plan/elevation views for snapshots

[theoryshaw]

This might be specific to @teocomi's implementation, but thought i'd put it here regardless--think it helps inform the format in general.

Matteo, for your plugin, do you plan on supporting plan/elevation views for snapshots?

Would be a huge help for us, to go beyond just 3d snapshots.

Thanks, Ryan

[teocomi]

BCF viewport file allows for Orthogonal and Perspective camera values to be stored, so I couldn't find a way to support plans/elevations/sheets

[ErikPijnenburg]

We get the same requests for our BCF Managers (www.kubusinfo.com). The BCF format does not support this currently. We need to do some research to find a way to define these type of viewpoints, but that is not obvious and not all BIM apps can support them

[Zerlang7]

I will follow this topic, because i also think i would make the plugin even better, and because, it would be easier to see where in the project you are.

[theoryshaw]

+1

[theoryshaw]

@ErikPijnenburg @teocomi Is it possible for you guys to take a stab at defining one here? We are all the standards committee. :)

[teocomi]

Can people please clarify how their workflow could benefit from the implementation of elevation/plans?

Applications for Clash Detection, Code Checking and Analysis often do not support this kind of views and therefore I do not see a big use for this feature. If it is intended to be used by people using the same authoring tool then I think it is outside of the scope of the BCF format.

[Zerlang7]

When i work in a 3D model, i always use plan views to work ind. There you
got the right angle of everything. When you use your 3D i think i min
opinion, you have to hide som thing to maybe see a mistake, that is a lot
easier in 2D.

2013/12/5 teocomi notifications@github.com

Can people please clarify how their workflow could benefit from the
implementation of elevation/plans?

Applications for Clash Detection, Code Checking and Analysis often do not
support this kind of views and therefore I do not see a big use for this
feature. If it is intended to be used by people using the same authoring
tool then I think it is outside of the scope of the BCF format.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/10#issuecomment-29923994
.

Mvh. Christian Zerlang

[theoryshaw]

i would agree, in terms of screen-captures of the model, that i share with the extended design team to discuss issues, I'd say 90% of them are orthogonal views. That's why a majority of CD's are in 2d orthogonal views--easier to convey certain types of information.

Actually, I'd say BCF's lack of addressing orthogonal views, is one of our biggest hurdles for us not adopting the BCF tool(s) 100% of the time--we find ourselves falling back on the generic 'Print Screen' Screencaptures of floorplans/section/elevations.

[pasi-paasiala]

Is the problem that sw has poor support/implementation of the orthogonal view or would you like to see actual 2D view (drawing)?

[Zerlang7]

I mostly use 2D, so for me yes i would prefer if the 2D was a possibility.

/ Christian

2013/12/17 pasi-paasiala notifications@github.com

Is the problem that sw has poor support/implementation of the orthogonal
view or would you like to see actual 2D view (drawing)?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/10#issuecomment-30745847
.

Mvh. Christian Zerlang

[theoryshaw]

for me, it's 2 views... sections/elevations/plans. (so support/implementation of the orthogonal view )

snapshots of 2d linework, would be nice, although not as crucial at this point. imho.

[pasi-paasiala]

What kind of design content the BCF file then point to? Currently the assumption is that it is used for BIM content, that is IFC, or some native BIM format (ArchiCAD, Revit, ...).

[Zerlang7]

Is there something new about the 2D views?

I am about to start my last semester as a student. Here i will have to
write about something that is involving coordination for engineers and
architects.
This i here i think the BCF tool could be a great thing to take into
my report, and analyse.

As you say i think it already is a great tool to use in Solibri for your
IFC file, and then dump it into revit.
Correct me if i am wrong, but here you highligt the coalition of the
coalition parts in Solibri and here you also can get the specific ID of the
building parts.
When you find a coalition in Revit it is most likely when you work in 2D,
and here it would be nice, if you could take a snap of this and put it into
your BCF report, when you still are link to the building part.

Last question.
Sometimes there are different linked models into your Revit. Is is here
possible to also highligt the coalition for the 2 subjects if they are in
different models?

Kind regards

Christian Zerlang

2013-12-19 pasi-paasiala notifications@github.com:

What kind of design content the BCF file then point to? Currently the
assumption is that it is used for BIM content, that is IFC, or some native
BIM format (ArchiCAD, Revit, ...).

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/10#issuecomment-30907936
.

Mvh. Christian Zerlang

[ErikPijnenburg]

Christian, We will release in a few days BCF managers for Revit an ArchiCAD which support 2D views as well (mainly usable for Revit to Revit or ArchiCAD to ArchiCAD communication because of the named limitations of BCF format and modeling applications) Keep an eye on www.kubusinfo.com
The linked model problem is related to changing of IFC GUID's in the modeling applications. We asked them to solve this.

[Zerlang7]

Okay that sound very promising. Looking forward to see the new tool.

Thanks.

/ Christian

2014-02-05 ErikPijnenburg notifications@github.com:

Christian, We will release in a few days BCF managers for Revit an
ArchiCAD which support 2D views as well (mainly usable for Revit to Revit
or ArchiCAD to ArchiCAD communication because of the named limitations of
BCF format and modeling applications) Keep an eye on www.kubusinfo.com
The linked model problem is related to changing of IFC GUID's in the
modeling applications. We asked them to solve this.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/10#issuecomment-34157839
.

Mvh. Christian Zerlang

[gschleusner]

@teocomi - I am wondering why you'd expect that BCF would only apply to people using different tools. Per @theoryshaw comment above we don't have a good way to capture items within the same firm/application without resorting to screen grabs which are pretty dumb. Heck I've though about requesting that PDF-A be a part of BCF so if someone got creative with a 2D or 3D pdf and could capture the element IDs...authoring or IFC, and thus they could embed a markup with real annotation in a BCF. To me the goal should be to unify 2D and 3D review and not just limit it to 3D and thus excluding 90% of current work process.

Greg

[teocomi]

@gschleusner I'm just saying that, to my humble opinion, BCF shouldn't be loaded with features that are software-dependent and such only work, for instance, Revit to Revit or Solibri to Solibri...

[gschleusner]

@teocomi That makes sense but but I also don't think it should mean that we restrict what goes in BCF based on limitations of half of the tools. All authoring tools from Rhino to Catia have the ability to produce orthogonal views represent some sort of projection or cut through a model. That is the level at which I'd advocate for functionally. Not something that is specific to a tool. The way that could be done generically is to support cut or projected plans in relationship to things like; Level, Column Grids, Element faces and so on. All the authoring tools will also have a ID for the applications specific representation view representation as either an element or or view so I don't think it would necessary have to be application specific at all.

[teocomi]

@gschleusner BCF already supports Clipping Planes and Orthogonal Views, how would you further extend its schema?

[gschleusner]

Here's what I think would be useful.

1. Clipping based on associated datum, like levels, with a specified offset. This way a cut in one application is exactly the same as another and not based on XYZ
2. View information separate from issues - IE What are the visible elements in a view vs. the elements with issues.
3. ID's for the views themselves so the issue could be associated with a particular view/slides/viewport
4. I know it really dead but it would be really great to vector overlay info from the views. I'd really like to see the AEC equivalent of GeoSpatial PDF, but that's for another conversation.

[theoryshaw]

+1 for @gschleusner's number 4 comment above. Related discussion on lines here #13