AIA CLG question

The AIA CLG lists A-FLOR-CASE for case work. I have two questions here,
specifically related to residential projects, both custom and production.

1: Do most people use this single layer, then force color/lineweight and
linetype to show uppers differently? or do you use two layers, along the
lines of A-FLOR-CASU and A-FLOR-CASL for uppers and lowers? Or do you not
worry about keeping the layers together, and use something like A-FLOR-CASE
and A-FLOR-UPRS?
2: The CLG also lists A-FLOR-WDWK for built in architectural woodwork. How
many people actually use this seperate layer? If so, do you show built-ins
graphically different, or identical but you have a different layer because
you have plans that show one but not the other?

I am working on a residential specific adaptation of the CLG for my
consulting clients, and I am curious what others have done in this area.

Thanks,
Gordon

 

Gordon: Last time I checked into using AIA Layering guidelines, they make a distinction between what is seen looking down towards the floor and what is seen relfected from a "glass" floor.

This would indicate that you should consider using spearate layers for upper and lower cabinets (if I read your post correctly).

My personal rule of thumb is: "If in doubt, put it on it's own layer." If for no other reason, it's a little easier moving objects to another layer if you change your mind than trying to find all the objects that need to be moved to a new layer.

If you weren't already aware, AIA Guidelines are simply as the name implies: guidelines, not hard and fast standards. You can use what is necessary to maintain control of images and ignore the rest.

Hope this helps.

 

Fully agree...except "mirror" floor instaed of "glass floor."

a distinction between what is seen looking down towards the floor and what
is seen relfected from a "glass" floor.

upper and lower cabinets (if I read your post correctly).

for no other reason, it's a little easier moving objects to another layer if
you change your mind than trying to find all the objects that need to be
moved to a new layer.

implies: guidelines, not hard and fast standards. You can use what is
necessary to maintain control of images and ignore the rest.

 

Yeah, thanks for the correction Carlos. After reading my reply also noted a little dyslexic typing as well. Gratifying to find out that people actually read these things.....

Cheers!

 

Well I finally got around to reading them also. New girlfriend cause a bit
of a delay. Forgiveness begged

Anyway, yes, my approach has been to put uppers on a different layer so I
can show uppers with a solid line in RCP, and no lowers, or show uppers thin
and hidden in a plan, with lowers thicker and solid. But I only show the
uppers in an RCP when they actually go all the way to the ceiling. When they
stop short of the ceiling I don't show them in the RCP, and when they butt
up to a soffit I just show the soffit in the RCP. The plan can be an issue
when the soffit is flush with the uppers, but I prefer a soffit that is at
least an inch proud of the uppers, so I see two hidden lines in plan, one
for the soffit and one for the uppers. The one place it has become an issue
is a kitchen with no soffits, and some uppers that go to the ceiling, and
some that stop short. I created a new layer in that case. I am also thinking
of adding a new layer for casework doors, which would use a very simple door
and swing line block, shown thin and hidden, for both upper and lower doors,
with doors only shown in plan. Another thought is to just force thin and
hidden to the door block, and put them on the lower cabs layer, as I need to
see the doors only when I need to see the lowers. However, that leads to
upper cab doors on the lower cab layer, which is a little odd. Probably not
an issue for me working solo, but for shared drawings, maybe an issue.

As for the CLG being guidelines, I think the document would be better if it
actually showed an example of a residential set of layers, a commercial set,
and maybe a hospital or other equipment heavy project type. Then again,
someone will interpret that as the only three possibilities, so you never
can win

Thanks for the input.

Gordon

 

Got that problem solved; let girlfriend read e-mails to you!

Think we discussed layering philosophy before, didn't we? BEst answer I can suggest is:

1. If in doubt put objects on their own layer (but don't get ridiculous about it).

2. Use layer name prefixes(A-, C-, E-, M-, P-, etc.)

3. Keep names short and easy to understand.

Cheers!