New project

[Anonymous]

Team,

What is your view on this situation? Do any of you have experience in managing something similiar? what would you recommend?

In this new project we are working on, it is going to have the office bldg wrapping up beside and then over the parking garage. We’re spacing the floors on level 1-5 so that basically its 2 levels of garage per 1 level of building. Now for managing stories on this thing, do you know of any way around doing this? It's a 10 story building but the first 5 levels will incluse 2 levels of Parking for each floor.

Would it be best to seperate this in two files? and then hotlink them. Any help would be appreciated.

[Laura Yanoviak]

Create a Story for each level:

Story ID 1: Level 1.....parking and building
Story ID 2: Level 1.5..parking
Story ID 3: Level 2.....parking and building
Story ID 4: Level 2.5..parking
Story ID 5: Level 3.....parking and building
Story ID 6: Level 4.....building
Story ID 7: Level 5.....building
Story ID 8: Level 6.....etc...

If I understand you correctly. It is a bit confusing because the Story ID is not the same as the Level number, but it's perfectly legitimate way to set up the file.

[Anonymous]

what's wrong with 2 separate files...? They only really need to be together in the site plan, no? It seems to be an unnecessary complication...!

[Rob]

I think Laura's suggestion can work with no problems... you are on AC10 so you can use multistorey walls. Each split-level plan arrangement can show an office level as 'void' next to the carpark plan. Nothing unusual...

what's wrong with 2 separate files...? They only really need to be together in the site plan, no? It seems to be an unnecessary complication...!

I think splitting it into 2 files would be an unnecessary complication... (referencing, coordination, export/import of common parts for both areas etc.)

BTW, this arrangement is perfect for teamwork use too.

[Anonymous]

Well depends on the project and the individual i suppose - I've worked on similar projects and have always always always found it easier to break it into two files, two drawing packages - rather than trying to juggle multiple split storeys - which is always a pain and logistically problematic (i.e. windows, doors, level dims, plotmaker, etc...)

[__archiben]

Laura wrote:
Create a Story for each level:

absolutely. ignore the storey ID tag - name each of the storey levels as you want them. using two files would cause no end of complication for what is a simple task for archicad . . .

~/archiben

[Rob]

which is always a pain and logistically problematic (i.e. windows, doors, level dims, plotmaker, etc...)

clearly this is not the case with AC10: plotmaker-gone, d/w are solved with multistorey walls, level dims ??? - having a storey for each level = no problem... I can not see your point here mate.

[Anonymous]

Well -I'm just saying that for MYSELF - I think it would be far easier to do it as two files... I get the point about the multistorey walls - and SURE - it can be done - I've done it 3 or 4 times myself... but I just don't find it much fun. It just requires a constant drain of concentration that I'd rather not have to expend. I'm sure there are many smarties out there - much better at dealing with this than I am... but again - for me - I'd rather concentrate on more important things.

My point about the doors and windows are that there WILL be situations where a door or window might (conceivably) be split between storeys - and that's a bit of a problem when you have arbitrary level references, etc... I've had to do that before as well - and I think it's just silly. It depends HEAVILY on the building design and the logistics of building the model... so all I'm really saying in the end is that I really like to simplify wherever and whenever possible... even if it makes more files... there are times when that makes better ergonomics than having 'everything in one'.

[Laura Yanoviak]

JWD wrote:
... so all I'm really saying in the end is that I really like to simplify wherever and whenever possible...

Apparently, what is "simpler" for you is "more complicated" for others...

[Anonymous]

Laura wrote:

JWD wrote:
... so all I'm really saying in the end is that I really like to simplify wherever and whenever possible...

Apparently, what is "simpler" for you is "more complicated" for others...

Apparently SO!! ha ha...! I dunno what to say with this difference of opinion - unless I'm just not understanding the situation. I normally feel it's a lot easier to set up separate files for separate buildings which have (even slightly) different sectional characteristics... clearly there are MORE THAN TWO different solutions to the problem that would be satisfactory - and it would really depend on having a detailed look at the actual project, and the person working on it, the team, etc etc..