We have groups that use different Bentley products to build parts of large interdisciplinary projects. The groups that use TriForma based products such as Bentley Architecture or Bentley Structural have their files locked down to only being able to be manipulated by TriForma or Architecture/Structural. You can't manipulate any objects within their files with basic Microstation. You get a message in the Message Center that says: TriForma has intentianally restricted changes to this element.
Is this a setting that we can disable? Once a building is modeled with Bentley Architecture, and handed off to the project team, we need to be able to move/rotate/reposition/etc... with basic Microstation. Right now, we're having to go back to the originating group and ask them to make simple modifications for us because they're the ones with the TriForma products.
Thanks...
Brian,
Well... Um... You sound those Revit users who live with the problems, which you so accurately describe, and are loving it !
What can I say? It's a funny old world... I guess.
Dominic
Mike - It's because Structural and Architecture use addition elements called Forms. Microstation doesn't and therefore cannot understand a Form in order to move it. In Drop Element there is a toggle for Application Elements. That might drop the Form element so you can move it - it does with walls. It would be nice to see some of the parametric features of forms in Microstation solids and some of the push pull stuff in forms.
Tom We didn't find BA that difficult either. The most difficult aspect was the shift in mindset but that would come with any BIM package.
Dominic - I don't have the time or money to test ADT, Catia, or OpenPlant like your good self :) but now that you've asked my favourite feature compared to other packages including sketch up, Max, RVT is Reference Files.... that's the Microstation Reference File system :). Take it as you will.
Danny - When my company looked at moving from Microstation 2D/bit of 3D to BIM a few years back we could see straight away that moving the whole office in one big upgrade was not a viable solution. We chose simply to start with the right people, right projects and the BIM bits we needed, could handle and we grew from there. We started out modelling to a simple level of detail, no compound walls, etc. When we reached the limit of our ability we simply flattened to 2D and went from there. We made our cost savings and justifications early on in projects. Now that we are up to speed we take BIM a lot further. We think we started seeing profit from the switch with our second project when we reduced what would typically be a 7 man team to 5. First project broke even but then again we didn't push it that far.
Stuart - At the time we looked at Revit against Bentley Arcitecture. In fact we tested Revit for some time - yes it had a nice glossy interface but there were some severe limitations, file sizes (opening and saving times and backups running all day), cost of hardware upgrades required to run Revit, lengthy time spent checking in and out files, difficult to manage a large model on a large team, limitations in geomtery, cost of training up staff etc, etc. In the end we continued with Microstation and effectively threw BA over the top so could mix and match both - Revit meant one in all in - no Autocad sharing the same format to fall back on there. Revit's friendly interface and the marketing guff certainly captured our attention but we found a lot of limitations under the hood - we could see nightmare scenarios ahead. The final killer was the bean counters refused to pay for the hardware upgrades required to run Revit. This was a version or 2 back - not sure if that's all changed. We often get asked for Revit files - usually from those who have never used a CAD package. When we find out what they really need our data for a DGN, DWG or IFC works.
Dominic - The ability to mix and match 2D / 3D is in BA. We reference our DV into a 2D model, draw and modify walls in 2D space after Activating the Reference File. We use this for our wall layouts, doors, etc. Its a real time saver and helps those who aren't great in 3D. As a result we have a 3D model created in 2D by a "grey beard" - I like that term.
I hear on the grapevine BA is having an interface makeover - Bentley? True? I've modified our interface to make it easier to use. For a start we got rid of those silly "worm iconed" workflows. Secondly we renamed many of the tools. For example Datagroup Explorer got renamed to Schedules - what is a datagroup explorer?
BA is not perfect but then again nor are the other BIM packages I've tested. You've got to pick the bits you want and get on with it. We haven't completed a manual door schedule since. It would be nice to actually hear from people who deliver a BIM project on deadline day. Some of these posts ......... well ....... um.........
No problem at all, Mike. We have a fairly passionate group of users when it comes to technology, so sometimes the topic will veer off the side of the road when a pretty flower is spotted. :)
Yeah...if plain MicroStation cannot move an object, it must have TF attrobutes of some kind. However... Although I haven't used PSDS in many years, from I remember you can do most manipulations since TF is loaded in the background. I only have an old 8.5 version still installed, but in my simple test this did seem to work OK. Take a look at the short AVI I've posted (zipped) and let me know if this is similar to what you're attempting to do.
ftp://ftp.bentley.com/pub/outgoing/Moving_slab_in_PSDS.zip
Thanks Steve...
You'll have to forgive my frustration... that was a large amount of off-topic verbage to wade through for essentially a non-answer.
I'm sure you're correct about our structurals modeling slabs as opposed to cubes. My specific workflow would be along the lines of: I model a pump with PSDS Equipment Modeler, call my structural guy and tell him I need a foundation. I get started piping the system... (I "magically" inherited a foundation under my pump somewhere along the way). My Mech Engineer now says, move that pump 3' south. I now happen to be drawing a proposal general arrangement on a completely unrelated project in Microstation, so I pop into the first job, move the pump and pipe, but the foundation says: '...use TriForma'. It's a bit irritating.
Mike, my first response did outline why TF based elements cannot be manipulated without a TF based app loaded. This has always been the case with our building apps. PlantSpace Design Series modules generate their elements in a different fashion altogether, so those dependencies were never part of the picture.
Regarding the cube placed in Structural, I would guess that it's not a plain MicroStation element but a TF based slab or similar. Or, that it has a TF part & family assigned. If it is just a plain MicroStation slab with no TF attributes, that happened to be placed using Structural, you should definitely be able to move it while in plain MicroStattion.
An no... my last response was not spam. Just my sad attempt at humor. :-)