Remember the old level number map. Microstation got rid of it quite awhile ago. Now that I finally upgraded to Connect...has anybody written anything so I can get it back?
As has already been explained here by a number of people this concept of the old level number map containing the limited 64 levels was something that was replaced with the Level Display dialog. This is due to the major change in operation between V7 and V8 DGN file format where the amount of levels that can be defined in a file are now virtually unlimited. The concept of the numbers against each level is also a concept that only really remains as a legacy workflow due to these old concepts. I would suggest having a closer look at the operations of the Level Display dialog as it should not be too much of a difference to turn levels on and off like you did before. As you stated the Level Name you have in your design file are still the numbers so you can just a click on each of these levels to turn them on or off.
https://docs.bentley.com/LiveContent/web/MicroStation%20Help-v15/en/LevelDisplay.html
RegardsAndrew BellTechnical SupportBentley Systems
Answer Verified By: Peter Singleton
Mr Bell, as a practicing architect of 25+ years, who started in Microstation when it was still on Intergraph VAX-based Clippers, and who now uses, albeit very grudgingly, Revit, I completely understand what Bentley had to do to the layer system.
I can claim a more than passing familiarity with the layer system, as I was the one who worked with Autodesk's Tech Desk in 2012 to figure out the massive file bloat when one import something from DGN to DWG with . It was a simple translational issue of line type styles, and we needed a translation matrix. Without which, something fundamental to the element definition structure "fractured" in the DWG file, and files that should've been less than 500KB ended up at 10MB. It was an intrinsic issue - meaning once you 'infected' a file, deletion of the DGN import, purging, command line purging, nothing but a 'Ctrl-Z' would save your file. So if you saved and closed out, you were done.
Forgive my digression. I'm chiming in because I only used Microstation in Arch School, and in am back finishing my MArch at Pratt Institute, while having just scored my first personal architectural commission. So I'm looking at this from all sides.
And I can absolutely see the point that a small one-man outfit, who uses the 8x8 grid of yore in a visual manner, as I did myself, it is an exceedingly fast & efficient organizational method that keys into an architect's base training - visual cues. For instance, my first row of eight defined primary massing, the second row the form, the third row, the structure, the fourth row, the lighting - it was visual rational planned with rigor and utterly intuitive. Just as Mr Singleton describes his own methodology from an engineering perspective - it works.
And yes, only in small projects, with limited no. of staff on it. The latter is a given, as hardly anyone is fluent in Microstation, however, the former, unfortunately due to it's retained use in all major transportation projects within State & Federal jurisdictions means large projects. The last firm I worked at, Zyscovich Architects, completed in 2020 Miami International Airport's latest terminal. There's a dedicated transportation studio of Microstation veterans that take these types of project on at Zyscovich.
BUT this doesn't mean the need for the simpler organizational grid system must be eradicated. Surely they're not mutually exclusive. Sometimes, evolution doesn't require the genocide of a species type, if the evolutionary process folds in the adaptation of the previous evolution. Simply put, we still have the same five senses the cavemen did, we simply have much greater faculty of interpreting their input.
So yes, this is hearty "Hear hear!" in response to Mr. Singleton's post. Perhaps if you read my bio, new as I am to this particular forum community, you might see I speak from a position of some fair experience in both academia & professional practice, with full CAD & Revit fluency too.
I'd be grateful if you could acknowledge this message, and ecstatic if you / Bentley expressed a willingness to revisit the issue with someone who was once offered a job there while he was an architectural undergrad, and who has some knowledge of "what goes on behind the scenes", if you will. And as a professional who's just signed his first major commission, I'm more than willing to find reasons to move from Autodesk to Bentley, but there needs to be some development.
When I first started using Microstation, there was an elegance to the GUI, borne from it's Unix roots. I'm now seeing a more blocky cumbersome "Windows" look, that just doesn't have the same slickness. Facility aside, you can get a lot of attention from your GUI. After all, at the end of the day, all these programs do the same thing. They're surface modelers with some parametric capability to claim BIM-worthiness. We're not talking Solidworks, or Catia, or any of the myriad self written / customized software like Ove Arup developed combining computational fluid dynamics with simple prioritized avatar behavior to model likely human surge directions in sudden, drastic fire events in large spaces. RWDI's CFD analysis software has been customized with materials science in metallurgy. You have a huge fan, you were the first, you're still the most accurate, and so please.
Sincerely,
TS Yong
Barry Lothian said:Well, that's interesting but in my opinion, you are about 20 years too late, as MicroStation's heyday has been and gone. As per my previous paragraph, some forum members as so annoyed with the current status quo that they are doing (or at least considering) the opposite (whether it be to AutoCAD or Revit or maybe something entirely different), albeit reluctantly as none of us long-term users are happy to leave an application we have used for so many years.
I don't disagree at all, as I've myself traveled the same evolutionary path starting with MicroStation in 1992 in full 3D, transitioning to 2D on AutoCAD DOS in 1994 (yes I know it was 3D capable, and with SoftDesk's Auto Architect, tried to reach some semblance of what I had been indoctrinated in. Returning to Microstation SE with full 3D materials mapping, with artificial lighting sources as well as sun lighting, on self-built PC workstations - dual Pentium-200 systems with 3DLabs Graphics Cards, I spent a good 6 years building student work, and post-grad research, some of which was published, some of which is in a permanent exhibit in the Peabody Museum of Natural History at Yale. I then was forced back into CAD for pure 2D work as I began my professional career, and became proficient to the extend that I ended up developing CAD standards for a number of firms I worked in. Revit trained in 2007, but only started real project deployment of Revit in 2019, struggling to develop my own families. Why generic 5" walls were part of the basic wall family, I'll never figure out, because there's no such thing. Revit's ability to handle stairs and their associated handrails is so crippled by fact that it treats landings as treads. I've barely managed to build a family for simple metal pan switchback stairs that will generate proper guardrails & handrail configurations. And don't' get me started on exterior envelope systems integration with floor membrane systems.
Barry Lothian said:I myself simply refuse to use CONNECT and so remain happily on V8i SS10
Thus begs the question - is there any way I can get v8i using my student status, which provides CONNECT absolutely free. Of course it's Bentley's ploy to get CONNEDCT out there at the get go with architectural students. I'd have no issue paying some sort of student discounted license for v8i, but I fear that effort is doomed. Having just secured my first major independent commission, I've no real options but Revit. Or Sketchup into CAD, which is a far faster design development process, as Revit is a production platform, not a design platform, no matter how hard it tries, it's just too cumbersome compared to Sketchup.
Barry Lothian said:you will find many disgruntled users who are unhappy with many of the forced changes brought with CONNECT: Poor performance, broken features, bugs galore, implementation of 'The Ribbon' with no 'Classic Interface' option for users to choose, removal of the Menu Bar, removal of tools either replaced with ones of lesser quality/functionality or merged with others.
And how does Bentley believe such a dismal progression will lead to further development. Same way Autodesk does with Revit, I guess. But with Revit, there's at least a fairly robust structure to start with, even if you need to wrestle it into doing what you want, it is nevertheless possible. Thus far, I see no such potential in CONNECT. In fact, it appears to be the software version of "special needs" kids, spawned from perfectly capable kids. Not sure if that analogy quite works, but I'ma cram it in anyway.
Barry Lothian said:Blender's GUI, it offers users customisability that MicroStation users can only dream about, and they're even making headway into the BIM side of things, time will tell if it becomes a relevant player in that market or not.
Don't count Trimble out. They've made some serious moves about 5 years ago, partnering with Microsoft's HoloLens
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmpoCjz0Yc0
Though the fact that it stopped there probably means it, well, stopped.
When you get back into Revit, assuming you're an architect, I would offer a suggestion - check out Enscape. It uses the gaming engine to map textures fast, with lighting, so you can walk around in your developing building design.
My thanks for a comprehensive response that concisely dialed me into the morass I'm confronted with.
Tet Shin Yong said:I then was forced back into CAD for pure 2D work as I began my professional career, and became proficient to the extend that I ended up developing CAD standards for a number of firms I worked in.
I began with MicroStation 95 on a DOS network (that was interesting when one machine crashed and everyone had to reboot their machines as they were all connected in serial). I've been completely stubborn in that I've always worked with MicroStation, other than the occasions where I wanted to learn or work with Revit. Aside from 1 year unemployment during the 'Financial Crisis' in 2009, I've worked with either and never had to solely use AutoCAD. I simply refused to use something I knew was so utterly inferior and infuriating to use. My previous employer as an office of entirely AutoCAD users. I joined them as a sole Revit user as they were keen to transition into it. The Main project I worked on was quite tricky, a Mixed-Use 5 storey building (Retail units on the ground floor plus a basement for storage, 2 flats per storey on floors 1-4) and 3 Townhouses to the rear, each with different Ground to 1st Floor heights. Unfortunately some of the staff simply couldn't understand that certain tasks (which could be achieved by a couple of lines on a drawing) required a much more involved solution in Revit. In a sense I agreed because I knew the same was true if I was creating the same end-result drawings in MicroStation. I felt burned-out by the whole experience in that office and when I was offered my current position, I was fortunate to be asked what software I wanted to use, so I chose MicroStation, and it was the correct choice to make. However, there are a lot of things I do miss with Revit and there will be some things I do a little different which will help.
Tet Shin Yong said:Why generic 5" walls were part of the basic wall family, I'll never figure out, because there's no such thing.
Its different in 2022, as such Generic types don't exist in the default Architectural Template. If you create a project without a Template, you need at least 1 type of System Family per category, with walls it looks as below. Most advancer users will either edit it or delete it one they have at one or more of their own Wall-types created.
Tet Shin Yong said:Revit's ability to handle stairs and their associated handrails is so crippled by fact that it treats landings as treads. I've barely managed to build a family for simple metal pan switchback stairs that will generate proper guardrails & handrail configurations.
Yeah stairs were one of the big frustrations in my previous (aforementioned) Revit project. In the Main Building's Common Stair, there were variable floor levels and different component constructions (Composite concrete deck landings with a screed finish and pressed-metal flights with concrete screed-filled pan treads). As you mention, the Stair Tools cannot create that representation in 3D so the pan's are done in 2D although advanced users tend to model stairs using different families instead. The railings in that stair required a total of 52 Railing Families to make the different balustrades parts and handrails to ultimately create the overall railing as required. The Townhouses were a little simpler, but you wouldn't think that to look at them due to double quarter-turn landings and carved timber Stringers.Common Stair:
Townhouse Stair:
Tet Shin Yong said:Thus begs the question - is there any way I can get v8i using my student status,
Not sure TBH, perhaps like users with a perpetual license, you would need place a service request asking for the V8i SS10 Installer file.
Tet Shin Yong said:Having just secured my first major independent commission, I've no real options but Revit. Or Sketchup into CAD, which is a far faster design development process, as Revit is a production platform, not a design platform, no matter how hard it tries, it's just too cumbersome compared to Sketchup.
Given your described situation, have you considered not using the expected traditional CAD/BIM approach and solely using SketchUp instead? There are some people who do use it exclusively; Nick Sonder is probably the most well known, and I suspect (assumption based purely on my interpretation of your few posts to date) that you both share similar Architectural values when it comes to drawing production and Architectural Design principles.
https://www.nicksonder.com
He has a book where he details all the steps he uses to create what I believe they call in the US, Construction Documents, called SketchUp & LayOut for Architecture:https://sketchupbook.com
Aesthetically, his drawings are like nothing I have seen elsewhere before:
There are also plenty of videos of Nick showing his process, here is a playlist on YouTube that might interest you:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTtB8XeJuhs&list=PL-bndkJaV8A6tVUVIlqFHMAcodO8aATrh
Another stylistic alternative can be seen in the work of Eric from 30x40 Design Workshop who only uses AutoCAD LT yet still creates brilliant looking drawings:
Tet Shin Yong said:When you get back into Revit, assuming you're an architect, I would offer a suggestion - check out Enscape. It uses the gaming engine to map textures fast, with lighting, so you can walk around in your developing building design.
I'm not an Architect, originally an Architectural Technician with numerous titles and positions since then. I'm familiar with Enscape but haven't used it. It seems good at what it does, but its certainly no VRay, which was my renderer of choice when I worked in Arch Viz.
Tet Shin Yong said:My thanks for a comprehensive response that concisely dialed me into the morass I'm confronted with.
No problem, I think its only fair that you be given an honest assessment of how things are from a user-perspective on the MicroStation side of the fence. Many years ago I would have wholeheartedly recommended switching across to V8i but I won't do so with CONNECT, not least until its in a working conditional comparable to V8i (although the GUI will unlikely change) but as I won't be using it, I would be reliant upon the opinions of the forum users that I trust here, to confirm how each update is being received.
As I said before, these are only my opinions and come the beginning of next week, others may offer you a different POV, but ultimately its for you to make up your own mind how you wish to proceed. No software is perfect, you just have to accept their fallibilities and pick what suits you best, warts and all.
More detailed response to follow.
Interesting conversation even for non architect as I am. It looks like there is a comparison between MicroStation CONNECT and Revit. Maybe I am wrong.
They are not same type of product. MicroStation CONNECT is a powerful general CAD platform BIM enabled with some functionalities such as item types (custom properties sets), collaborative environment, etc. but it is not engineering specific.It is the platform for many applications such as Building, Rail, Road, Bridge, Water,...
If we want to do a comparison, then we should compare OpenBuilding Designer to Revit.
Though this is quite off-topic compared to the original topic.
I agree it's a strange comparison between Microstation and BIM modelling software. Though indeed Microstation offers quite a lot of functionality, with Item Types, which might be a lot more compared to other CAD applications.
A correct comparison to Revit (or ArchiCAD, SketchUp, BricsCAD BIM, ...) would be to Openbuildings Designer. In my opinion Bentley does a good job with OBD, though the remarks about bugs that Barry made is applicable here as well.
When looking at "production" level software (Tekla, Allplan, Advance Steel, ...) the comparison should be made to ProStructures.
Johan De Cock said:I agree it's a strange comparison between Microstation and BIM modelling software.
Is there a direct comparison being made between Revit and MicroStation??
Barry Lothian said:Is there a direct comparison being made between Revit and MicroStation??
If not a direct comparison then at least indirect. You said yourself that you used MS V8i on "level 2 BIM projects", then start your argumentation for MS not being a BIM software. In that post and others you repeatedly mention/compare with Revit.
I'd be very interested to know if you ever considered AECOsim / OBD as an alternative? In my opinion going from MS to Revit for construction/building projects is almost as big a step as going from 2D AutoCAD to Revit.
Johan De Cock said:I'd be very interested to know
Please, respect the best practices, stay focused to the original question and do not steal the discussion with own new topic.
The original question was about old MicroStation tool, not available in the new versions. When you are interested in comparing products, create a new post.
Regards,
Jan
Bentley Accredited Developer: iTwin Platform - AssociateLabyrinth Technology | dev.notes() | cad.point
Johan De Cock said:If not a direct comparison then at least indirect.
Umm no, I never made any comparison between the 2 applications.
Johan De Cock said:You said yourself that you used MS V8i on "level 2 BIM projects", then start your argumentation for MS not being a BIM software
I'll start by providing a definition of what a Level 2 BIM project is:
"Level 2 involves developing building information in a collaborative 3D environment with data attached, but created in separate discipline models."
We used a CDE (ProjectWise Online iirc), a project structure which separated disciplines (amongst other things) and federated models, but what critically missing was attached Data. The geometry contained absolutely ZERO data, nothing more than SmartSolid's drawn at 1:1 and geospatially located in 3D space. Had the same drawings and models been stored on a local network server, it wouldn't have been deemed a BIM project so the fact that it was being titled a Level 2 BIM project by the client was (IMO) incorrect and nowhere near to the true definition. Basically, BIM without the I.
Johan De Cock said:In that post and others you repeatedly mention/compare with Revit.
I mention it yes (as its the software I will be using for most projects at some point in the future), but I do not compare one against the other. By all means, feel free to quote where I compare similar features of both applications against each other and outline pro's & con's or opine which is better....
Johan De Cock said:I'd be very interested to know if you ever considered AECOsim / OBD as an alternative?
I did use AECOsim and found it to be a truly awful experience. There was just so many things I hated about it: 5-6 icons on my desktop for different disciplines (or whatever), the terminology it used for certain things was confusing and the parametric studio made me want to self harm. ABD was like MicroStation but with extra stuff added that felt clunky and I just didn't like how it worked at all.
Johan De Cock said:In my opinion going from MS to Revit for construction/building projects is almost as big a step as going from 2D AutoCAD to Revit.
When I experienced Revit and seen how it approached things, it was like night and day and made perfect sense and so I took to it immediately; I embraced the difference, the freshness of the software (GUI/Tools etc...) but there was one factor which was most important above all else. If you compare MS V8i to ABD or MS CONNECT to OBD, they are very very similar in appearance, in operation and contain many of the same tools and dialogs etc.. Now if you compare Revit to AutoCAD, they aren't even close and for that reason, given my absolute dislike for AutoCAD, I saw immediately that it was a completely different and therefore I had no bias preventing me to want to learn Revit and it was therefore a very enjoyable learning experience.
Johan De Cock said:Though this is quite off-topic compared to the original topic
On this I will agree (partly my fault of course, but that's just how some topics evolve) and I won't be replying further to this topic. If you want to discuss a similar theme then feel free to create a new topic.
Thank you for the insights!
Barry Lothian said:When I experienced Revit and seen how it approached things, it was like night and day and made perfect sense and so I took to it immediately; I embraced the difference, the freshness of the software (GUI/Tools etc...) but there was one factor which was most important above all else. If you compare MS V8i to ABD or MS CONNECT to OBD, they are very very similar in appearance, in operation and contain many of the same tools and dialogs etc.. Now if you compare Revit to AutoCAD, they aren't even close and for that reason, given my absolute dislike for AutoCAD, I saw immediately that it was a completely different and therefore I had no bias preventing me to want to learn Revit and it was therefore a very enjoyable learning experience.
It's funny how personal such things are, I'd say it's an advantage to keep to a similar interface.
Jan Šlegr said:Please, respect the best practices, stay focused to the original question and do not steal the discussion with own new topic.
Sure, I'll let it rest. I didn't see any harm since the topic had evolved into the direction where I picked up.