TurboCAD Forums

The Ultimate Resource for TurboCAD Knowledge

Register
 
When posting a problem be sure to include which version you are using.  Give as much information as possible.  If the problem is with a specific file be sure to attache it to your post.

Question: Does It Matter About Location of Wall Baseline and Wall Direction??
Read 4024 times
* September 17, 2012, 02:37:36 PM
Hello All,

After having a bit of fun (??) playing with walls, I found that I can place the baseline wherever I want based on wall component offsets. So, that leads me to two questions: 

1) Is there a "correct" way to set baselines when laying out a component wall? Does this have something to do with how walls will clean-up? Currently, I am placing the baseline on the component that gets built first. So, for a CMU wall that is furred out for drywall, I put the baseline on the CMU wall since that gets built first. Is that a good practice?

2) Does it matter on the direction a wall is laid out? I know direction matters on asymmetrical walls, but if I can design a component wall to layout correctly clockwise or counterclockwise (anticlockwise), is there a reason for one direction over the other?

Thank you for the help!

Kate---

Logged
Kate---

TurboCAD Professional V19.1 x64


* September 17, 2012, 06:20:52 PM
#1
i have no ide' about what a cmu wall is, but i put the baseline on the foundations outer side, normaly thats where all measurments start.
But then again some arcitect start from the inside of exsterior wall
Counter clockwise will be the correct, easy test; make 2 ecual rectangle, 1 start left and go down to the rigth, 2 start rigth and go down to the left, convert them to a wall and you will se what happens :), they follow the same size baseline
Inside outside of the component will depends on the type material i belive

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* September 17, 2012, 08:30:36 PM
#2
Tor,
CMU = Concrete masonry unit or Betong mur enhet (I hope that translated properly).

Kate,
I don't do this for a living, but I seem to always draw walls in a clockwise manner. My big problem is that I always find it hard trying to set up a multi-component wall due to all the scrolling back-n-forth between components. I wish they would lay out the components side-by-side, as seen here: Wall Styles (5 Component), to make it easier to compare component values, but I doubt that is possible.

my 2¢

Logged
John R.

V17—V21, 2015—2019
Designer, Deluxe, (Professional, Expert, Basic), Platinum
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Pro (1903), 64-bit


* September 18, 2012, 03:50:17 AM
#3
Thank's, then i know what a cmu is :), same like i ment with foundation, depending on if there is a basement or not on the building.
When you put a wall on the topp of it you normaly follow the outer side and for that reason this will be the best place for a baseline, clock or counter clockwice is little howe TC react, if you use a wrapped image or something i guess it will look the same, but if you use a nother way of putting somthing at the " fasade" outside i belive it will show on the " wrong side" with clockwice, i never shceked this, but what i belive.
I startet to learn drawing on computer with Autocad, so for me it's only counter clockwise that will be "correct" :)

For the multiple layer/ component wall's it's very easy, i make a wall vertical, zooming in and loocking what happen when i make mine adjustment on it, layer by layer, then i don't need all the scrolling, and like i learned yesterday there must be somthing in all layers, not leaving "air" inside the wall, if TC should calculate the area of the wall :)

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* September 18, 2012, 07:10:08 AM
#4
Hi Torfinn and John,

Thank you for sharing how you use component walls. And Torfinn, I apologize for using acronyms ("CMU") without clarifying their meaning.

I went through on-line documentation for both TC and AC on composite walls and the purpose of the baseline. In AC, if the baselines do not intersect the walls will not clean up, if the cleanup radius is less than the distance between the baselines. I was wondering if the came could be true for TC. Component material priority is also important in AC and my experiments show the same is true for TC.

My disclaimer is that all of my experiments have been in 2D. I would imagine that constructing 3D walls has its own additional complexities.

I think it would be a benefit to understand how TC uses wall attributes, such as baseline, to programatically construct composite walls.  Then we, as product users, would know how to best set those attributes and layout walls to create clean healing composite walls. Like John, I think having wall components laid out side-by-side would be a real plus for usability. Currently, I essentially do that side-by-side comparison on paper when troubleshooting composite walls. And, currently, I keep "dumbing down"  my walls (making them simpler) since accomplishing clean wall layouts is something of a trial-and-error process. I would *love* to know of any tips or tricks.

I have always been unsure to what level of detail should be shown on a typical construction floor plan produced by a CAD product. In the old school manual drafting days, a brick veneer wall was usually drawn at 8" in width. One half of the wall would be hatched to show it was brick, and one-half non-hatched to show the stud component and drywall.  With CAD, it is easy to show the many components of one type of brick veneer wall: brick, air cavity, stud wall, and drywall. TurboCAD should allow users to accomplish both with relative ease.

Thank you again for your responses!

Kate---



Logged
Kate---

TurboCAD Professional V19.1 x64


September 18, 2012, 08:55:13 AM
#5
....
 
  I have always been unsure to what level of detail should be shown on a typical construction floor plan produced by a CAD product. In the old school manual drafting days, a brick veneer wall was usually drawn at 8" in width. One half of the wall would be hatched to show it was brick, and one-half non-hatched to show the stud component and drywall.  With CAD, it is easy to show the many components of one type of brick veneer wall: brick, air cavity, stud wall, and drywall. TurboCAD should allow users to accomplish both with relative ease.
....
Kate---

Hi Kate.

re:  "I have always been unsure to what level of detail should be shown on a typical construction floor plan produced by a CAD product"

     I would recommend drawing your Floorplan- and all sheets/views- so that it can be easily read, comprehended, and utilized by the lowest intelligent, knowledgeable, educated, capable of those whom are to work with it (likely, the lead, or foreman of the field-crews).  I would also try to replicate- as close as possible, while still instilling my own "style" or format- attributes of construction drawings in your geographical area that all those that work with it (i.e.:  Building-dept. plan-checkers, truss-companies, material-suppliers doing take-offs, sub-contractor estimators and field-personnel)  find to be of high-quality and of maximum benefit-in-use.

     I've always thought of plans- construction drawings- as a communication instrument; construction drawings used for the actual approval and construction process are not a place to show off "what I can do with my CAD system".  Again, I would defer to the guys in the field and ask them to provide you with a set of plans or two that they really appreciate and really like to work with (I've collected some myself over the years, done by other draftspeople, that I often refer to and try to replicate parts of).

     Personally, even if I owned version 19, and thereby had the capabilities to draw Component Walls, I don't know that I would use them.  In 2D work, I don't see much use for illustrating [Edit: in Plan Views] that there is insulation; a vapor-barrier; drywall, air-cavity, etc.; it's either just "known", or in the specifications and/or details on the sheet.  For clarity, I would likely choose to omit everything but the actual Wall and the masonry veneer [Edit:  Using a Double-Line or a Single-Line offset from the Wall- not a Component Wall].  That may be only applicable in my low-economic area, where no-one is used to seeing more detail or finds need for such detail.  [Edit:  One thing I do do differently than the "norm" around here, that I really like for clairty, is I use a Solid Brush- about 70% Transparency- in my Walls; I utilize that "style" all the time now, but really appreciate the clarity it provides when drawing remodels/additions.]

    As a framing-carpenter/contractor for the past many years, I can tell you that I hate and get frustrated when I come across a set of plans that were obviously drawn by some newbie, fresh out of community college that wants to show off all that he learned.  What a mess.

----
If I ever did start finding the need/desire to draw in 3D (i.e.:  someone around here wants to pay the extra $$ for it), there is a good chance that I would try using detailed, accurate Component Walls- mainly for the reason that when I "pull a Sectional", all the elements of the finished wall system will be accurately- and close to completely- displayed.

----
I could say more, but my Verbose-meter alarm is ringing.

-Alvin|Gregorio
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 09:55:15 AM by Alvin Gregorio »

Logged
Alvin Gregorio
(mostly Residential Architectural 2D; no formal CAD Training; intermittent TurboCAD user since yr. 2000 [ver6.5])
---TurboCAD: V21PP; V20.2PP; V19DL; V11.2Pro; Windows-7-Pro/64-bit; Intel-Core-i3 CPU; 2.27ghz; 4GB RAM; Intel HD Graphics (CPU based)


* September 18, 2012, 10:25:52 AM
#6
Hey Alvin,

I am glad your verbose dial is set to "high" this morning (;-D) as the information you provided is very enlightening.

You are 100% correct. Construction documents are communication tools. So, if that is the case, then the type of drawing that needs to be produced is predicated on the target audience. I produce documents for professionals like you who actually build the house. So, how can my plans communicate effectively to a framer/carpenter? Should I layout interior walls from face of stud or from the center-line? Does a framer care if the wall is a simple one or a component wall? Should the wall be nominal size or actual size?

I am sure these documents would be different than a drawing targeted to the homeowner. In those documents, perhaps it is good enough to label a room as "Kitchen" and say the room is 11'-0" by 14'-6" from edge of the finished wall to edge of finished wall. For documents going to the building department, perhaps they want see a composite wall with sheathing, stucco, studs, and drywall with actual measurements.

I think the challenge for those producing the different documents is to find ways to do this efficiently without too much duplication of effort, and a CAD tool should facilitate this. For me, I plan to have a talk with my framer and ask him what he needs to see in the construction document.  He is the target audience that I must communicate with.

Thanks Alvin, for taking a topic that at first seemed confusing and complex ( "level of detail in a construction plan") and making it pretty darn simple.

Kate---

Logged
Kate---

TurboCAD Professional V19.1 x64


September 18, 2012, 11:44:17 AM
#7
Hey Alvin,

I am glad your verbose dial is set to "high" this morning (;-D) as the information you provided is very enlightening.

You are 100% correct. Construction documents are communication tools. So, if that is the case, then the type of drawing that needs to be produced is predicated on the target audience. I produce documents for professionals like you who actually build the house. So, how can my plans communicate effectively to a framer/carpenter? Should I layout interior walls from face of stud or from the center-line? Does a framer care if the wall is a simple one or a component wall? Should the wall be nominal size or actual size?

I am sure these documents would be different than a drawing targeted to the homeowner. In those documents, perhaps it is good enough to label a room as "Kitchen" and say the room is 11'-0" by 14'-6" from edge of the finished wall to edge of finished wall. For documents going to the building department, perhaps they want see a composite wall with sheathing, stucco, studs, and drywall with actual measurements.

I think the challenge for those producing the different documents is to find ways to do this efficiently without too much duplication of effort, and a CAD tool should facilitate this. For me, I plan to have a talk with my framer and ask him what he needs to see in the construction document.  He is the target audience that I must communicate with.

Thanks Alvin, for taking a topic that at first seemed confusing and complex ( "level of detail in a construction plan") and making it pretty darn simple.

Kate---

Now I am speaking as a Lead-Framing-Carpenter and Framing-Contractor, not a TurboCADist, Kate (and whomever else is following):

I don't want my Walls dimensioned to centers; causes confusion, believe it or not.  When I'm bent over for hours in 100°F sun, "snapping out", with the sun's heat radiating back at me off the concrete slab, I don't need to be trying to think "okay, 1¾" that way and 1¾" the other way".  My preferred dimensioning format is:  Start at one outside corner and dimension to the next Wall- "hook-it-to-it" is what we call it.  What I like about "hook-it-to-it" is- that as long as the Walls are the same width ("Thickness, TurboCAD... such as 2x6, 2x4), I'm actually getting "center-to-center", as well; it's takes some of the confusion out of it. (I also instincually know from experience that the same applies to "butt-it-over-it".)  [note:  the verbs used in the quoted phrases, "hook-it..." and "butt-it...", are what the tape-measure is "doing"]

After that first Dimension, continue on with "hook-it-to-it" until getting to the end of a run of Walls- then that last Dimension has to be "over-over" (nikkipollard's use of 0" Baseline setting with the Continuous Dimension would be valuable here).  In a typical-sized house floorplan exterior Walls, there would likely be about three or four "runs" of Dimension lines:  All the individual Walls; then the major changes (i.e.: outside of house corner to garage firewall); then some overall Dimensions.  The last "line" of Dimensions (the "overall" dimensions) should be the same in the "North" & "South" lines, and the "West"& "East" "lines"; that is for verification of accuracy, among other reasons (such as 72'-6" the overall dimensions of the whole structure for both the "North" & "South" last/outside Dimensions; and 81'-0" for both the "West" & "East" last/outside Dimensions.)

All I want on the Framing page are those Dimensions that I need for "snapping out".  Don't give me measurements to windows, doors, or other miscellanies; I'll take those on a separate Floorplan detail page, please.  Framing view/sheet is just for structural- as much as possible.

----
(ding-ding)  I don't care at all about stucco, or siding, or drywall, or any of that stuff; so don't draw it (on the Plan views)- it will only confuse me as the 24"x36" sheets of paper are flapping in the wind, and the nearby generator is bellowing out.  (ding-ding)  I'll Frame it per the Dimensions you give me to Framing, the other trades will attach their material to what I give them.

(ding-ding)
-Alvin|Gregorio- Framer
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 12:45:10 PM by Alvin Gregorio »

Logged
Alvin Gregorio
(mostly Residential Architectural 2D; no formal CAD Training; intermittent TurboCAD user since yr. 2000 [ver6.5])
---TurboCAD: V21PP; V20.2PP; V19DL; V11.2Pro; Windows-7-Pro/64-bit; Intel-Core-i3 CPU; 2.27ghz; 4GB RAM; Intel HD Graphics (CPU based)


* September 18, 2012, 01:42:38 PM
#8
If you only should use the drawing for explaining the carpenter/ frameworker, it's a waste of time to use 3D, they need a 2D drawing on the site, and i prefer the measurment from the edge of the stud, in the center i would ned to calculate where the edge is, i dont se the center mark when i put up the wall :)
And i also like it at both sides, then there will be no questions about the size ( width ) of the framework
What's coming outside the stud is nearly not interesting when i put the framework/ construction, i want the correct measurment to put it on so nobydy can come later and tell me " hey this is not
correct possision for this wall ", then i show them the drawing, smile and continuing with my work, dont waste time on it. Espacially the plumber and electricians like to do so when they have done something wrong :)
For the frameworker it's also will be a god ide' to make the "framework" in correct size, if you forget 1 messurement, it will be possible to take it from the drawing if it's not a critical point

Then what can you use a 3D drawing with multiple layer wall/component for:
If it's some part of the construction that is difficult to explaine, show the 3D drawing and they get the point ( normaly )
" Show of for the customer" = easier to sell the produkt
Esy to show details, they ( customer ) can "walk" inside/ outside the house and see how it look, remember a normal customer have absolutly no idea's about how the room feels,
   how big is it etc.?
   You can put it in to terrain and show the customer( and goverment ) howe it will look finish. Whats the idea' of the house ( many of this people ho work inside the goverment office's have/or
   dont want to have ide's about what you trying to explaine ) a picture tell more then 1000 words
When the housedrawing's is fully finish, its possible to catch all the informasion, the differnt group of people ho should work with the house need
You dont need to draw a cut to show the different level's, 2-3 click and you get it, saving big time
A shedule and/or a database table save a lot of time for the people ho should calculate all the different area's, length and so on for calculation of material or price or what ever :) and the
    computer don't forget a wall, a slab and so on, when the database is ready, it,s down to the millimeter correct, and on the multiple wall's you can move the bottom elevations for each layer, then you will not calculate this area 2 time, like you will do in a standard wall intersectio with a floor for example
TC can't do construction drawings atomatic for the moment, but for the constructor it then will be possible to se if there is something that "crash" with someting else if/ when??  they make sutch
    a system (in TC  ::)
    that means the risk for something wrong happens on the site, go's down, the house is quicker finish and the risk for wrong calulations nearly disapear's

There is a "tousand" reasons for making a drawing so exactly as possible, but like i start with, the frameworker don't need all these thing at all, he/she need a 2D drawing ho can tell the size,
   length, where the window's stand etc. etc. in the framework when they make it.

  Make the muliple wall's with no brush, maybe on the basic constructions, and they get what they need.

  But normaly there will be a lot of more people you can sell the drawings, calculations and so on to. ( get what's possible from each project ), you will have all this info available if you make a
  prober drawing.
  And after you have making some example of the most commom walls,floor,doore,window etc., you dont need tho do it every time, that means, it not cost you any time/ money to make the
  wall's like component wall's

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


September 18, 2012, 01:57:06 PM
#9
Hey Alvin,
....
... Should the wall be nominal size or actual size?

I am sure these documents would be different than a drawing targeted to the homeowner. In those documents, perhaps it is good enough to label a room as "Kitchen" and say the room is 11'-0" by 14'-6" from edge of the finished wall to edge of finished wall. For documents going to the building department, perhaps they want see a composite wall with sheathing, stucco, studs, and drywall with actual measurements.

I think the challenge for those producing the different documents is to find ways to do this efficiently without too much duplication of effort, and a CAD tool should facilitate this. For me, I plan to have a talk with my framer and ask him what he needs to see in the construction document.  He is the target audience that I must communicate with.

Kate---

Had lunch, have time, Kate.

----
A couple of your (rhetorical?) questions quoted above answered here (again, as a Framer):

... Should the wall be nominal size or actual size?->  Actual Size, always actual size.  Along that same lines- always have your Dimensions' Precision and Round-off set to 1/16" minimum (one millimeter for those non-U.S.A.-ians of you following along).  (while on that subject, if your using a pre-cast 5' tub or shower, that's 5'-0" "in-between" [more trade jagon], not 5'-0½"- that's an oft-occurring pet-peeve of mine)

----
For documents going to the building department, perhaps they want see a composite wall with sheathing, stucco, studs, and drywall with actual measurements.->  No, they don't want any of that in any of the plan-views.  Some jurisdictions require at least one Sectional "pulled" one way; some require at least two, "pulled" each way.  In the Sectionals- and other Details, like the full-Sectionals- is where you'll show all that "extraneous" stuff (being a Framer, I'm biased to the Framing aspects).  Drawing in 2D, Sectionals and Sectional-Details take a lot of time; I try to avoid them, if possible (I might wait for the plan-checker to put it on her "compliance list").  Having said that... I do enjoy drawing Sectionals and Details; since I know the components of a house so well, I can slam out those types of details... and it's kinda' fun and satisfying.

----
I think the challenge for those producing the different documents is to find ways to do this efficiently without too much duplication of effort->  That's always a challenge for me.  Presenting the drawings so that they easily make sense to a lay-homeowner is so different than drawing what construction professionals require.  I sometimes feel like I almost re-draw the whole darn thing when I take it from the homeowner's presentation drawing to actual construction drawings. (that's hyperbole)  I guess that is one of the big attributes of those TurboFloorPlan and Envisioneer types of programs.

----
Hope this helps give you more "enlightment" Kate.  Like I said 6 weeks ago-- this stuff is right up my alley.  -Alvin

Logged
Alvin Gregorio
(mostly Residential Architectural 2D; no formal CAD Training; intermittent TurboCAD user since yr. 2000 [ver6.5])
---TurboCAD: V21PP; V20.2PP; V19DL; V11.2Pro; Windows-7-Pro/64-bit; Intel-Core-i3 CPU; 2.27ghz; 4GB RAM; Intel HD Graphics (CPU based)


September 18, 2012, 02:07:48 PM
#10
....
Esy to show details, they ( customer ) can "walk" inside/ outside the house and see how it look, remember a normal customer have absolutly no idea's about how the room feels,
   how big is it etc.?
 ....
Torfinn

Torfinn, I deleted most of what you wrote in my quote above of your Post, but regarding that which still remains:

I have long thought that what would be useful- and could very possibly be coming in this half of this century- is a large warehouse or airplane-hanger sized building where 3D-projecter type apparatus can- using 3D house models, such as CAM would- create a virtual hologram of a house so that customer's can see and actually walk through their virtual future home.

If we can imagine it, we can do it.

The whole rest of your Post made very good sense Torfinn.  Very good sense.

-Alvin

Logged
Alvin Gregorio
(mostly Residential Architectural 2D; no formal CAD Training; intermittent TurboCAD user since yr. 2000 [ver6.5])
---TurboCAD: V21PP; V20.2PP; V19DL; V11.2Pro; Windows-7-Pro/64-bit; Intel-Core-i3 CPU; 2.27ghz; 4GB RAM; Intel HD Graphics (CPU based)


* September 18, 2012, 03:22:03 PM
#11
This i totally agree, but it's just a "wet" dream in my district  ;D
So for the moment the customer has to be satisfied with 2 screen's and they can looking the change when i do it :), moving/ take away/ adding a wall, shanging a window etc.

Torfinn

Logged
V20, V21, 2015/ 16/ 17/ 18/ 19 Pro. Platinum
Deluxe 2015/ 16/ 19
RedSDK enabled
Windows 10 Home Premium 64 bit, 32 GB
NVIDIA Geforce GTX 780m, 1 GB


* September 18, 2012, 05:10:01 PM
#12
Hi Alvin and Torfinn,

End of the day for me, and I wanted to respond. 

Ah, that's what you meant by hook it to it ...that is what the tape measure is doing! I get it now.

Alvin, a **BIG, BIG, BIG** thank you for explaining to me what is needed in the field. It makes perfect sense to lay the walls out in the "hook it to it" fashion. I would think that method helps to significantly minimize layout errors.  I thought about how I was taught in university to lay out interior walls, which was to center line. The logic was that it did not really matter what wall you were building on that spot as long as the center line of the material was lined up on the layout line. When I discussed that with the framer on site, he just looked at me funny and very nicely explained the center line to center line was not a very "productive" way to layout interior walls, especially walls that are built on the ground and tilted into place. Plus, as you said in your post, there is all of the fiddly math needed to convert the layout back to the hook it to it method from the center line method.  Ah..the difference between academia and the real world.

I will continue to use actual measurements in my plans. Again, it makes perfect sense. Dimensional lumber has an actual size and that is what a carpenter/framer uses on the job site.

Currently, I have the luxury to focus on construction documents.  Others, who must also sell their designs and construction services must also deal with the investor/ home buyer as Torfinn said in this message. I understand that is a totally different audience and which requires a very different set of documents. They are the ones paying the bills, so their satisfactions is very important. "Eye Candy" is what I have heard it called.

Perhaps until we have  holodecks in hangers, we will just have to resign ourselves to some duplicate work for different audience types.

Sometimes I get very confused when drawing construction documents.  But, Alvin, you always take the time and have the patience to explain real world practices to me in a way that makes perfect sense. So, I go from confused to "Do'h! I understand now!"

With much thanks,

Kate---

Logged
Kate---

TurboCAD Professional V19.1 x64


* September 18, 2012, 09:01:28 PM
#13
Alvin you can draw your 3d model as simply as possible So that when you view it in 2d it looks like a clean 2d drawing.
I find it saves time to only have to draw an item once. If you move something or remove something the whole drawing is changed. After a few years I notice the time difference when I change my older 2d drawings.
The trick is to know when to stop - its so tempting to add every nail to your model but thats time consuming.

Logged
Nikki
TC20 platinum
TC 2015 platinum
TC 2017 with lightworks


September 19, 2012, 08:36:28 AM
#14
Alvin you can draw your 3d model as simply as possible So that when you view it in 2d it looks like a clean 2d drawing.
I find it saves time to only have to draw an item once. If you move something or remove something the whole drawing is changed. After a few years I notice the time difference when I change my older 2d drawings.
The trick is to know when to stop - its so tempting to add every nail to your model but thats time consuming.

That is probably some of the best advice nikki, in regards to drawing architectrual construction drawing via TurboCAD.  It would just take some practice and trial-an-error to draw the 3D entities such that they appear "correctly" (such as those in the field are used to seeing them).

If I were a full-time architectural designer/draftsman, I would probably make the switch to 3D.  In addition to a host of other things, I would have to get all my Door Styles and Window Styles just right- for example, I don't need or want casing, door-stop, etc. in my 2D plan views.  It would take considerable time, initially, to get my templates and symbols set up, but would probably be worth the time and effort if I designed and drafted full time.  Also, I would like to try starting with TurboFloorplan- that TurboFloorplan-to-TurboCAD system seems to have merit.

Just as I'm sure is the case for so many other Users, drawing in 3D to be presented in 2D was my original intention when I first purchased and started using my first CAD program- TurboCAD- 12 years ago.  Having made my living throughout most of those years principally as a Framing Contractor and/or General Contractor, I have never been able to justify the time/effort commitment; I just kind of have gotten by on the (old fashioned 2D) way I was doing it... the way every draftsman around here was doing it.

----
nikki, after spending a lot of time on these Forums the past several weeks, I have to say that I respect what is coming across as your architectural drafting experience, skill, and knowledge.  I am so curious as to how your 3D- and especially 2D construction drawings- are actually coming out.  I looked for some posts by you on the Gallery Forum, but didn't see any.  Any chance we can talk you into posting something there?-  some .pdf's or pictures of 3D architectural and their corresponding 2D drawings?

Thanks for the post nikki.   -Alvin

Logged
Alvin Gregorio
(mostly Residential Architectural 2D; no formal CAD Training; intermittent TurboCAD user since yr. 2000 [ver6.5])
---TurboCAD: V21PP; V20.2PP; V19DL; V11.2Pro; Windows-7-Pro/64-bit; Intel-Core-i3 CPU; 2.27ghz; 4GB RAM; Intel HD Graphics (CPU based)


September 19, 2012, 08:50:10 AM
#15
Alvin you can draw your 3d model as simply as possible So that when you view it in 2d it looks like a clean 2d drawing.
I find it saves time to only have to draw an item once. If you move something or remove something the whole drawing is changed. After a few years I notice the time difference when I change my older 2d drawings.
The trick is to know when to stop - its so tempting to add every nail to your model but thats time consuming.

I guess in all my suggestions and recommendations the past few weeks to Kate (User w359), I have always suggested her working only in 2D because:

My sense was that Kate is new to TurboCAD and pretty much a novice at CAD, in general (at the time, a few weeks ago; she's really getting the hang of it fast).  I just think that it would be best for someone at that experience-level to start off in, and gain experience/confidence in, 2D.  I still believe that to hold true.  I am quite confident in my 3D capabilities now (not photo-realism rendering, though, such as utilizing Materials, Lighting, etc.), but I wouldn't have gotten there without the base knowledge and experience that I gained from first becoming quite familiar and confident with using TurboCAD in 2D.

*EDIT*:  I also got the sense that Kate, while trying to learn TurboCAD, was also trying to to turn out a set of construction drawings as expeditously as possible.  I've been there, done that:  I lost my first three house design/drafting commisions (project jobs) after being "released" by very disgruntled home-builders because I was taking forever in producing drawings, being that I was both learning CAD/TurboCAD and trying to work in 3D (which, to the novice, just intuitively seems to make sense).

So, even though I just previously posted that creating architectural drawings in 3D- simply, so that they are easily represented in comprehensible 2D- could very well be the best method, I do not believe that to be the best avenue for a User that is not at least 80% experienced and comfortable drawing in 2D.

FWIW -Alvin
« Last Edit: September 19, 2012, 09:14:32 AM by Alvin Gregorio »

Logged
Alvin Gregorio
(mostly Residential Architectural 2D; no formal CAD Training; intermittent TurboCAD user since yr. 2000 [ver6.5])
---TurboCAD: V21PP; V20.2PP; V19DL; V11.2Pro; Windows-7-Pro/64-bit; Intel-Core-i3 CPU; 2.27ghz; 4GB RAM; Intel HD Graphics (CPU based)


* September 19, 2012, 09:11:44 AM
#16
Hi Alvin and Nikki,

Alvin (again) provided great advice when suggesting that I focus on 2D at the current time. I not only had to learn TurboCAD to produce construction documents, incorporate generally-accepted drafting standards into my work, but also needed to learn how residences are *really* built, which, in turn, contributes to the quality of the construction documents I produce. (Productive cycle!)

I would love, love, love to eventually learn how to produce quality 3D renderings. I have seen what is possible in the forum gallery.

But, of all of the issues that would keep me away from working in 3D, it would be the idea that it would require much duplicate work to produce both usable 3D and 2D artifacts.  So, Nikki, I would like to add my vote to persuade you to publish your 3D renderings and associated 2D drawings in the Gallery or another part of the forum. I would be very interested in seeing how you accomplish this.

Kate---

Logged
Kate---

TurboCAD Professional V19.1 x64