Creating Schedules in AutoCad

[daniel.191403]

Also, just a reminder from my very wise 8th grade English teacher: Be mindful of the very nature and limits of metaphor or analogy as you use them. Both of these linguistic tools serve a specific purpose. They aspire to act as a surrogate way to communicate ideas which other wise are challenging at best to get across, but in doing so do not overtly announce which part of the borrowed subject is being leaned on by the user to assist in the illumination of the subject the metaphor is focused towards and in doing so the user neglects to indicate which part of the borrowed subject should stay on the side line as not really pertinent to the meaning of the metaphors intended usage. By this there is an agreement to listen carefully, not always an easy thing to do. The playful analogy of the automobile, luxury or otherwise, is not a one-to-one comparison to AC and Revit, as it falls short on many fronts in wanting to blanket the whole meaning of this topic of conversation…so watch your metaphors closely for as like an unruly child they can run astray and trip you up!! Chew on that metaphor for awhile. lol

You see your suggestion of buying different kinds of vehicles for different kinds of uses [going off road or otherwise] really is interesting, but not a good match for this conversation. Being a drag racer, or Indy racer, or derby crash-car clown car driver, or a mother with her Prius for taking the children to school in an ecologically sound manner are all acts of driving, but very different kinds of activities; do you choose one vehicle over the other for reasons which have to do specifically with the same act but under different circumstances? Of course you do. But with AC/ADT/Revit you choose them all for the same act and activity and circumstances = designing buildings. So see if you can find a way of keeping your metaphors tracking within a line of reason…part of being clever with words is holding to a thru line while wondering off into the arena of the poetic, and maintaining a certain level of intellectual honesty is key.

IRNEB: “Now to get to your idea of an architect drawing a window. That you only do in ACA or Revit. In straight ACad you draw a bunch of unrelated lines…”

DANIEL: Yes, IRNEB, we all know how they each work…if not then you are a bit handicapped in this discussion and should go do your homework. We all know how ADT windows & doors get inserted and how they get into the data flow process, and we all know that AC doesn’t have ‘intelligent blocks’ as plug-in windows and doors, etc, like ADT or Revit. Which is exactly why my idea is so brilliant: I’ve worked around this difference by focusing the intelligence on the TAG [or callout depending on your preferred nomenclature] not the objects being tagged!! This makes it a universally usable feature [not industry specific], and not graphics dependant [meaning lines or arcs representing real objects – those get to stay dumb] and as such is an enhancement of already built in functionality found in AC. Have I not made this point clear yet? Let me know and I will try again.

But while you were away I was thinking about another way to achieve my brilliant idea. The first notion was putting the intelligence in the TAG as I’ve just described; but then I got to thinkin’ that this could also be done using a grouping method, sort of like what you’ve just describe – only a bit differently. In this alternative way when you make a group [a quasi block if you will] you do this using a special new ‘group’ tool, sort of a ‘smart group’ [like smart objects in Adobe CS series] tool set which is linked into the Table functionality I’ve already covered. So, when using this ‘smart group’ tool it activates an attribute editor interface where you can fill in all the kinds of data you want attached to this ‘smart group’ of lines/arc/circle/or even blocks. Then you can reuse this ‘smart group’ entity [which represent what ever you wish] just like a block or a Wblock and the data travels with it & is editable as you wish.

The added functionality is that this ‘smart group’ also initiates a Table execution in the background, just like Vectorworks does with its Worksheets [which BTW has a true Vertical fleet of software each adding upon the other for industry specific tasks, though all sharing this built in excel ‘worksheet’ scheduling functionality for both 2d & 3d workflows]. One of the fields in the ‘smart group’ attribute editor interface which opens when the tool is initiated is an area to select what kind of ‘group’ the entity represents i.e. a door, window, plumbing, electrical, structural member, nut/bolt/connector, landscape stuff, etc… Checking the appropriate field [or check box] initiates some basic formatting rules for the Table. Pretty much like choosing your category headings for your schedule when creating table columns in Revit & ADT tables creation steps -- and as do all the other programs out there with a similar feature.

So there are several ways for the programmer to get at this new functionality. Though this is the job of the programmer I would be glad to help in any way I can. In the meantime our job is to put the ideas out there and understand its value to us. If you don’t understand the value of my idea, and JW might not given that he doesn’t make schedules, then just say so. You won’t hurt my feelings…I promise.

IRNEB: “It does not know what a window schedule is, it does not know even that the door drawn inside the wall is linked with a reference tag to a schedule. All it knows is what the user (after tedious setting up) told it…”

DANIEL: Of course!! That’s the whole point. And it doesn’t need to be tedious anymore – does that interest you? May be you have been misdirected by my initial use of the word SCHEDULE, which is of course the real world word to use to discuss this topic, but in terms of the mind of the software [silly metaphor] it’s not really that at all. It’s simply 0s & 1s. So, the data extraction you discussed here is exactly the same with my idea, its just happens in a new way. SCHEDULE schmedule, the word means nothing to the software. But it means a whole lot to us users, and that is who I am speaking to and why I framed the thread as I did.

IRNEB: “You should know yourself that Arch Schedules have no real standard….”

DANIEL: This is trivial, though true. All software advancements especially those directly focused on annotation/dimension/text based tools run into this very same formatting and style issue. This is the very same issue Revit is running into as you noted, and Vectorworks and ArchiCad and all the other software’s which work to provide flexibility to a disparate user base…certainly not a deal breaker for the idea. Plus the AC table edit-ability would still be fully functioning as it is currently!

I’m really beginning to get the impression you have not quite grasped the idea I’ve put forward…its not that complicated, just take the same processes you already do and combines them into a more stream lined automated way. Sure, at first there may be a reduction in the full range of applicability, just like it was with Sheet Set manager or dynamic block editor or other enhancements through out the history of AC, but those things get worked out over time; and in the meantime the most common uses for scheduling will have greatly improved…thus improving our lives.

And yes there is an add-on company ‘JTB World’ who I did contact about creating such an add-on, they thought it was an outstanding idea, but would need the $$ to put it together. And there is another company who has a version of this, though somewhat cumbersome and not quite there. I downloaded their manual to learn about it and it’s very similar to what we already have in AC; it’s a good leap forward, but not exactly internal to AC as I am suggesting it can and should be. http://www.globalcad.com/products/schedule.htm


Your final statements around the challenges of variations on the theme of Scheduling and the WORSE IS BETTER IS WORSE is all very interesting and even cogent if you want to play the role of programmer in this conversation. But let’s not go there again…I’m speaking with my peers. Or am I??

I am a user, and I am impressed with the programmers abilities already demonstrated by very specific developments with in AC. WE the USER reserve the privilege of promoting more development, however…that’s our job, that’s what the programmer wants from us, that’s what user group forms and wish lists are all about. Can we at least agree that this is a fair approach to using this user group? Meaning sticking to our wishes and not interjecting notions of what ‘they’ may be thinking [meaning Autodesk]. Otherwise we are having 3rd person dialogues based on conjecture. Talk about a cat chasing his tail….

BTW, I don’t except your #4 in your final list: AC doesn’t have a vertical program to move into. Oh, wait I think I’ve heard that somewhere else already. lol

But since this is fundamental to your P.O.V. then we will have to agree to disagree about that and so avoid trying to have a tug of war over the validity of the statement and get back to the merits of the idea as it stands on its own.

So, would you use ‘it’ if Autodesk provided it in AC? IF this is too much to answer no worries…I get it. I’m still having a really wonderful time discussing the matter and hope you will continue to join in and tell all your friends to come along for the ride too. d.

[daniel.191403]

IRNEB wrote: "If you're (me as well) using ACad stright off the cuff for building design, then it's you using it for that. It doesn't mean it's been made to do so."

Come on now, you're being a bit pedantic here...this is a rhetorical flourish your wading into...yes, we all know what CAD is and is not...lets not get mired in these kinds of understandings please!! Even BIM is still just drawing, nothing has really changed since scratching lines in the sand in front of the pyramids with your sandaled toes…just the technology has changed. The driver is still the drawer wether with mouse, a lead tip wooden thing, or finger paintings.

True BIM adds another dimension to the act of drawing, sure, but the notion of intelligence is still just a metaphor. And the fact is BIM is about document coordination primacy not design primacy....they are still working very hard on trying to tie the other shoe lace having focused so much on the automation and coordination of CD output and system integration across all relevant building industries...meanwhile they are trying to pull the 'designer' along with a collar and leash and finding this is not always working for them as they had envisioned. Seems to be they have the equation backwards.

[irneb]

Dear Daniel, I'm not saying AC shouldn't have a scheduling system ... maybe sometime someone will duplicate something like one of the 3rd Party add-ons (or more likely ADesk will simply buy them out). That's usually how it happens, if its found that a particular add-on is extremely popular.

What I am saying however: ADesk is a business strictly for their profit. The customer may be right, but he's going to have to pay to be right. No-one in their right mind would do extra work for less pay ... well, maybe we architects do that, but then we're some weird breed of our own.

As for your OP ... I think I've answered it ad infinitum ... if you don't like the answer I can't help that. I don't think ADesk will ever do what you call your great idea ... it's an old idea and many add-ons have made such types of scheduling possible since the time I started with ACad R9 in the late 80's ... and no R9 and R10 was IMHO useless (or at best extremely inefficient) as an architectural tool without some add-on package (I was using CadPlan up to R14). These days I'm using tricks and add-ons of my own to get around the unbelievably basic tools which is still ACAD Vanilla, I would still be able to do twice the work with CadPlan on R10 which I can now do on AC Vanilla. Revit/ADT/ACA all grew from similar products which was either started by ADesk or boaght over by them.

And as for you stating its a marketing hype ... sure it is ... are you trying to tell me you believe what an add tells you? Everyone in marketing is only concerned with how many products they can sell and keep on selling. I'm thinking in ADesk's terms because I'm trying to understand the beast ... it doesn't help putting blinkers on and saying: "but it shouldn't be so" ... the point is it is so and they've got good reason to keep it so ... why should they change that? Just beause you want them to? They'll change it if you're willing to pay them for it ... it's called capitalism not altruism.

[daniel.191403]

For my money, IRNEB, this is the clearest post you’ve made…much appreciation because it almost answers the threads question: would you use it if it was provided? You almost answered it but instead went more directly to why Autodesk wouldn’t dare give it. But here in lies the issue, the more voices speaking on the subject, though it may be a long haul, the more chances that they will.

The force of my long posts have had to respond to side tracking issues which have been raised….but now we are getting down to simpler terms which is good.

Yes marketing is the thread that runs through many folks perception of the fleet of Autodesk offerings. Not me. Working with the programs is where the pudding is proved and is how I access them. So, like you I am not that naive to be persuaded by the desires of the PR folks…though I do dig a creative campaign.

Profit is governing decisions…on this we agree. And it could be seen that such a scheduling system in AC would undermine the marketing of ADT/ACA & Revit, as this is a primary tool of seduction many fall for in moving prematurely into those products only to find out that their move was perhaps not well understood or thought out.

And yes, it is true, Autodesk gobbles up 3rd party stuff to make many of its enhancements, and indeed Revit is a prime example of that at a larger order of these kinds of acquisitions.

So the question remains, would you use it if AC did find the heart or principled business decision to add it [one way or another] into AC?

The more yeses out there makes the business decision more likely. It doesn’t hurt to ask, promote, cry out for, protest, or what ever….

Part of the reason I find this topic so timely is exactly due to the advancements in AC with all the ‘intelligence’ it has been given of late…..perhaps there is an acknowledgement at headquarters that AC is here to stay in the short and mid term because Revit is still a baby giraffe with wobbly legs in certain sectors of the industry, especially in the creative corners. IMO.

[daniel.191403]

Jaberwok, You may find this interesting, as a picture says a thousand words:

Here are several reasons why this brilliant idea is already a no brainer!!

Exhibit A: Autodesk inches towards the topic of this Thread in 2008.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKloFFKzTSE

Exhibit B: Autodesk has almost a version of this functionality in MEP which is of course an industry specific AutoCAD based program. Does that make it a vertical offering…perhaps for that industry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqGe_...eature=related

Exhibit C: Autodesk has an interface which it can appropriated quite easily to match the subject of this Thread – so those who think it would take heavy lifting for them to do it should relieve themselves of this cynical concern.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Injwa...eature=related

Exhibit D: The functionality has been reserved for MEP...you lucky dogs!!
http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/file...y_WP_May06.pdf

Exhibit E: For those herein who have claimed AutoCad is not a building design oriented program nor a Schedule creation intended software I like to introduce you this Autodesk University lecture.
http://www.dscohn.com/AU/au-2008-05-Tables.htm

Does this answer the question of the marketing madness debate? Hardly.
Is this a support of your guys notion of Verticality...no. But we've been over and over and over that already.

enjoy the movies!!

[daniel.191403]

Stop the presses: Exhibit E is actually 80% of the way to what this thread is all about.

I've just watch the movie and so should you, and then reevaluate the level of cynicism about Autodesk, which is why I was trying to not have others answer on their behalf....clearly they are moving in the direction I am asking them to. Bravo Autodesk!! A few more steps and viola they've provided the functionality as desired. ))

And lucky me as my AC 2010 arrives this week!!

[irneb]

That is exactly what 2008's Data Extraction does ... it doesn't improve from there (much). The "link to external data" works in some instances, however take note that you need a unique value to link with ... understandably (but what of stuff like window type tags, you'll end up with duplicates every time so the link will fail).

That's why I'm saying it's not perfect for all scenarios, and it sure as S... is not automatic to set it up. What the presenter did in 90 min I got mine in 10min using LISP add ons.

Also note that he's simply glanced over one of the biggest gripes I have with DE ... non-uniformly scaled blocks are ignored. And that's mirrored blocks as well, so now you have to either go through each block to check if it's mirrored or stop using the mirror command. WTF?

Also, the table is very limited as to what you can achieve from this. E.g. say you have a door tag with a room no and door no for reference. There's no way in DE to combine these into one column (as you can with Excel's & operator or concatenate function) so you have a single column with unique values to link with (and you need a single column to do so). My solution to this is to create a hidden attrib which links via fields to the 2 displayed attribs, but in order for this to become "automatic" I had to look to lisp.

If you want to promote your idea, send it as an AUGI wish item. ADesk sometimes do look at those which has a lot of votes. Describe it clearly & state how you'll use and benefit from it. Then maybe you'll find enough votes that ADesk will actually sit up and listen. It's a numbers game, straight and simple.

[daniel.191403]

IRNEB: “That is exactly what 2008's Data Extraction does…”

Yeah, and this is brilliant and a huge step in the right direction!! I suppose the disconnect between us in our conversation, including Jaberwok, has a little to do with temperament & perspective.

I will be jumping from 2007 AC to 2010 AC and so I was not familiar with this level of robustness in 2008 Table/Data enhancements; plus the new interface seems to make the whole process even easier, IMO. The major reason I’m upgrading to 2010 is the interface, I find it very sexy and so much clearer to use then 2007 and before. It’s just visually simpler...especially for infrequently used commands as they are more directly presented to you.

Let me drill down a bit into your wording, too. What you are calling “tedious” takes you 10 mins to accomplish??? HuH? 10 mins seems pretty reasonable to me given the scope of the functionality. And of course it took the presenter 90mins in the video to do it -- he was giving a class!!

Is it automatic? No, not yet, but I am even more convinced after watching the entire video that to get it more and more automatic is a relative hop-skip-and-a-jump for the programmers – the entire skeleton is in place for this to happen!!


IRNEB: “Also note that he's simply glanced over one of the biggest gripes I have with DE ... non-uniformly scaled blocks are ignored. And that's mirrored blocks as well, so now you have to either go through each block to check if it's mirrored or stop using the mirror command. WTF?”

Yeah, so why don’t you add this to the Wish List thread? Have you?? Isn’t that part of the whole process here on AUGI!! In the famous words of Jim Valvano, “Don’t give up [man], don’t ever give up!!”

IRNEB: “Also, the table is very limited as to what you can achieve from this. E.g. say you have a door tag with a room no and door no for reference.”

Okay, cool, then just make a wish; bet you a lucky star it will happen.

My friend INREB --- from what I see here, automation is well on its way for this “general purpose base level software!!” This is exactly the kinds of enhancements which happen over time.

Why so cynical?

[irneb]

I will be jumping from 2007 AC to 2010 AC and so I was not familiar with this level of robustness in 2008 Table/Data enhancements; plus the new interface seems to make the whole process even easier, IMO.

I actually liked the 2006/7's interface more ... it was quicker to use. The 2008-10 interface of DE is bulky, a bit unyielding, not to mention slow to run through.

Let me drill down a bit into your wording, too. What you are calling “tedious” takes you 10 mins to accomplish??? HuH? 10 mins seems pretty reasonable to me given the scope of the functionality. And of course it took the presenter 90mins in the video to do it -- he was giving a class!!

And he'd practiced it beforehand, knowing exactly what he wanted and how to get there. You'll find you go start DE then notice you need something more because your current blocks don't give you the info the way DE wants it. Then you stop, and redefine your blocks, then start DE again ... this process takes the tedious time.

... non-uniformly scaled blocks ... Yeah, so why don’t you add this to the Wish List thread? Have you??

Yep, me and several others have ... no news about fixing this though!

Okay, cool, then just make a wish; bet you a lucky star it will happen.

Have already asked for better functions available in the tables ... if they can do that it would be simple to add to the DE.

Why so cynical?

Because my biggest wish in this instance is not happening, and as far as I can see my wish would be to ADesks own interests as well.

Here's what I mean by using an ODBC connection to the DWG file. In Excel I can easily modify several stuff as I'd want it ... formating is a pleasure, there's stuff like on the fly filters & sorting. See the attached screen capture of one of my door schedules.

The 1st shows the automatically generated table when I link to the CSV file I get from my LISP code. This is done through the MS Text File ODBC driver and is a snap to setup in Excel.

Notice the down arrows next to each column heading ... these provide a menu for each column, the 2nd capture shows the menu for the LeafType column. Notice you can sort it on the fly, you can provide text filters like DT1* would show all values staring with DT1, or you could simpli pick those values you'd like displayed.

E.g. in the 3rd I've got LeafTypes sorted and filtered on DT110 and DT111 only. This happens in a second. From here I can easily use these features to find out if there's any mistake ... e.g. notice the 1st column Door No ... the duplicates are highlighted ... no I know someone's just copied a door tag without using my code to do so ...

If I needed to do any one of these tasks using DE ... I'd have to redo the entire DE process, which takes time to just start.

So here's my "wish" to ADesk ... create an ODBC driver so I can link to a DWG from Excel and leave the data extraction & tables to the professionals ... ADesk are amateurs in this field.

[daniel.191403]

Nice presentation. So let me get this straight, due to my being a knucklehead, what you've presented is an attribute data extraction from AC directly into Excel where you do your entire table formatting which in effect is your Schedule? Then once you have it the way you like in Excel you import that Excel file into AC and AC converts it into an AC table exactly as you've formatted it in Excel -- OR the Excel file is imported as an Excel file and stays that way and so is and xRef?

Then if you make changes to the AC drawing, add or delete items, you go back to Excel and make the manual changes there, or do you update the Excel file with ACs DE linked file update command? Or if it’s an inserted Excel file into AC then like an xRef you can edit the Excel file in-place or click to launch Excel and update in the source file?

Sorry for the basic questions, but as you may recall at the very start of this thread I was hoping to have something completely internal to AC, and as you've discovered I'm not even close to using what you've described.

But the rub with my wish, based on your experience, is that the table functionality in AC is not nearly as robust or fluid as Excel and so you want Autodesk to provide much more Excel functionality to AC tables? If they can't do this, then you want them to provide an ODBC driver to allow a bridge to side step ACs table limitations [as it’s currently developed]?

What you have demonstrated is a higher order of user needs then where I was coming from when I started this thread -- my idea was focused on much simpler functionality of creating Tags which hold the attributes of what they are tagging and by adding/deleting a Tag into a AC drawing a corresponding Schedule gets created accordingly and stays current as Tag changes are made in the drawing(s) linked to it. The formatting of the Schedule would operate just like it does in Revit/ADT or better!! -- which have seen improvements over time in regards to editing -- but the data linking principle would be the same. My thinking was the Schedule formatting tools already exist in other Autodesk programs which could therefor be used in AC since this is just a data pipeline process; the missing functionality for the data transfering in this pipeline was how to associate an entity inserted into an AC drawing with the creation of the Schedule upon the user insertions of door/windows/plumb/elect stuff. In the BIM programs the insertion of an 'intelligent' 3D object did the trick given its data packed power. With my idea the power would be in the Tag itself, not the lines representing the items tagged.

Right now in AC the DE process relies on Blocks with attributes...and apparently a Dynamic block adds a higher order of data extraction functionality. Because this process is Block dependant, however, this ties the Block creation process into the pipeline. And as you'v noted Block manipulation or editing impacts the data pipeline process.

My idea wants to side step this by using a Tag based approach, or what I call 'smart tags', which are loaded with all the data. Editing this data can be done pre/post tag insertion and be bi-directional with the Schedule. One issue I see with this is that Electrical/Plumbing/HVAC symbols [blocks] usually don't get tagged in a drawing. But like using hidden attibutes attached to a block a TAG can be invisible and associated with the symbol, or the symbol itself is the both symbol & Tag.

But either way what you are discussing is a higher order of Excel functionality within AC tables to ease the work flow when changes are made or when the information needs to be viewed in multiple ways...i.e. different kinds of schedules for different purposes using the same data +/- user selected categories. And what you are discussing is the limitations of Block manipulation relative to the data extraction pipeline and keeping things current in a seamless way.

In the meantime since my idea doesn’t address all the current limiations you have found with AC tables & other Block issues your solution is that an ODBC driver would optimize your current work flow to your satisfaction because it would seamlessly and immediately add Excel funtionality into AC by proxy….? Would this also side step the Block manipulation isses you've raised...i.e. mirrored blocks?

d.