![Hokusai Hokusai](/uploads/1/2/3/8/123827928/629433571.jpg)
Hi Fellas, I started a previous post a while ago about sample drawings but didn't know if anyone would answer a new post there, so I've started a new one. I'm after some sample drawings (produced in civil 3d) of the following: bulk earthworks (in the context of a subdivision) - preferrably with cut and fill hatched and showing depth of cut/fill, tables etc., crossections of different areas of the site (to show finished ground, existing ground, site service etc.), a drainage plan + drainage longsections and some road longsections. These drawings are to help give me an idea of what civil 3D generated drawings will look like on paper.
I've seen all these things in AutoCAD, but want some examples from Civil 3D to have as a comparison. Ideally the drawings would all be in the context of a subdivision. If anyone would be able to help me by either providing drawings or directing me to where I could find some I would be very grateful. Regards, Lachlan. Hello Lachlan Pretty much every title block from any company has something like this on it: I think you need to take another look at the the tutorials. Right off the bat the corridor tutorial specifically goes through a sub-division.
Just because a pipe tutorial is in a road doesn't mean you cant run it through a site. There is an entire division of the software devoted to dividing up a subdivision. Aligngment aint just for roads: alignments and surface profiles are probably the most powerful dynamic linking tool in the cabinet. The grading tutorials are all about Site and building pad grading; your job - figure out how to use it to your advantage. Cross Sections? If you are doing earthworks and not looking at a cross section, you are probably doing something wrong. Material calculations.
To paraphrase Stan Lee. 'Nuff said' Labels & tabels. Just like at the end of the hokey pokey: Thats what its all about! Learn how to leverage your labels and tabels Most importantly, you have to understand the software where you can leverage it to work for 'you'. The tools are a means to an end and you have to approach it that way. Don't get caught up in. 'there isn't a subdivision earthwork button'.
Do the tutorials, take some classes, learn the tools and make them work for you. If Earthwork is your interesest focus on building surfaces and getting quantities. You may find, in a particular situation, that maybe a 'Road' tool gets me to where I need to go. I have said this before: 'You have to get under the hood and scrape your knuckles'. Keep poking your re-sellers.
I find it odd that they aren't calling back. Come back with specific questions on earth works orwhat ever and you'll get plenty of responses. By the way: Don't they have roads in these subdivisions you are involved with? Roads are typically the backbone: set you roads and pads and the rest of the site should grade itself.
Could someone please help me here? Google results give me no guarantee that the pictures I've viewed of the aforementioned were created in Civil 3D, and I really need drawings created in Civil 3D. I've already gone through the tutorial files that come with C3D, and they don't have what I'm after.
Surely there's some site that has example drawings created in Civil 3D? Autodesk should supply something of the sort for prospective customers to view.
Once again if anyone can help I would be very grateful. Regards, Lachlan. Forgive me if I come off sounding harsh, but you're asking an awful lot of other professionals to hand over their work. If I recall you first post, your boss is looking for some sort of validation of the software.
First off, as a business owner I'm suprised he would make such a request. It is often hard enough to get drawing files from another firm when you are working on the same project. My recomendation is this: 1. His re-seller and many others would probably be thrilled to come to his office and demonstrate what the program can do. 1.a Get a free trial 2. There is always a dog and pony show at some hotel or convention center near everyone. The tutorial folder is a plethora of data that can be culled over and examined.
Is in a few weeks. Hi Joe, Thanks for replying - please forgive my ignorance: when I say that I'm completely new to Civil 3D, I should also have mentioned that I'm completely new to the industry. I have literally worked as a draftsman for 4 months (as a new graduate).
I am unaware of professional conventions (but thankfully am learning thanks to you all on this site). I was unaware that professionals don't like handing out their work freely. May I politely ask why is this? Is it because of copyright/legal issues? I have already contacted the reseller, who have yet to get back to me; I also have a free trial, which I am using, and have checked the tutorial files - they do have examples of cut/fill, sewer longsections etc., but not within the context of a subdivision. The cut and fill sections it shows are along road alignments, which doesn't really help me, as we don't really do roads.
Give you free example drawings/files? Regards, Lachlan. Hello Lachlan Pretty much every title block from any company has something like this on it: I think you need to take another look at the the tutorials. Right off the bat the corridor tutorial specifically goes through a sub-division.
Just because a pipe tutorial is in a road doesn't mean you cant run it through a site. There is an entire division of the software devoted to dividing up a subdivision.
Aligngment aint just for roads: alignments and surface profiles are probably the most powerful dynamic linking tool in the cabinet. The grading tutorials are all about Site and building pad grading; your job - figure out how to use it to your advantage. Cross Sections? If you are doing earthworks and not looking at a cross section, you are probably doing something wrong. Material calculations.
To paraphrase Stan Lee. 'Nuff said' Labels & tabels. Just like at the end of the hokey pokey: Thats what its all about!
Learn how to leverage your labels and tabels Most importantly, you have to understand the software where you can leverage it to work for 'you'. The tools are a means to an end and you have to approach it that way. Don't get caught up in.
'there isn't a subdivision earthwork button'. Do the tutorials, take some classes, learn the tools and make them work for you. If Earthwork is your interesest focus on building surfaces and getting quantities. You may find, in a particular situation, that maybe a 'Road' tool gets me to where I need to go. I have said this before: 'You have to get under the hood and scrape your knuckles'.
Keep poking your re-sellers. I find it odd that they aren't calling back. Come back with specific questions on earth works orwhat ever and you'll get plenty of responses. By the way: Don't they have roads in these subdivisions you are involved with? Roads are typically the backbone: set you roads and pads and the rest of the site should grade itself.
Gerrit This looks much nicer (inside and out) then anyuthing the straight line architects have ever designed. Or the McLaren car factory Yes if the owners are only interested in maximum space for the dollar then you will design monstrosities such as the featured house in your posting.
Surely the architect has a duty to combine both the eye appeal with the pocket constriction. Hopefully that prison block going up at Mt Eden is not one of your designs. @Gerrit: Your last name is.:-) And you might not realise there's been no shortage of beautifully-curved buildings on display here that you might enjoy.
Off the top of my head, for example, buildings by Bruce Goff, and, - not to mention several by FRank Lloyd Wright, including his. That said, you'd be quite wrong to call Mr McDonald's house a monstrosity. His use of natural materials and his sensitive integration of site and architecture (not to mention his ability to design small rather than large) gives the lie to such a charge. And you'll notice that since most building material is 'stick'-like, if you want to express that appropriately you'll be building in straight lines, and when you're building in curves you'll find that your palette is going to be more limited. Which is why so many curved houses have been made out of truly monstrous building materials like fibreglass! But each house is designed for each client, and each context, so if you're happy to stump up the extra to build the curves.;-) Anyway, all that said, it's certainly true that so many of the computer-jockey designers of today have been using their computers less to push the boundaries of their profession, and instead to build and re-build the same CAD boxes ad nauseum. Which is hardly very inspiring.
(I bet that on this at least you'll enjoy the post on.:-) ). Falafulu Fisi Gerrit said. I guess in the modern age architects have yet to descover how to create a spline curve on the computer? I am not a CAD user, however I believe that algorithms (different variants) are already available in CAD software of today, such as covered in this AutoCAD ebook here,.
So, I think that it is a matter for the user to invest time in learning those features (ie, curve interpolation) in the software to be able to master them in their design work. Splines are a must have features in modern CAD software products or otherwise, those vendors whose CAD products where splines functionalities are not available will not be competitive in the market. LGM Gerrit The McLaren HQ was really a money no object exercise. McLaren has an annual budget in the hundreds of millions of pounds to run only two cars in a few races per year (put it this way, their expenditure in operating two cars in a few races and tests each year was higher than that of the entire SR71 Mach3 aircraft operating budget during the same year- one can only imagine how much more it is presently).
On top of that they have other business interests and property interests as well. Recently they paid the FIA a fine of some GBP150-million, just so they could keep spending money on racing two cars for the next season. While that pissed them off, they could and did afford it. They have that kind of cash to hand. Ron Dennis could afford to let his achitects make the McLaren palace as extravagant and over-designed as they liked. That's not to say its the best design possible, merely that it is expensive- hence 'curvey'. And for the proposed production rate of only 20 cars a day, that facility is completely and totally over the top.
The ROI is likley to be woeful. Then again, Ron has the resources already. He can afford it and don't really care about the expense. Surely the context of Ron Dennis' super-wealth shouldn't be used as the standard to which one judges all architectural clients.
BTW the most difficult motor cars to design well are the cheap, small ones. They are also the most difficult to package and frustratingly hard to make profit on. Luckily McLaren stays well clear of such things. Nevertheless it is worth considering whether similar difficulties confront architects designing within strict budgetary and other limitiations. Gerrit said: 'I guess in the modern age architects have yet to descover how to create a spline curve on the computer?' It's people such as yourself, who assume that something can be built, just as easily as it can be drawn on a computer (or piece of paper) - that are responsible for a lot of aborted projects and cost blowouts. Drawing it is one thing, building it affordably is another - and it sounds like you know little about the latter.
However you're be no means alone; many architects and engineers in NZ who are held in high regard are equally lacking. Gerrit Mark, Huge assumptions on your part. I manufacture components from CAD drawings and solid modeling software using CAM. Have a few clues in other words. You sir are knowledgeable about?? And yes even in the engineering industry we have designers who (because solid modeling software makes it so easy) who will put a 2mm radius fillet at the bottom of a 100mm deep pocket without even knowing how to machine it cost effectively.
Solid modeling software is a great boon for 3 dimensional machining but in inexperienced hands can be a cost increaser. OK Gerrit, perhaps you do have a few clues. But there's a difference between producing some metal component in an engineering workshop, and building a house or structure. The latter can't be 'manufactured' like some machine component. And whether you intended it or not, your initial comment did suggest that the only challenge was drawing it, and that the poor buggers who had to try and build it (or fund it) weren't really a concern.
Time and time again I see architects under-estimating the cost of implementing their designs, because they don't understand construction practicalities (or worse, they think it's beneath them to even consider it). And that's even without the extra 'curves' you'd like to seem them add. And although I'd never thought of it in those terms before, I think PC is right that the fundamental reason for curves being so difficult is that 'most building material is 'stick'-like'. To some degree 'curves' are trying to make building materials do something unnatural. I don't disagree with your comment that the 'architect has a duty to combine both the eye appeal with the pocket constriction' - which is what I seen in the McDonald house, executed superbly. Although even this would be far from a cheap house.
At a guess it would be maybe 2-3 times the cost of 'standard' house of similar floor area. I think you severely under-estimate the impracticality and cost of building the way you'd like. Perhaps you'll find this out for yourself first-hand one day when you go to build your own house.
If you can afford to pay maybe 10 times the normal building cost, then good luck to you.:-). Gerrit LGM, Is concrete form work build to a curvature that much more costly to produce then the flat shutter formwork? No I had not considered the comment in that light. You dislike fibreglass.
Autocad 3d Drawings Free Download
Timber can be easily formed into curves, many a boat has been build using steam to form curved timber structures. With the advent of modern adhesives, laminating timber into curved structures is not that difficult. Can clearly remember my third form art teacher expounding the truth that nothing in nature has a straight line. Everything is curved, hence my like for a bit flow and curved form. Mark, What you see as superb design in that house to me looks like a golf club house, designed by a committee of fifteen. Comparing one construction method, (engineering) with another (house building) is futile.
Each has its own constrains that need adherence to. We may have a mechanical structure requiring up to several thousand components, each with a tolerance of 0.01mm being build by several dozen different firms. You may have a building worked on by several dozen different trades. Each has their own set of problems.
LGM Gerrit You ask, 'Is concrete form work build to a curvature that much more costly to produce then the flat shutter formwork?' You've answered your own question already. In general curves are more costly to produce. The difference in cost is enough to lead to the results encountered in housing- not so much curvature around, not as much as straight anyway. 'You dislike fibreglass. Why is that?'
I dislike fibreglass? You made that up. 'Timber can be easily formed into curves, many a boat has been build using steam to form curved timber structures.' It is a particular skill to do that and not one that is commonly employed in house construction (BTW try building a boat that way and see just how 'easy' it is).
It is much more labour and time intensive (hence expensive) than are conventional house construction methods. Size for size boats are extremely expensive compared to houses. They also require much intensive on-going maintenance of a scale houses are not expected to ever receive, let alone require. Remember the saying about boats being a hole in the water into which the owner throws money? There's truth in that. 'With the advent of modern adhesives, laminating timber into curved structures is not that difficult.' It is difficult enough to require extra $ sufficient to see other construction techniques and materials dominant.
'Comparing one construction method, (engineering) with another (house building) is futile. Mizuno mp 630 fast track driver settings. Each has its own constrains that need adherence to.'
Perhaps you shouldn't have done it then. @ Gerrit: You misunderstood me.
I implied nothing about house building being more complicated than what you call 'engineering'. I am a civil engineer for christs sake, and I know every discipline has it's particular challenges. But LGM is correct, you need to listen to your own advice. It seems to me you started off assuming that shaping bits of metal in an fabrication shop (into curves and shit) can be done with as much ease as building a house. A house is not a bit of metal you can bend or weld. The same applies to the sort of engineering structures I'm involved in (bridges, etc). And to answer your question to LGM about curved concrete, the answer is YES, it is much more expensive.
Strucural analysis is very complicated, difficult in bending/placing reinforcing, having to 'bend' the formwork, etc. You can either go on believing that everyone except for you is an idiot, or you can accept that maybe, just maybe, there's a good reason not many houses are 'curvey'.
Bill of Due Process. Bill of Rights. Education. Environment. Environmentalism. Exploitation. Health.
Inflation. Stick war 2 chaos hack. Justice (and Law). Liberalism.
Libertarianism. Money. Multiculturalism. Nationalism. New Freeland. Nozick-ism. Objectivism.
Parkinson's Law. Political Correctness.
Political Power v Economic Power. Postal Service. Producers. Property Rights. Pride. Racism.
Rationality. Responsibility. Restrictive Covenants. Security. Socialism.
Tariffs. Taxation. Technology.
Autocad Architecture Sample Drawings
Tragedy of the Commons. Underground Economy.