Aaron Buckman's Final CD's

O.A.R.S. Project
(.jpg b/c Blogger won't upload .pdf)










1) Highlights: Decent level of complicated form modeling
Clear plans that communicate bridging concept
Clean, smooth running model after building it.
(the Sketchup version of this model barely works)

2) Process/Presentation:
I was not in a studio this term and so I chose to revisit my 384 Springfield Recreation Project, aptly named OARS (Oregon Adventure and Recreation Site). Last fall in a construction management tech course I was required to revisit a previous project and present a series of fundamental decisions that were made in it. These being occupancy, fire-safety, etc. The way this project ended up was very similar to actual CD's. When the time came to pick a project to model in BIM class I choose this because I thought it would make a nice piece to put in my portfolio, not only as a project that was fully articulated enough to be constructed but as one that had been continued to be developed from its initial hand drafted stage.
My final presentation of the CD's was a little weak as I ran out of time in modeling the large masses and did not have enough time to put in some of the details that would make the construction set more usable to the contractor. Details such as pertinent dimensions, detail drawings, and as suggested by the reviewers, line weights.

Learned:
I have learned that Revit is a powerful program which has a wonderful place in the real world, but due to Autodesk's continual insistence on using changing "beta" versions it might not be the best tool for design student to actually attempt to design in. However I still believe that those same design students would benefit from knowing this program as it is really the only way to currently model a design and easily have accurately scaled drawings extracted from it for the purpose of conveying one's ideas to the project reviewers.

Aaron Buckman's Renderings

Buckman Rendering Photo's

For my rendering project, I am stepping back to the first project I attempted to go digital on. This project was the end of my learning about space making and the beginning of my figuring out how to communicate my meager ideas onto the printed media. I am going to re-model my 384 project which was a Youth Recreational Center located across the Willamette River in Springfield. I was pushed to model it digitally in Sketch-up. This went fine until nearing the end, I attempted to get a realistic model built and it became to much for the computer or the program to handle. I hope that revit will be a better home for the digital version of this program.

I was looking for some nice tree dappled buildings in my renderings but then I just decided what I really wanted was certain light aspects and that the dappling effect could be something unique to my specific rendering. I chose this evening version to reflect the time during when it would be most frequently be used thus viewed. The building is the Michael Rantilla residence as displayed on dornob.com




This photo taken from the exterior is of the same residence and I chose it because it has a similar wood finish that I envisioned would go on my Oregon Adventure Recreation facility.

REALLY HATE PARAMETRICS right now

I have just spent the last 10 hours trying to get a simple masonry unit that was completely parametric to array into a parametric screen wall. Guess and check does not work with this program unless you have days to do anything. Not hours. The concept behind the parametrics of a model are great. I am thankful that the Revit family modelers have done a good job for the main program. Not knowing the logic behind the little video clip I watched multiple times I did not get why my copying of his process did not work all the time. I did not want to bother the revit guru's available to me at the time I was working this evening b/c it was not during their designated office hours and that would be disrespectful. I failed at that. Chris and I could not get the model to array parametrically in both directions. i brought the initial masonry unit model into a line based family to allow it to array a certain number of whole units down a designated length. i thought then I could import it into a new family afterwards to array it vertically. Nope! not to my knowledge anyway. I then started taking the model steps backwards and trying to work back up in different manners. first trying to array in the line based family, then when array didn't allow it to stay parametric I tried copy. then in an attempt to not fail for friday's pin up i did a step even further backward and attempted both ideas in the initial model phase to attempt a crude parametric. NOPE. FAIL. so in the end a 4am I gave up and copy and pasted a picture of what looked like what i was attempting so the point would get across. not my finest hour.
Would like to learn the logic behind the family parametrics. SAD.

Aaron

2011 Teaser

I just got done reading the new features that were released in the new Revit 2011 that were posted on David Lights Blog.(linked via Cris Deel's) Impressive.... I am new to this Autodesk world that is Autocad and Revit, etc. I think that they are doing a good thing trying to bring a diverse set of programs together under one roof. This has to be a daunting task to buy a innovative company and try to make it work with your proprietary software. Both Revit and Ecotect are examples of such an umbrella procedure. Under the 2010 version of Revit I think that users have been experiencing what is the transition phase to Autodesk thought process from the prior company. This is why the earlier versions worked well, they were just improvements on the existing software architecture. (Hate, that software companies call this such) Now, finally we are seeing what the Autodesk powerhouse can produce. The 2010 format was all new and in many ways both innovative and a step backwards. 2011 seems from David Lights Blog to be improving the areas that need working on and debugging the system. It is my opinion that no one should depend on a new program/format for anything wonderful for the first few versions/years, especially when it comes to software. However they are making strides in the right direction. Modeling tools are getting better. Autodesk has realised that the 2009 way of modeling profiles should be reintroduced (go user interaction) and has attempted to meld the two. It also seems that several interfaces that have a need to be consistently available are becoming such; Type drop downs are now in a separate ribbon, etc.

This post is meant as a teaser for the front end of the class blog to get others interested in searching about the system to find out things that most of the time students pass over in favor of doing other work.

Aaron Buckman

aaron buckman PROJECT #1

This blog is going to be rushed because I have spent the last hour trying to work around the Mac/PC interface that is Revit running in BOOTCAMP. finally decided to just export the .JPG and convert in illustrator to PDF on the MAC side so that I could use the OS that the UO recommends architecture students invest in. (Even though NO Autodesk or Rhino product yet runs in this OS).

I have found the GTF's daily hands on experience has been the best for me learning the actual BIM software the class is about. Although the website is a good resource for us with the power of GOOGLE search and all of the REVIT communities that exist on the web I do not feel that it warrants the amount of time I have spend learning this interface.(I could just be a frustrated introverted non-writing architecture student.)

The tools that I have found frustrating so far has been PRINT in Revit. The sheet set up to print did not show the gridlines and when exported to a jpg. they suddenly appeared.

Questions that this project raised is how to put in a site and when will someone else figure out an intuitive conceptual massing program as easy to use as Sketchup.

aaron's precedent study building

I have decided to do my precedent study project 1 on Richard Meier's Smith House. Barring the iconic starkitect name, prior to this term I knew nothing about this architect. Style, time period etc. all drew a blank when I was assigned him in my diagramming class. Now I know that he was a classicist who built in the modern format during the 1960's-90's. Most of his early work has been rendered in white, as is evident in the picture to the right, this makes material choice in Revit easy, ha ha. This building has mainly been an experience in making sure that I completely understand the structure and construction of the building prior to modeling it. Evidence that Revit is not a conceptual tool but an contract document device. Then nice thing is that many of the mistakes I have made are easily fixable with Revit's parametric dimensioning capabilities. The biggest challenges I have faced so far have been the modeling of the exterior stairs. Not only are they curved at the landing but they have a solid wall railing wrapping one side of them while on the other they have a minimal glass and pipe railing. The task that I have not been able to tackle yet is the construction of the main vertical element in the building, the central facade fireplace. The further I diagram this building (for my other class) the more I realize how important it is to be there. I could create a simple form that resembles the actual build fireplace but as in all my digital models I have a need for everything to be physically correct. This has led to many problems in past projects, slowing down of machines, crashing programs, even refusal by some machines to run certain models but it is a problem I am attempting to rectify. The decision to completely model this fireplace stems from it being the most complex thing a significantly small model, and from its significance in the meaning of the main circulation and gathering spaces. Help in this direction will be needed to continue.