Larry_Sweeney

Architectural "layout" question

Recommended Posts

I'm completely self taught, but I've been doing designing for over 40 yrs. and have always had this question in the back of my mind.

What is the difference between a section and a cross-section? Sometimes when making a "cut" I'll use the "backclipped cross-section" tool and other times I'll use the "Cross section/Elevation" tool and refer to both as "Sections". As you know one will give you just the actual "cut" while the other gives you the "cut" and what is beyond that cut in the direction of the arrow. Are they both referred to as a section? Is it "proper" to use both in the same layout and call them both "Sections" or should each type be referred to by separate names? If separate then by what? I've looked through different books on the subject over the years and have really never come across a definitive answer. No one looking at my plans have ever said anything one way or another about how I had them drawn. Like I said, it has always bugged me and I'm just curious. You know, It's h--- being a perfectionist.  :rolleyes: Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry,

 

I use the following definition:

 

Cross Section ..........  A section cut across the entire building (sometimes it includes visible elevations and sometimes not).  Usually it's at the same scale as you would use for Exterior Elevations and is labeled Cross Section A-A, etc.

Section ....................  A localized Detail (such as a wall).  Usually this is at a larger scale showing more detail and is labeled Wall Detail [C] or something similar.

 

In either case using the "Backclipped Cross-Section" tool or the "Cross section/Elevation" tool is really a matter of preference.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those tools can do the same thing, the backclipped section using a longer run will be the same as a section /elevation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry,

It comes down to what you need to show and how you want to show it. With the CA Cross section tool you get everything. For me, I want everything and then I want to make the important stuff read stronger. If I cut a section and there is a closet door in the back ground, I want to show that but with a very faint line weight. The object that I actually cut through reads very strong and (hopefully) I have made my cut somewhere that shows the critical information (heights dimensioned, a connection spot to then have a detail call out, etc.). The back clipped cross section is helpful to me if I want to create a CAD detail from a section but a building section I want to cull things out differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question Larry.

 

I have been looking into issues like this recently myself.  Since X6 has the capability to automate Callouts, it would be good to have a clear understanding of what all of these views are supposed to be called.  And from what my research is turning up, supposed to be is the opperable word here.

 

From the text for my engineering tech class, which has been the standard from the days when everything was drawn by hand, there are three types of section views.

 

A full section cuts through an entire building, and within the full section catagory there are two types of full cross sections.  If a full section view cuts the entire building the long way it is called a longitudinal full section view.  If it cuts the building across the entire width of the building it is called a transverse full section view.

 

Next is the partial section view, which is used to clarify details on a portion of the interior of the building that may need a more detailed drawing.  Finally we have the offset section views which also cut the interior of the building, but do not fall along a straight line.  Usually right angles from what I have seen.

 

In the old days of hand drawing, it was often acceptable to use lines as kind of short hand for structural items such as steel columns.  In this case a heavy line was drawn to represent the column in a section view, and the shape of the item was used in a plan view.  If you are familiar with Revit, I think this is what they are trying to reproduce.

 

As far as how deep the cut is to go into the building, that is where the good question comes in.  I don't know that there is a right answer to this question, or even how this is to be indicated on a plan set.  I have access to a ton of plans in my work and I have been trying to find an answer to this myself lately.  My best guess is that since we are using new technologies in the form of 3D modeling, which will capture every detail if need be, it seems to be up to the individual as to how far and the level of detail that is provided.

 

I have yet to see anything that on the plan view itself that gives any indication of the depth of the cut from the plans I have studied.  It seems to me that there should be some indication of the depth, but unless I have missed something it is not commonly indicated.  I am considering using a very faint gray line, or maybe a hatch pattern or a terminator indicator of some sort.  Still working on that.

 

I have a question regarding detail views.  From what I have seen the views themselves are consistent across a wide variety of plans from different companies.  What is not consistent is what they are called and how they are labeled and called out.  My question is, does anyone know if there is a standard regarding the labeling of section details that relate to a particular section cut?  The reason I ask is that. from what I have seen on other plans, it is not clear to me how this should be done.  The same goes for plan details for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm completely self taught, but I've been doing designing for over 40 yrs. and have always had this question in the back of my mind.

What is the difference between a section and a cross-section? Sometimes when making a "cut" I'll use the "backclipped cross-section" tool and other times I'll use the "Cross section/Elevation" tool and refer to both as "Sections". As you know one will give you just the actual "cut" while the other gives you the "cut" and what is beyond that cut in the direction of the arrow. Are they both referred to as a section? Is it "proper" to use both in the same layout and call them both "Sections" or should each type be referred to by separate names? If separate then by what? I've looked through different books on the subject over the years and have really never come across a definitive answer. No one looking at my plans have ever said anything one way or another about how I had them drawn. Like I said, it has always bugged me and I'm just curious. You know, It's h--- being a perfectionist.  :rolleyes: Thank you.

Larry,

 

Joe's answer is right on as close as it gets. That being said The software architects at Chief differ in the way they use the term.

 

Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RodCole, on 24 Mar 2014 - 12:39 PM, said:

I have a question regarding detail views.  From what I have seen the views themselves are consitent across a wide variety of plans from different companies.  What is not consistent is what they are called and how they are labeled and called out.  My question is, does anyone know if there is a standard regarding the labeling of section details that relate to a particular section cut?  The reason I ask is that. from what I have seen on other plans, it is not clear to me how this should be done.  The same goes for plan details for that matter.

 

Rod...I guess you could say that this is also my question as a whole on this subject matter. Thanks to all for your input. It's much appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry

 

I don't know for sure if the answer is here or not, I have not had a chance to review the information yet.  You can google "Uniform Drawing Systems (UDS)" and see if that helps.  They have 01 thru 08 Modules covering the different aspects of drawing conventions.

 

This seems to be a response to the advent of CAD drawings in general as opposed to hand drawn standards.  What I think we are both trying to do is to wade through this to establish how to accomplish this same consistency when using 3D modeling.  The questions we are both trying to answer should not really be that tough.  There just does not seem to be much consistency regarding standards, at least from my experience.

 

From what I understand, this organization is attempting to do something about this situation.

 

Note:  The way Chief goes about doing some things makes it difficult to adopt what would be seen as industry standards.

 

Layer names are one I have been dealing with lately as well.  I did finally get my layer names to work with X6s Name filter feature.  It took some time, and we are not given much to work with as far as instructions are concerned, but once I got it to work it is amazingly fast and simple to use.  Blows anything I have seen previously away.  I have some suggestion for this feature that I will post later.

 

In short, Chief is a very capable modeling program.  With the advent of the new features in X6 and the goals that Chief developers seem to be setting for rapid plan developement we are now faced with how to best use these new features.  It would be good to have some standards available to use, and for Chief to be aware of them as well for future developement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that the really important thing here is that I am able to find a way to adapt Chief's capabilities in Layout regarding Callouts to the needs at hand.

 

For me that means being able to label the Callout in such a way that the various views can be clearly defined.  I don't see much chance that I will need more than 99 separate detail views, or sections, or whatever.  So, then it is a question of how many letters are req'd to show the views in the Callout.  So far two seems to work for me for the type of drawings I do.  Those two groups of four characters and a separating dash and I am good to go.  I think.

 

It appears that five characters will be req'd above the line, and probably four below.  I did some playing around with this today and I came up with a Callout size with Automatic unchecked and set to 20", and with a text style that has the text height set to 3 1/2".  That was about the smallest I would be comfortable with from what I can tell so far.  It can obviously be adjusted if need be, but that seems to be a good starting point.

 

I will have to use it a bit more before I know for sure if I am going to like this or not.  I just thought I would pass the info along in case it may be of benefit to those who may be concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will throw my two cents in. In the attached pic you will see;

 

Building Section : Larger diameter call out with (2) letters "AA", "BB" telling the viewer the section goes from one A to the other A, heavy dashed line connecting them

 

Local Section, or Wall Section : Smaller diameter call out with 1 letter, or in this case "WS1" for Wall Section 1. Also notice the cross section line is solid, with a "tail" pointing the same direction as the view.

 

Elevation Call out : I use numbers for elevations. The call out has a smaller filled in arrow, and the diameter is smaller then the building section. 

 

This is the method I was taught in arch school 20+ years ago, and I think college text books still use these methods. My plans and elevations are being used in the current version of this textbook.....

 

http://www.amazon.com/Architecture-Residential-Clois-Kicklighter-Ed/dp/1590706994

 

...so I must be pretty close.

post-70-0-42968200-1395775133_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joey

 

Any ideas on the dipiction of the cutting plane depth, or back clipping?  Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I generally set my backclipped sections (slice) at 12", 24" for certain framing situations. If I need to see certain details in the background to better explain the design idea, then I use the section/elevation camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To all..... Thanks for taking the time to give input on how you deal with different types of details and sections. I've picked up some very good information. Have a great day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

  • Member Statistics

    27602
    Total Members
    6254
    Most Online
    Floriance
    Newest Member
    Floriance
    Joined