Contours & Overlay.ssc /s
9154 SITE: SUR - Terrain Model.sst /s
9181 SITE: UTL - Services.sus /s
9182 SITE: UTL - Waste & Drainage.suw /s
9203 SITE: WRK - Excavation.swe /s
9161 SLAB: STR - Concrete - Slab.ssc /s
9162 SLAB: STR - Edge Beam & Footings.sse /s
9201 SPACE: ZON - Area.sza /s
9202 SPACE: ZON - General.szg /s
8992 STAIR: EGR - Stair (h).ses /h
8991 STAIR: EGR - Stair.ses /s
9131 STRUC: STR - Steel Beam.sss /s
9132 STRUC: STR - Steel Post or Column.sss /s
9133 STRUC: STR - Timber Beam.sst /s
9134 STRUC: STR - Timber Posts & Bracing.sst /s
9090 TRIM: EXT - Molding & Trim (h).tem /h
9130 TRIM: INT - Molding & Trim (h).tim /h
9392 WALL: EXT - Clad/Cap/Finish (h).wec /h
9391 WALL: EXT - Clad/Cap/Finish.wec /s
9393 WALL: EXT - Control Joints.wec /s
9401 WALL: EXT - Frame & Joinery.wef /s
9402 WALL: EXT - Gable (h).weg /h
9400 WALL: EXT - Wall - Envelope.wew /s
9403 WALL: EXT - Wall - Non Envelope.wew /s
9444 WALL: INT - Frame & Joinery.wif /s
9445 WALL: INT - Stud Wall.wis /s

Mark Wesse
AC26 | Win10 | Since v6.5r
Architerion - Architectural Systems Developer
Aurasphere - Acoustics
Building Biology - Human Compatible Architecture
"--- Every time...do it better ---"

Now you ask, fairly light undertakings would certainly be a good way to describe our work, as we have stayed in a fairly small scale.  

 

We have mostly all the layers you show here, save the sofit and wood parts because working with wood here is so ridiculously expensive that most dont bother with it.

 

We like to think our models hover near the 300 lod.   For the few things that get into the building phase we also function as project managers or Owners reps, so generally we have full control of the information flow (or lack of!). 

 

We have more dimension and annotation layers for diferent scales than actual element layers, which works, but makes us feel ashamed of ourselves, as in: isnt there a better way to handle scales and annotation? 

 

We colaborate with structural engineers and sometimes with MEP engineers. Only one of the engineers handles 3d models, the rest are still 2d semi-manual affairs which then we have to incorporate in the model, which is starting to get on my nerves.

 

Even though we are working on implementing it,  so far we havent been in the need to use a clasification system because the scale of our projects dont need it, and neither regulations nor clients ask for it. Yet we do get fairly extensive BOQ from our models, enough to budget up to the last square pound of concrete per element.

 

Our template, if it can be called that, has about 80 layers combinations which relate nicely with each type of plan, scale, section or plan, 3d, structural, foundations, windows, etc.  

 

We use a lot of 3d documents and axonometrics (some axonometrics are for on site use, but others are just for the website, for the sake of showing off 😁)

 

Save for the main plans and sections, we also try to enforce as much as possible not printing anything and using PDF files instead and we also try to expose everyone to the 3d model as much as possible, even the help guys that prepare mortar for the brick layers and the cleaning crew get to see it, until they all get sick of it but doubt and perplexity is erradicated. 

 

So far, using Archicad we have never had the need to do any adhoc views as you mention in the original post. All 3d view is handled from layer combinations and layers alone, so there is no need to keep track of these kind of things.  We also dont use any 2d in any of our projects. If 2d details are needed they are done in other software, but its rare, as our projects really dont need many complex details as they are mostly brick and mortar stuff and benign climate (and low budgets) doesnt need for fancy insulation details. Otherwise we go with the flow and accept what Archicad gives or can give.  We fought 2d and inferior 3d software long enough to know this.  Granted, getting these layers combinations more or less right took us a LONG time. We stopped dispairing about pensets a while ago.

 

We think Archicad gives a lot.  But with a few tweaks, most of which already have its foundations set, it could give EXPONENTIALLY much more.

 

 

Thanks for your detailed answer

 

I have had the privilege of being focused on overviews, automation and implementation in a number of large companies...so its a bit intense (since 98 in earnest)

 

We have more dimension and annotation layers for diferent scales than actual element layers, which works, but makes us feel ashamed of ourselves, as in: isnt there a better way to handle scales and annotation? 

 

 I have an industrial design background/manufacturing/graphix so I tend to do a lot of tearaways as full page PDF so that users can just scroll through for pseudo animated sequencing with just a couple of note...its actually easier and they can just measure off the bimx. ..but using the alt F5 is almost enough in concept

This is from an old file...that green is not original hehe so normally the matrix of images is full screen and scrolling does animated tear/build which engineers find very helpful and was pretty minimal to do (once its in a template from). Dynamic visibility is key though

 

Aurasphere_0-1710549365080.png

 

Even though we are working on implementing it,  so far we havent been in the need to use a clasification system because the scale of our projects dont need it, and neither regulations nor clients ask for it. Yet we do get fairly extensive BOQ from our models, enough to budget up to the last square pound of concrete per element.

 

Classification really comes into its own for IFC exchange to quanity surveyors in progs like CostX etc

 

My initial job was implementing a fair bit more than a BOQ; the old listing system in Archicad is blindingly powerful...just a ridiculous layout process. I was actually generating the entire (well 95%) of the orders directly from within Archicad. ie The pricebook was linked to Archicad from accounts/purchasing via a text file (an old non current example displayed below). You chose a supplier and it did the rest with item codes generated parametrically by the items and heirarchy. No nuts and bolts as they are assembly/m2/m3 based anyway but just about everything else.

Aurasphere_0-1710547607145.png

 

Nothing needs to go outside...

BUT

It does mean that the physical modelling needs to have audits and feedback AND simplicity for users 

AND

Create top notch graphic competent display etc so that is my gripe and why dynamic control would work so well in my case.

Im only really just getting into the deeper stuff of BIMx but it has thrown up plenty of showstoppers for a succinct stakeholder interchange, most notably not being able to introduce variations of the model without saving a separate geometry model for each one...which just doesnt work well for a browser/linked presentation.

Cheers

 

Mark Wesse
AC26 | Win10 | Since v6.5r
Architerion - Architectural Systems Developer
Aurasphere - Acoustics
Building Biology - Human Compatible Architecture
"--- Every time...do it better ---"

Thanks!! As defined in another thread by @thesleepofreason, our beloved layers would be a part of a much bigger implementation of the criteria based approach. So we are all waiting for it to happen.

 

Cheers to all!

I do wonder how criteria based would work in the pier example though, where you tear pieces away as a reverse reveal, as there are many objects that would fall in the same criteria filter...unless Im missing something? Ill have another read

Mark Wesse
AC26 | Win10 | Since v6.5r
Architerion - Architectural Systems Developer
Aurasphere - Acoustics
Building Biology - Human Compatible Architecture
"--- Every time...do it better ---"

Scraptrash
Booster

Every now and then, there’re posts saying layer is not enough.

Based on their response, I’m sure GS has already set up a criteria based filter to filter out all topics related to layers for themselves.  😆

MacBook Pro (16 inch, 2021) Apple M1 Max 64GB macOS Monterey Archicad 26 MBP trackpad Logitech Master MX3