i MUST CREATE FINISHED ELEVATION OF MY BUILDING IN A 2D LINE DRAWING FORMAT. tHIS IS STANDARD WHEREVER i GO AS THE RENDERINGS WON'T PRINT WELL ON MANY MACHINES AND ARE NOT MADE FOR WORKING DRAWINGS AS TOO MUCH WORK IS REQUIRED WHEN THE CAD FILE IS STANDARD. So....
Because of issues here is what I have to do to create an elevation.
1. Create my Building View (Works fine however items like roof valleys don't show)
2. Save to another file (Called Drawing File which references the Buildling View of My Model)
3. "Save As" to another file (Same name in different folder) With Switches set supplsedly merged lines show up better.. I also merge everything to create a good 2d file |ssues I have are joints like Valleys don't show and there are many ghost lines. This is because Unify does not always work and NEVER works with PCS items.
4. Open the Drawing View
5. Reference the 2d Merged veriion
6. display off the Drawing View
7. Pattern based upon hte 2d Merved file as you cannot pattern an elevation based upon a drawing view
8. Basically redraw alot of the elevation as there are many gaps that are made in the drawing view
9. Now finish patterning
10. Add weights to things like overhangs and where buliding are out in front of other parts of the buildings
11. Add dashed elements like where stairs are and where each floor is
12. Display off the 2d Merged file and Display on the Building View
NOW make a single change to the model and the Building View is updated but everythgin else must now be modified.
1. Open the Building View
2. Move all the stuff drawn on top of the refererenced files (up 100')
3. Resave the file overwriting the Mered 2d file
4. Open the merged 2d file and remove those patterns and lines that were moved in the Drawing file
5. Open the Drawing file and move the annotation and patterns down 100'
6. Make changes
NOW make a change like correcting one slab and.....
WHY NOT ADD PATTERNING TO FORMS IN FORWARD AND REFLECTIVE VIEW.
Hello
I'm finding your text a little hard to follow so exuse me if I'm barking up the wrong tree. If I'm reading it correctly you simply want to put patterning on a wall in Elevation?
Have you looked at the Forward / Reflected Part Mapping on the Participants tab in DEM?
You can map the cut patterning attributes of one part to the forward extraction of another part. Therefore this can automatically put patterning on your wall elevations.
Stuart
I havn't seen many problems with using DEM to give acurate Elevations. I find your statements a bit off the mark.
Every now and then the DEM goes funny and gets corrupted and the lines start going haywire. But usually if you delete the DEM instance then redo a new DEM in its place it works fine again.
Damon, seldom are comments posted on this forum off the mark, especially coming from experienced users.
With Regards
I just found out about that. I DON"T use DEM anymore.
But also even if I did that is an archaic want to not put something in the dialog box.
I stopped being a programmer 25 years ago and have no desire to go back.
There is entirely too much programming "XML" stuff now having to be done by the users.
Ustn since 1988SS4 - i7-3.45Ghz-16 Gb-250/1Tb/1Tb-Win8.1-64bEric D. MilbergerArchitect + Master Planner + BIMSenior Master Planner NASA - Marshall Space Flight CenterThe Milberger Architectural Group, llc
This has certainly turned into an.... uh, interesting discussion.
For everyone's reference, Forward View Part Mapping has been available in core TriForma since at least 8.5.2 (the oldest version I have installed). I just double checked. So this isn't new technology at all, and was one of our most requested features some years ago.
And speaking of older technology, I would certainly not consider DEM archaic or obsolete... hardly. Drawing Views are obviously our way forward, that's pretty clear. But *right now* you should use whatever tools best suit your needs. As an example, Bentley Structural V8i now has the ability to create automated plan and elevation drawings during the process of importing a RAM file. Cool stuff. Guess what? It uses DEM. Want a brick pattern in a wall that falls in the forward view? Yup, use DEM. How about different lineweights for the cut plane and forward view? You guessed it. (sorry Steve and Jeff, I couldn't help myself :-)).
Anyhow, my point is that all of these tools are available and they still serve a purpose. Nothing's really obsolete until it's gone. Some tools may become outdated, sure, but that's really in the eye of the beholder. And in the case of DEM, V8i is the very first version where there's even an alternative, and it was only released a few months ago!
And I missed Patterning all this time. I've logged the request every year since year one and never given the fact that that feature was out there and how to use it.
The problem is that If I go with DEM them some things I wish to reuse BECOME obsolete.
I've had that happen already with BA.
And I need to jump in sometime and if I wait for the Buidling Views to mature (like DEM hasn't) then maybe it will mature and maybe it won't. I just want ONE way to do it and One way to work.
This information was included in both the TriForma 8.5.2 readme:
Drawing Extraction Manager Enhancements
2. Forward and Reflective view hatching is now supported.
And in the Help files' "What's New" section:
Support for Forward and Reflected view hatching You can now add hatching to the forward and reflected views of your elements in an extracted drawing. The SamplePartMapping.xml file is delivered with the 2004 Edition SELECT V8.5.2 version of TriForma. It contains an example of how to include your parts and families in the list of parts that will be hatched in the extracted drawing.
<instructions for use followed>
Have you tried the "Sync Drawing View to Drawing Def" option from the main DEM dialog? It's the new icon just to the right of "Move Selected Section Defs". This tool will generate a Drawing View from an existing extraction, within the current limitations regarding symbology overrides of course. But when those limitations are removed, then you still have a valuable "source" that can be used to generate data in the current form (Drawing Views).
Yes I see that it has been snuck in and I ,issed it.
It is a shame it was not added to the dialog boxes as I am an Architect not a programmer and work as such - designing and not programming nor drafting.
Thsi increases the workload and the lack of WYSIWYG is very 1970's
I am tring the latter but have difficulties because my drawing view moves on my sheet or drawing if i change the volumn.
Well, I guess it comes down to perspective. I am not, nor have I ever been a programmer in any way. And I certainly wouldn't consider forward view part mapping to be "programming". Writing scripts in Generative Components? Yeah, that often looks like programming to me. :-) But using a part mapping file? Nah, that's mapping which is ASCII text > left column-right column type stuff. And no "special" terms used, just family and part names.
Could the process of setting this up be made better or more "user friendly"? Sure, no argument there. But the current technology certainly works, and has not posed any major problems in the way it's configured.
Regarding the latter... When you get the moving thing straightened out, I would definitely take it for a spin. If it works for you, it'd give you a way to bridge the gap between DEM and DVs, or today's and tomorrow's technology.
The last item is crucial and a major issue so I must not be getting it across
If I change the boundry of the drawing view or ad or remove a reference file. When I open the drawings or sheet view the annotation are in the same spot but the saved drawing view moves. It moves so the new centroid of the range of the current drawing view is in the location of the old centroid of the previous Drawing view. My drawing no looks like garbage. This has been logged and TR's with support but is a major issue