Hi all,
During my short carreer I have encountered several phylosophies in modeling walls and floors.
Some companies prefer to do it in one family (eg multilayered wall) some prefer to create several wall families (eg massive structure and plaster wall).
Both can be right and wrong at the same time. Modeling should be directly linked to which result we would like to achieve.
But, by your personal experience, what is the best way, or
the more convenient one, to model those families?
Depends on the situation, but generally with floors - structural floor and separate finishes. With walls, generally one wall, but for tiled finishes or similar, I would model additional thin walls for these.
@XXalessio.amodioXX wrote:Some companies prefer to do it in one family (eg multilayered wall) some prefer to create several wall families (eg massive structure and plaster wall).
i don't know anyone that will model each layer of the wall separately. you can select any wall and pick Create Parts, but that's different.... it still 1 wall, its just allowing you to access the "layers" of the wall.
We played around with different wall creation methods a while back. mostly dealing with Structural and Arch coordination. the main thing we were looking into is should Structural place the Structural wall and then Architecture can place an interior and exterior "facades" on the Structural wall. we quickly decided that was too much effort :-). what we ended up with was editing all the Architectural walls so the masonry/concrete component of the wall was set to Actual size and not Nominal. Then the Architects and Structural designers/engineers had to collaborate. So the nominal core masonry/concrete components of the Architectural wall match the actual structural elements for any "Structural" walls.
i mentioned this in another post and i'm going to say it again... Autodesk, please make it so when a view is set to Structural you can see the structural components in linked Architectural walls......
Howard Munsell
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
Are you asking about compound-layered Wall/Floor Types vs. creating a separate Wall/Floor Type for each material layer? If so, we always use a combination of both.
We always have a separate structural wall, if there is one, and an architectural wall which can be multilayered. It's a matter of responsabilities. When you put both into one multilayered wall, who is allowed to change the composition of that wall? Who is responsible for the element?
When you have two walls the architect can move his wall, basically saying "I'd like to propose we place this wall here." When the Structural engineer moves his wall accordingly that's an "okay that works, as long as I change these beams or those floor thicknesses or whatever".
Basically each party is responsible for their elements and you just can't do that with one multi-layered wall.
does your Architectural wall have a Structural component to it or do you place a "wall" on either side of the Structural wall for Interior and Exterior conditions?
Howard Munsell
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
Hi
I have tried once to use ''parts'' tool in a model. It turns out a mess for visualization line thickness drawing requirements.
Mostly i try to divede the architectural from the structural one.
But many times the architectural one (eg external insulation) may change in thickness throught the height.
You would model it as eg two separate wall or one single with reveal and/or sweeps?
Sometimes I have seen even Plaster finish modelled as a separate wall. I believe for better control of the layer itself.
I'm also interested in how you draw a (structural) floor and screed*...(sloping) as seperate layers/multi-layered variable. Kind of missing a floor which can be aligned to bottom, and please don't tell me to model it as a roof. *hope I'm using the correct terminology. Would be nice if the view is set to structural, to see structural elements only.
I try to follow the same idea. Divide the strucural from achitectural.
Most of the time modelling bearing wall (e.g. masonry ) is tricky beacuse related to different professions (e.g double masorny wall with internal insulation). Plus we mostly work with Linked models.
So th architect should model just eg the insulation and structural one the load bearing layer?
How the wall thickness will be displayed in section? (Not correctly I suppose beacuse the two separeted wall cannot be joined due to fact that one belongs to a linked file).
This passage is crucial.
Hi , I am not sure to have understood your question.
You mean how to model a sloped floor separately from the architectural? Some sketch drawing would help.
in our case, i wold model the structural wall (CMU, Concrete, etc...) in the structural. then the architects would model there wall and the architectural model (Interior/Core & Exterior all in one). the architectural wall would be placed basing the Location Line on the of Core Face:Exterior of the structural wall. since the structural Core element of all my architectural walls are Actual vs Nominal they line up. if the architectural wall needs to change, the cores remain lined up. if the Structural core changes, Structural tells the architect about the change and the architect updates there wall type. any reveals or sweeps would be placed on the architectural wall in the architectural model.
i only use Parts for some details for the most part my office doesn't use them. we did look into them as an option at one point, place the wall, separate it into Parts, freeze all but the structural Core. as expected, too much hassle and quickly abandoned :-).
Howard Munsell
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
Same question really, but with regards to floors. To model that seperately or not, and how. And my wish-item for a bottom alignment for floors, it's somewhat limiting to have only top alignment option.
Same thing really. Architectural Levels and Structural Levels. Each party responsible for their part. Architect can change the architectural Levels which host the Architectural floors and walls. Structural Levels are managed by the Structural engineers. Structural elements use only structural Levels and offsets relative to those levels, so a change in architectural Level doesn't inadvertedly change any structural elements.
We do not constrain structural to architectural or vice versa. Communication is of course still required, but at least this way nobody is changing anything the other party is responsible for, which is the crux of working together in the same model.
Architects will start off with "architectural structural" elements in the beginning of a project to later be taken over by the engineers, so these are always separate elements. Purely architectural walls do not have a structural component, it's just not the architect's responsability and they have no business changing anything structual. Architects can place and modify their "archi-structural" elements but they're not allowed to modify anything already in the structural engineers' workset.
Communicate with the engineers and if it works for them they change it.
Hi,
I will answer by my experience.
Whenever it is possible I d prefer to use Multilayered vertical-horizonatal elements.
But most of time building geometry does not allow me to do so.
To overcome the issue I model as "Lego" and giving to elements a particular naming convention to track them easly.
I do not use parts and I try to not join geometry between disciplines.
Check the video.
Sie finden nicht, was Sie suchen? Fragen Sie die Community oder teilen Sie Ihr Wissen mit anderen.