'modeling' vs 'drafting'

[ron.sanpedro]

I am curious, as people progress with their Revit implementations, what trends do you see with regards to 'modeling' vs 'drafting'? And by 'modeling' I don't mean only 3D aspects, so much as non 'drafting lines' content in individual views. Do you find that more is included in the model, and less is added as 2D embellishments?
And with regards to embellishments, is there more in the form of detail components and 'objects', or do you still find a need for a lot of 'drafted' additions to views before they are complete?
And lastly, when you do resort to drafted lines, do you use Categories based on plotted look (thick, medium, thin or variations) or Categories based on Architectural use, such as Expansion Joint, Reveal, etc?

My sense is that defining things by graphic expression is the 'old' way, and defining things by Architectural or Building function, and then controlling graphic expression via categories in particular views is the 'new' BIMmie way. But perhaps I am the one off on a flight of fancy?

Thanks all,
Gordon

[gbrowne]

An oft discussed topic!

We use both, line thickness and lines with implied meaning. If the situation requires it. Much time can be spent trying to find a catch all system that works for each job, but I think a little flexibility is a good thing. As for modelling, I also think that too much modelled detail can be a bad thing. In here, I don't render too much, I am just getting the drawings out and I only model something if it really really needs it, i.e. if its crucial to the plan/elevation. For example, I have a parametric 2D WC stall, 2D "worktop", 2D sinks etc that work for most situations. I have also went down the path of detail components for electrical symbols. No need for 3D electrical items usually.

Horses for courses, as they say here.. haha!

[patricks]

I find that I model more and have more of that model visible in wall sections and details and less detail components.

For instance, in recent projects I have spent more time modeling things like slab edge turndowns, footings, structure (if it's metal building that our struc. engineer doesn't design), downspouts, etc. so that they will always show in any detail view I create. Then I don't have to draw them myself.

[gordonp147484]

An oft discussed topic!

We use both, line thickness and lines with implied meaning. If the situation requires it. Much time can be spent trying to find a catch all system that works for each job, but I think a little flexibility is a good thing. As for modelling, I also think that too much modelled detail can be a bad thing. In here, I don't render too much, I am just getting the drawings out and I only model something if it really really needs it, i.e. if its crucial to the plan/elevation. For example, I have a parametric 2D WC stall, 2D "worktop", 2D sinks etc that work for most situations. I have also went down the path of detail components for electrical symbols. No need for 3D electrical items usually.

Horses for courses, as they say here.. haha!

I agree completely on the "less 3D modeling" aspect. I wonder about things like:
An expansion joint. I could draw it as a Drafting Line in just one elevation, Category Medium. I could draw it as a Model Line, Category Medium, or I could draw it as a Model Line, Category Expansion Joint.
I am wondering if people started with the former, and are gravitating to the latter?

Thanks,
Gordon

[Justin Marchiel]

i think this also depends on how much BIM information you want to add into the job. If you are going to turn the model over to an owner (or manage it for them, another source of debate) one of the great parts about BIM is you can select the element and get all the information about it (ie product, manuf. website, colour, size, etc.). so if you have a situation where you have the file you can quickly select the item and find out all sorts of information about it instead of see it is an expansion joint, going into the specs to find what type, then finding there are 2 type, depending on the size requirments, going back to the drawings to see the size, going to spec, then to shop drawings for colour, etc.

I agree that there is a time to model and not model, but why not make a family that is not much more then a graphic line, but has a detail component for a section, and the information about the object? you dont have to model the geometry of the object, but have some BIM info added to a "line like" family.

Is that not what BIM is trying to do? have all the info in the model?

Justin

[etornberg]

I TRY to model for everything in small scale plan, elevation, and even section views. Add linework when judged efficient.

3/4" = 1' - 0" is usually the trigger for drafting. Any section or plan details at this scale or larger ends up with the model as "do not display". That doesn't mean the model is useless at these views - it is in fact essential, being used "as underlay" up to the point of completion.