Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

How to generate simplified drawings

Even in Model View sections I get distracted by the hatches
on cutting faces.
I would be more interested in a simplified drawing Style.
Here a few examples of what I am looking for :
https://www.homecrux.com/wp-content/gallery/north-star-apartment-by-nice-architects/north-star-apartment-by-nice-architects-5.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_E-U7KDrvlEE/R6hCxljQi9I/AAAAAAAAAHY/PH7gEuc61ec/s320/fpt_0058-02.gif
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b3/70/52/b37052316d5138bc468a44a101fdbedb.jpg
https://cdn.architecturelab.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/sectionA.jpg

What is the best approach ?

Are there any other Ideas than using fake/presentation Building Materials
in temporary Compositions ?

Comments

  • @Michael Mayer said:
    I would be more interested in a simplified drawing Style.

    YES!! Good examples.

    Moments ago I was navigating yet again to find where in the twelfth nested level of support folder hell hides that _SectionSettings.dwg that promises—somehow—to hold the key to nice looking drawing output. I started to fiddle for the umpteenth time in vain to achieve what I want with the various layer naming, colors, linetypes, lineweights, text styles, block symbol, scale defaults, etc. I tried to compare the template Section Plane settings with those of an ad hoc section in a recent dwg that had come close, but the drawing explorer window doesn't show the two side by side (like the very handy way it does for editing dim styles), nor does it preserve which zones I collapse because the list doesn't fit on my screen without having to scroll. After a bit of toggling back and forth, it gave me the "application became unstable" warning, so I gave up and checked in here before restarting.

    For schematic design, I also resorted to a "fake" monolithic material composition. In the next phases of design especially, it would be a shame not to take advantage of BIM compositions, but I still want graphic output I can readily control. BricsCAD is so amazing at the rest of what it can do. It should not be so difficult to generate legible and aesthetic drawings!

  • edited May 7

    @Michael Mayer said:
    I was navigating yet again to find where in the twelfth nested level of support folder hell hides ....

    Are you using the old offline Help chm? I've got used to the online Menu bar>Help>Help Help (don't panic - false alarm!) - any old search term usually gets there first go.

  • In Vectorworks I have that in Viewport Settings.
    If the Cut Face appears as separate Plies of Compositions or
    as a uni color of choice.
    Also Model Space has a switch between detailed and simplified
    representation. (And now 3 levels of detail which can hide
    geometry applied to higher LODs)
    The rest, if Hatch, Material or Color is controlled by Attributes
    or by Classes.

    Basically in VW I also work with "fake" monolithic material compositions.
    But there it is easier to keep mitered Wall Connections and expansion
    directions when replacing final Compositions.

    I assume, so far, Bricscad does not generate Areas/Regions of the
    Cut Faces, where they could fill in a color and add weighted lines
    around (?)

    But I will question if activated standard Sections in Model Space
    should show a Hatch at all or better just the Solids Face Color.
    At least for View Window LOD ON/OFF.

    For now the generated Sections and Plans look pretty hard to read
    and show more complexity than the Information I feeded into my
    Model so far.

    But maybe I am doing wrong.
    For now I just don't oversee from where to approach a simplification.
    From Building Material side, from Viewports or from Section Styles.

  • But what I really would like to have for low LOD Sections
    is that only Elements/Plies with "Structural" Tags
    get full Color tint,
    while secundary Plies like Insulations and (soft) Claddings
    may stay white and keep their fine Outlines.

    Something where Vectorworks in simplified Section Area
    would just fill everything.

  • Could we have facility to make up our own rule sets? called LODs if you like but that means something specific in CAD nowadays. Two or three different setups that I'd standardise on, prob different from anyone else's.

  • edited May 7

    Well in VW we got just 3 LODs to switch.

    You decide for any Element on which, all or not LOD they will be visible.
    So everyone can set Objects it as he/she likes.

    Imagine a Symbol (ACAD=Block) of a wash basin,
    where the 2D lines and curve will reduce when lowering LOD,
    until in lowest LOD you will only see the Outline of it.

    Just the PIOs (Plugin Objects) use their pre-defined output,
    which e.g. for Windows and Doors does seem to not meet everyones taste so far ....

  • edited May 8

    @Tom Foster said:
    Are you using the old offline Help chm? I've got used to the online Menu bar>Help>Help Help (don't panic - false alarm!) - any old search term usually gets there first go.

    My comment was not about finding the topic in online help (although pointers from forum folks are invaluable for learning where to look), but rather about the depth in which the BIMsection settings themselves are buried, at least on Windows systems.
    The fifteen section-related files are nested eleven tiers deep: C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming\Bricsys\BricsCAD\V20x64\en_US\Support\Bim
    right there near other support files such as default.pgp.
    But not everything lives in that neighborhood. Model, sheet, and sheetset template files are in a parallel tier, over in .\AppData\Local...
    Meanwhile, components and render materials hide out way over in C:\ProgramData\Bricsys
    I don't remember where BIM compositions reside.

    The point is, it's a lot to wade through when attempting to adjust the output of 3D-to-2D translation to something workable, let alone fine tuning it.

    Many of the default template files are interdependent, thus the solution is not a simple matter of pointing SRCHPATH and other support folder paths to our own custom templates, blocks, and other shared resources. Such customizations should be easy to incorporate. However, in my experience so far, modifying the wrong combination wrecks havoc. For example, a missing sheetset template causes BimSectionUpdate to fail (see also https://forum.bricsys.com/discussion/36015 or https://forum.bricsys.com/discussion/35694), or section tags turn up oversized (cf https://forum.bricsys.com/discussion/35821) or upside down, etc.

    Because of this, I am wary of modifying the numerous default templates and support files, even having backed them up, of course. And also because, within our own practice, we want to be able to apply different settings for different scenarios, exactly as Tom says:

    @Tom Foster said:
    Could we have facility to make up our own rule sets? called LODs if you like but that means something specific in CAD nowadays. Two or three different setups that I'd standardise on, prob different from anyone else's.

  • Hey, I also tried find some way to do this. It can be done easily if no compositions are applied - see screens. Only one setting in the section plane setting to set solid fill for all sectioned objects. You can change color, layer and other setting. Works fine.

    But You cannot use this way, when composition is applied to wall. Then it always hatch according to plies in composition.

    So my workaround is to save copy of file, remove compositions from model and export like in the screenshots.

    But I only need this simplified drawings in the first phases, so does not bother me much. I apply compositions in later phase when detailed view is needed.

    Hope it helps someone ;-)




    Plan01.png
    1554 x 986 - 48K
    setting01.png
    2092 x 1366 - 100K
    Plan02.png
    1505 x 996 - 27K
    setting02.png
    2095 x 1389 - 133K
  • This is what I want to look like my generated drawings :

    +

    According to local drawing standards,
    e.g. for a Plan Drawing,
    I need an upper and lower plane to define what Objects
    are included in a secondary fashion.

    E.g. important objects, like Windows, above Cut Plane,
    have to appear in dashed Lines !
    Everything important below, hidden by a Slab or such,
    like Foundations, have to appear in dotted lines.

  • Great video - I agree entirely that's the look we're after in building incl CAD , but sadly few CAD draftspeople do that, probably because CAD isn't set up to do it, so it's arduous to achieve, though not bad once systems and routines are in place. Consequently, even to a practiced eye, I find many CAD drawings for building very hard and ambiguous to interpret - shudder to think what they make of it on site.

    BTW, the guy's insistence on crossing lines at corners is a red herring - not necessary, just his artistic style. And he clearly is art-school artistic, which I am certainly not, but that doesn't prevent creation of great buildings and production of clear illustrative and technical drawings, like his.

    Still not being fluent with 3D, not using all the facilities like sections, I am a bit horrified and incredulous to read here that the visual output isn't readily customisable, even in the cumbersome way of render materials. CAD developers always claim that they keep in close touch with users, to understand their practices and needs, but things like this make you wonder just what kind of architects and draftspeople they do consult - none that I'd wish to employ, anyway! (not that I employ anyone - previous attempts creating more work and stress for me, rather than less). More it seems that developers sit in their ivory towers and imagine what they think industry practice might be - or what it should be, as there's a lot of ideology there, like the notion that 3D will or should entirely replace 2D 'drawings'.

  • On another point, in Michael's OP, https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b3/70/52/b37052316d5138bc468a44a101fdbedb.jpg - what's going on there? No less that 15 section lines, front to back. 5x more than you'd ever consider necessary to illustrate a scheme, so what's the thinking - it it just so that large scale construction details can be taken off on that no of cut planes?

  • For me it looks like has has only 3 Sections
    (called x,y and z with the black stripes)

    Numbers and Letters for me look like Axes - for each building element ?

  • Nevertheless,
    I played with some project exports in Bricscad,
    set some Sections and let Bricscad render Plans.

    And it is ... ähm ... an other Drawing Style than I am asking here for.
    And I still don't like the noisy Hatches in sectioned areas,
    neither live in Drawing Window nor in Viewports.
    I would prefer a Solid Fill.

  • @Tom Foster said:
    BTW, the guy's insistence on crossing lines at corners is a red herring - not necessary, just his artistic style.

    Exactly what I did in my Studies.
    I found it great at that times.
    My Professors found it .... red herring ....

  • Most of my drawing are complex, with many layers. So, if I were to create a drawing with the kind of finesse he includes, I would wait until the design were truely finished. Then, I would create copies of the drawings, so that each version can really be edited to be what I want it to be. Trying to do the sort of features he shows with a physical drawing onto a CAD drawing is quite difficult to do otherwise. Somethings, such as a drawing of a door hinge on a large wood garage door, need one level of detail when you are close, and a different level, or even removed from a more distant view.

    But, in reality, just what the standard CAD file creates is nearly universally accepted, even if it is far from ideal.

    -Joe

Sign In or Register to comment.
Origami
Origami is the Japanese word for paper folding. ORI means to fold and KAMI means paper and involves the creation of paper forms usually entirely by folding.

Powered by VanillaForums, Designed by Steam