Showing posts with label Materials. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Materials. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

WIGGLY TOPO

Park Guell sits in a horseshoe shaped basin nestled into the foothills of the mountains behind Barcelona.  At 148m above sea level, the main terrace has stunning views over the city and out to sea.  How to get this into my Revit model ?  Can I grab contours from Google Earth ?


A quick search throws up references in Revit Forum and CAD addict, two excellent sources of information.  There is a plug-in for AutoCAD available as a free download on Autodesk LABS.  This creates a mesh.  Save to DWG, link into Revit and create topography by import instance: click, tick, done.


This is wonderful, but I want to see trees and houses, and those wonderful elevated roadways that snake around the folds of the hills, supported on random stone pillars. vaults and buttresses in trademark Gaudi style.  As you can see I was successful.  The challenge was to create a material from Google Earth imagery, scale it correctly, and map it onto the topography.


If you switch to realistic view in AutoCAD, you will see that the mesh already has a low-res image draped over the terrain.  This is useful.  I can inspect the corners carefully to decide where to crop my image.  The image itself comes from Google Earth Pro which allows you to save at higher resolutions.  If you only have the free version that's fine, the results will still be useable.


My aim is to create a Russian Doll effect.  A site, within a site, within a site.  The inner portion will be fully modelled in Revit. The next shell will be fairly high resolution topography and imagery.  As we proceed outwards the resolution will necessarily become coarser.  No problem.  All I need is the impression of the city spreading out over the coastal plain with the sea shimmering out on the horizon.
My Russian dolls are linked Revit files with shared coordinates and levels.  The main file, is modelled directly in Revit.  There is no imagery mapped onto the topography here.  Instead I have subregions with materials for grass, footpaths, etc.  This is topo 1. 


Topo 2 is a linked Revit file with a larger rectangle of topography.  I have carefully cropped an image to match the rectangle that was grabbed by the Autocad Plug-in, and set up a plan view that allows me to decide on the real-world size of this "rectangle" ... which is actually somewhat distorted as it wraps over the contours.


Next step is to create a material based on the cropped image and scale it up to life size.  For some crazy reason I had to mirror all my images (rotate canvas, flip horizontal in Photoshop)  It's almost as if the topography turns itself inside out during the "create from import instance" process.  Also had to rotate 90 in most cases and to adjust the X & Y offsets.  If you are not familiar with these features in appearance tab of the materials dialogue, now is a good time to explore.  They are hidden in a secret room, accessed by clicking on the image.  To choose a new image you have to click on its name.  It's easy once you know how.


Be aware that the mesh is quite crude.  If you are a real architect doing a real job for a real client ... better get a real survey done by a real land surveyor.  But for early concept work, (or explorations into Gaudi) it's certainly much better than guess work.


I decided to record some levels and coordinates from Google Earth to check against my Revit model.    This is all useful information when it comes to setting up a shared coordinates and levels system.  My first attempts to creat meshes were incorrectly scaled.  Need to set units in both Google Earth and AutoCAD, then check the results before moving on, 



It is well known that Revit hates DWG style Real World Coordinates.  You have to accept centre-to-centre imports.  I am sure many of you have struggled with this.  In this case the DWG files are Revit friendly if you accept the default values when creating the mesh (enter, enter = place at 0,0 with zero rotation)  Vertical heights will be correct, but to locate X & Y you will need Northings and Eastings for a known feature. 


In practice this meant some manual adjustment when linking Topo 1 into Topo 2 (for example)  Once you have linked any 2 files together and shared coordinates, you are in business.  You can now link any 2 files by shared coordinates, load and unload at your pleasure.  Once again, if you are not too familiar with shared coordinates yet, get your hands dirty.  Experiment and learn.  It may seem hard at first, but it's wonderful, powerful stuff "once you know how". 



One problem with multiple nested sites is going to be 3 sets of topography in the same place.  The larger pieces are extremely crude and will obscure the more detailed modelling of the smaller ones.  My solution is to create resizeable holes: voids that allow the Russian Dolls to sit inside each other.  Resizeable is especially important in the middle because I want to gradually eliminate the crude Google Earth topograhy as I replace it with Revit objects.  What do you call a resizeable hole in Revit topography ?  Yes, it's a pad.


If you check out some of my images you will see where Topo 1 and Topo 2 are weaving in and out of each other.  I am gradually reducing this effect by editing topo 1, moving individual points up and down.  It's all very ad-hoc, but in the absence of highly detailed survey information ... it works for me.  I ended up with 4 topo surfaces, the biggest being almost 8km wide. 


Don't know if anyone else has used this method, or can suggest improvements.  At the moment I am quite excited by the potential.  Can't wait to put Corb's chapel on its hill overlooking the village of Ronchamp and identify the paths that pilgrims take up the hill.  When is a pilgrim not a pilgrim ?  (think Tourist, but then maybe tourism is the modern form of pilgrimage.  Worship the sun and the sand, the wilderness, the historic creations of past architects.  Restore your soul with a journey to some metaphoric Canterbury)


And so my last image is of Gaudi's hypostyle hall at dawn with shafts of light streaming in to wake the oracle.  And my oracle is telling me that there are many more mysteries to be uncovered at Park Guell if I have the patience and endurance to continue to model.  So far my representations are as crude as topography I grabbed from Google Earth.  There are so many avenues to be explored: wrought iron railings and gates, the gatehouses, the raised roadways, how to represent the broken tile patterns ? how to model the rough stone work ?


Behind it all the deeper issue of how to abstract something highly complex into a simpler version that is managable, recognisable and useful.  It's sometimes called seeing the wood from the trees and it's "what Architects do." 



Tuesday, October 25, 2011

GOING ORGANIC

Post number 3 of my pumpkin carving competition entry.


OK so the first image is a nice diagram that Wil sent me. It explains the derivation of the formulae in his original family. Now I understand better what he was driving at.  Probably more scientific than my "Bulge Factor" approach, but I'm going to persevere for the moment with my nested profiles.  In fact I'm going for a "Five Stack" this time around.


You may notice that the profile family looks neater now.  I've got the whole "select-filter-copyrotate" routine down now. But that's probably a separate post.


Using 5 profiles is a bit more hard work, but it gives me more options for sculpting the shape.  This time I want to focus on a more realistic, organic looking pumpkin.  So this represents the opposite pole to that whole Doric, pure-geometry approach to Design.

Now I'm getting a rounded volume with a depressed centre. But it's still too regular.




I can play with the render settings.  Give it a bump map.  This one is based on the Leather Fabrics, but with the depth of the bump map cranked up.


Looking at images of pumpkins I got the feeling that my segments were too regular. So I made another profile, being deliberately sloppy with the setting out.  This is better, but I need to give one or two segments an extra bulge.  I also reached into my bottom drawer for a render texture image that I made a while back to simulate old walling  (we do resorts that capture the feel of a desert village, see this link :  Bab al Shams by GAJ  )  It has a large-scale blotchiness.


Rendered up, the result is starting to get there. The stack of 5 profiles also gives more control over the stem.  I can keep most of it thin then just bulge out quickly at the base.  No way to achieve that with only 3 profiles. Would be better if it curved to one side, but that needs a different family with profiles swept along a path.  While I am busy messing with the render settings I sneaked in a background image from the bit in Cinderella where the fairy godmother transforms the pumpkin into a carriage.


I haven't used the background image in renders much before.  I like the way the automatic sky responds to different times of day.  Flat images of the sky tend to look a bit ... flat.  But perhaps there is scope for using images in a more diagramatic context.  It's OK to be flat when you are not trying for that ultra-photo-real effect.

In the end, everything we do is a diagram, and sometimes a simple thumbnail sketch is the best way of communicating an idea. We should spend more time thinking about what is the BIM equivalent to this.


  The massing tools are one approach, but there must be many others.  Just because it's an intelligent 3d model it doesn't have to be so complex that you can't see the wood for the trees.  For example, a while ago I made a Revit version of one of Corb's simple diagrams.  "Less is more" as a cigar-smoking German once said.

Sunday, September 25, 2011

STAMP COLLECTION

This is another post about my interactions with suppliers/manufacturers of building products.  Creative Concrete Concepts started out doing stamped concrete and have broadened out into a range of cement-based finishes.

 

 
They gave us a CPD recently and I asked my usual question (do you know about BIM & Revit) and got the usual answer (not really, but we're willing to learn)  So I've entered this dialogue where they send me jpegs and I demonstrate how these can be turned into Revit materials.

 

 
The plan is that this will generate the enthusiasm for them to take ownership of the project and make their entire range available in Revit format.  This opens up a discussion about how best to present materials as a downloadable package, complete with image/bump map pairs, suitably scaled fill patterns, specification codes etc.

 

 
But first of all, lets make a material. The source image should avoid these common mistakes:
  • Image zoomed in to a small area, can't find the repeat
  • Taken from an oblique angle, distorts when you correct the perspective
  • Uneven brightness: dark on the left, pale on the right.
Step 1: crop the image to a rectangle that will repeat.

 

 
Step 2: offset the images so that the corners move to the middle
Step 3: make small adjustments to eliminate the cross-hairs effect
Step 4: save the image at an appropriate size

 

 
Step 5: change mode to grayscale
Step 6: enhance contrast
Step 7: save as bump map

 

 
Using this process you can create pairs of images for each material type.  These will be used in the render definition, which is one of 4 tabs in the material dialogue. 

 

 
The "Graphics" tab sets appearances used in construction drawings:  surface appearance and cross-section hatch.  The cut-pattern can be one of the standard drafting patterns supplied with Revit.  The surface appearance needs to be a model pattern.  This could be a "pat" file  downloaded from the web, or you could use a programme to generate your own hatch.

 

 
For our office I have compiled a "collection" file of fill patterns which is available on the server. This grows with each new project and encourages basic naming standards for filled regions & fill patterns. 
The last 2 tabs contain non-visual data (sometimes called the "I" in BIM)  This is information that can be picked up in tags & schedules.  Keynotes are potentially a very powerful feature because they provide the link to Specifications.  We us the British NBS system, which I still prefer to the US Masterformat, but that's another post.  Stamped concrete is going to come under section M10 and you will need to create some custom clauses here for the different patterns used on your project, perhaps M10/170A Proprietary Stamped Concrete Screed: type A, where type refers to the mould pattern and colour.

 

 
Revit will be able to calculate areas for type A, type B, type C ... and schedule this out with whatever information you type into the material properties.

 

 
Now won't it be nice when every brick manufacturer hands out Revit materials for their entire range with all this information already embedded. Not to mention tiles, rainscreen cladding, cultured stone, terrazzo, formica ...  So I'm making the effort to get this message across to every supplier I meet, and if you all do the same.  Surely it's achievable.