Design Notes

I thought I'd take the convo out from under the misleading subject- heading of Chinese Drywall, despite the built-in threaded-ironies re. industrial vs natural building.

> Ken S. Tucker > Warm Worm wrote: > > It's you WW that has thing 'bass ackwards', the devil is in the > > details, get it right ASAP. > > Ya and all that CAD is putting out so much fantastic architecture in a > hurry. > What's the rush? It's going well and I'm enjoying it. > > CAD notes: > > - slow reconstruction of mesh lines in Google 3d Warehouse models. How > > to speed up? (I looked at performance. Am I missing anything? Driver > > upgrade?) > > - some toilets have no apparent tanks; where are they or do they > > operate like those commercial pipe toilets? > > - in the property panel, some objects have no lengths or other info > > displayed. where is it/how do i retrieve it? > Our last place we decided in 2000 to sell, and started improvements > to it for curb appeal. > By 2002 we decided on Oky Valley and took ~4 weeks to find the lot > that we needed, and closed, but we had a site, and began design. > In 2004 the old place sold and we landed on the new place with tools > and a tent, and put up an 8x12 cabin for a construction site office, > and a place to sleep, worked ok. > Then we built the next place (20x20) as a base to build the house, > which we're still planning on, but there's no hurry, I'm considering > building a public library.

In what context? What about the still? Anyway, no ASAP then, good.

So I suppose we're serious amatuers.

I would imag> > OK, here's the deal.

> It ok to design with nominal dimensions like say, 4" wide interior > > walls, but you have to understand that such a thing is not really > > possible in todays world.

I read about rammed straw-slip walls (or however you call them). Cool things, and they look great, but I'd like to see about how they deal with plumbing and electrical with such walls. Perhaps they're embedded or external? My house design only includes plumbing more or less on one side of the house, but maybe I could still use those walls.

> So therefore it requires a broad range of knowledge and experience in > > a variety of related field in order to design a building on paper that > > has some chance of actually being built in the real world, otherwise > > its just so much playtime.

Maybe I should quote the book I'm reading about how the US housing industry has apparently produced overly complicated design requiring all kinds of professionals, sources (from far away) and energy (to ship it all in). I wouldn't be surprised. The more I look into it, the more it appears a real sham. Maybe we need more playtime for real work.

As kid's we built forts out of boxes then scavenged wood, > then onward to progressively larger projects. > Building a scaled 'shed' following the codes would be a good > start for a novice...

That's kind of what I'm doing in AutoCAD. :)

...and is a useful building, for a DIYer designer/ > builder, as we (wife and I) were. The building we did is designed > for pre-fab mass-production.

I'd be careful with the implications behind mass production. We, as a society, seem to be reconsidering the benefits and drawbacks of it.

> For example, a 30" wide door will require this: > > 30" for the door itself > > 3/4" on each side for the jambs > > 1/4" on each side for shims. > > So your rough opening for a 30" door is 32" minimum. > > You can make it 33" and use more shims, but you really shouldn't > > because it will net a *loose* door jamb or other materials will be > > necessary to make it tight. 2x4's ain't 2x4.

Know any good off-the-shelf 3D doors/etc.? They're probably easy to custom-make onsite, but for the purposes of cutting my teeth, they might be a worthwhile foray.

Right, 3.5 x1.5 + sheathing, (don't forget wiring). > Then each piece needs to be inspected and graded on site. > The corner joints need to be done very well.

I forget what this refers to as I copied/pasted the thread, but I'll look it up. Would that be the door frames again?

> Otherwise, if you don't know these things and try to move ahead with > > your project you will get major issues right away. For example, the > > guy that does the lumber take-off will know immedately that he's > > dealing with a novice and gauge his paperwork accordingly. Same with > > everybody else thats involved with the thing.

That's why ostensibly hiring professionals where needed for some parts of the project save money and headache.

> Basically, in a nutshell, a person should not attempt to design in 3d > > until he has mastered designing in 2d. You have to walk before you run > > otherwise you'll most likely land on your ass, hard.

Point taken. I've learned 2D, but haven't really practiced it in itself, except where 3D is concerned. But you do a lot of 2D work when doing 3D, which is funny. So I know 2D and know it very well in some ways. I mean, 3D is in a sense simply 2D along various 2D axes, like Z. I'm still flipping around the "flat plan" ucs. Did you want to learn 3D by the way?

(I found WW's pix confusing, but that may be lack of experience). > > Me too, and I'm in the business!

I can see how you would have. I have new pix that I'll post if I can before my internet cafe time expires.

If you can't see it in staright 2d you'll never see it in 3d either. > To complicate it further, they weren't even 3d, they were 2d meant to > emulate 3d, without the 3rd d. > Now if they made a 3d monitor.....

In a way, it would still be 2D. ;)

> Frankly, I've never seen the advantage of designing in 3d.
1 possible advantage: Once you have the model, you can "go in it".

Given that you've done 2D, you may find find it easier than you think to pick up.

But I do > > see disadvantages to it. It tends to skew the viewpoints and the > > overall picture in ones mind, that is, assuming one has that picture > > in the first place. If this is just one of those play as you go things > > then disregard what I've said because there will never be any reality > > to it anyway.

It should have its application.

> Knowledge of materials and construction methods is really critical in > > design and I don't see anyway around that.

I'm learning a lot about that too, if more on the natural side of things than industrial sometimes, perhaps usually.

> And those things, materials and methods, can be regional, varying by > > locale. > > Be careful when asking for criticism because sometimes it has meaning > > not immediately recognized.

Any time. Constructive criticism on construction.

> Then you can avoid all that messy UCS stuff. > > Just pay attention to where you put your insertion point. > > You are aware aren't you that windows come in standard sizes?

There are a lot of windows out there. I have to find a good site. Any recommendations?

> Ya and all that CAD is putting out so much fantastic architecture in a > > hurry. > No. > The architecture starts in the mind and the tools that bring it to > reality are just that. > If you can't design it in 2d on paper then you can't design it in 3d > on pixels either, and thats a fact jack.

Well I can and/but I'm now doing it in 2D/3D, which I prefer for now and for some reasons. I may try to dump the whole model into a rendering program if ACAD can't hack it. I worry that the script will crash, but we'll see.

Everything starts with a pencil and a paper.

Sounds like illustration. We know that many in various creative fields throughout history have done things off the book, unconventionally.

Reply to
Warm Worm
Loading thread data ...

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.