3D Drawings

Status
Not open for further replies.
necnotevenclose said:
I'm curious as to how many people are seeing the electrical industry utilize 3D drawings for coordination.
Click to expand...

I get 3D drawings from some architects and from some mechanical engineers. All my electrical drawings are 2D. I've never had a request for 3D, and I don't expect to have any 3D requests in the forseeable future.

Martin
 
I've had to work off exactly one 3D drawing ever in my career. It was an existing mechanical room that was getting a lot more stuff shoe-horned into it. The drawings in 3D were the only way anyone was going to stay out of everyone else's way. There were some troubles like a common pipe rack for 2 trades, with no clear language as to who builds the rack, and a few non-standard conduit bend radiuses that had to be done with a hickey.

I think that a 3D drawing would be a waste of time and plan expense for run-of-the-mill work. I'm sure they cost the customer plenty, so I'd come down in favor of very judicious use of 3D drawings for electrical work. I guess the fitters work off 3D plans a lot more.
 
Last edited:
3-d

3-d

Good Luck with that hussle, as my engineer friend reminds me all the time,
"What, you want me to show them how to run conduit" :roll:
 
Well I'm not surprised by the responses but they still get me down. 3D drawings may be more expensive, but it allows the designer and other consultants and the customer to get a visual of what is involved. If there any conflicts during design they can get it worked out so that the construction time can be executed faster.
 
Honestly, unless you're building a nuclear submarine, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a situation that couldn't be sorted out using just 2D drawings and old-fashioned cooperation. Until buildings stop being built at right angles, it'll be that way.

Would 3-D drawings help? Sure.

Would 3-D drawings be worth it from a time invested standpoint, except in the most tricky situations? IMHO, no.
 
Having been for hire for years, I think I've worked on 3 drawings, once a chair, once for the Corp, and once for a surveyor and that was a basic GPU transfer to CAD. It exists its just not used.

My friend and I talked about your post, his comments, "if everyone is working on the same set of information, a CAD file, then it can be done."

He remeinded me that he only does a small iso or a 3-D on big gear work, or on a site lighting plan, and the lighting plan lends itself to the application. He also stated that he had to transpose the contours to a 3D format.

If you want 3D go chase it. Keep your head up and your ears close to the rail ...
 
3D Drawings

We use 3D drawings for our power plant designs. For electrical, we use 3D for UG duct banks, stub ups, major equipment, junction boxes, cable tray layouts and some conduits.

Our structural and piping groups started using 3D with programs that automatically calculated piping stress, did bills of material and cross referenced parts to P&ID's. Our piping design group had spent millions on this 3D software to improve our designs and shorten our design cycle. Their sporadic successes drug us kicking and screaming into 3D.

For several years, we could not find a good package for electrical 3D design and stayed with typical 2-D layout drawings showing home runs and field routed conduits. We would provide the piping modelers 3-D models of our major equipment and lay out some electrical corridors in the 3D model.

Our electrical group had to go to 3D in self-defense. If the duct bank or cable tray wasn't shown in the 3D model, the pipers would run right through our exclusion zones and right-of-ways anyway. Electrical models were not updated as equipment drawings came in because the piping guys were busy with their own items. We went the brute force approach, drawing in AutoCad 3-D with little training and no fancy software tools. (Pipers had used all of the budget).

We have found 3D helps a lot on cable tray and lighting layouts by showing an isometric view of some convoluted boiler platforms or cable tray runs. But it takes a lot of time and training to be able to use 3D effectively and you spend a lot of money on computers, networks and software. We do find interferences faster and can catch problems earlier.

We do not try to run conduit in 3D except in critical, congested areas.

The pipefitter and electricians are not reading 3-D drawings, they still look at a 2-D sheet of paper. It takes skill to pull a good 2-D view from a 3-D model, deleting the unnecessary information and keeping the critical data. We find a lot of drawings getting issued from the model with inadequate dimensioning because it is so easy to see where stuff is on the multi-colored view on the screen. The designer looses track of what his drawing shows because he only sees it on the big color screen. We have set up a computer running the model at our construction sites. It does help sub contractors and our field forces to view the design and investigate alternatives.

We still believe that a good electrician does the best conduit routing. My computer jocks, who have never bent a conduit or even seen a real cable tray cannot make the best decisions on how to route into an MCC or panelboard. The time involved to model to that detail is not worth the interference savings. The 3-D models are not that accurate.

Bottom line, we use 3D, it seems to save time but it costs a lot in engineering. We hope to save $$ by getting the final project completed faster. Jury is still out.
 
rcwilson said:
We use 3D drawings for our power plant designs... Jury is still out.
Click to expand...
Odd that you mention this. I'm currently one of many electricians on a power plant project. I don't know if the engineers of the project used 3D, but I'm assuming they did to some degree because I've seen some 3D hidden-line renderings of the entire project in the jobsite office trailer.

However, we still only see 2D electrical drawings in the field, and still have "interference" problems. Just the other day we discovered we will have to reroute six 3" conduits because a large duct passes thru where they are now... and our prints show plan-view conduit routing, but not in a exact-placement fashion, and nothing vertical.

We have another four instances where process piping has been run directly in the path where some cable tray is supposed to go.

A big problem I see in the field is that we only get electrical drawings and have absolutely no idea where anything else goes! Yes the engineers do include some background info, but the majority is structural and only parts of mechanical or piping that require electrical connections.

"My computer jocks, who have never bent a conduit or even seen a real cable tray cannot make the best decisions on how to route into an MCC or panelboard." Well, the jocks on this project must have thought they are better at tray routing. If only you could see what we've had to build :roll:

Are your guys using AutoCAD MEP (formerly Autodesk Building Systems)? While I'm not totally familiar with this product, I have had the opportunity to try it first-hand and experience some of its features. Seems to me, anyone doing engineering on this level would be using this product or something very similar :grin:

"We have set up a computer running the model at our construction sites." That's great... does anyone catch problems before they exist, or do they wait until a problem exists then use the model to determine whose right and whose wrong and who has to move their stuff? :grin: I'm wondering because I have the skill to look at it beforehand and, to a significant degree, prevent problems from occurring as they do... but here I am at the bottom of the command structure and will likely never see a screen version of the model.
 
We are continuing work with 3D coordination at the company I am at. I started coordination for the project back at the beginning of November. We are still at it. Aside from panels failing the coordination study and other issues on this project, I think it is a nice tool to have. The biggest issue I have come across is the lack of 3D models of equipment (panels, lights, generators) from vendors. There are 45 fixtures types and I had to go through and build each of them. In addition, I had to build all of the panels, distribution panels and MV switchgear. An advantage to the process is that you can model dedicated equipment space and working space to keep other trades out of the space. The program that I am using Autodesk Building Systems (MEP) only shows the ID of conduit. When they want to coordinate down to a 1/2" of tolerance, you have to keep in mind the size of racks, etc.
 
I would like to thank everyone for their posts. 3D will never take the place of an electrician, but as a designer one of my duties is to see that there is a sufficient pathway for conduit. As for knowing all of the exact bends or offsets that could be attempted, but its almost guaranteed that something will change in the field that will make you detour from the original path. I think 3D is a great tool that allows everyone to see how they plan on running the conduit and if the pipes are color coordinated they can be easily read, but that is only my opinion.

Also, I would like to agree that manufactures need to start providing their equipment/devices in 3D.
 
As a General Contractor we have begun to use 3D drawings for coordination on all large projects (Approximately over $40 million).

The Large Mechanical guys have been using 3D for their drawings for quite some time and the Architects are moving forward pretty quickly since it helps them sell an idea to the Owner. The MEP Engineers and the Electrical Contractor seem to be the furthest behind at this point in time.

we use REVIT and Architectural Building Systems Primarily with NavisWorks as the Clash Detection Software.

So far the biggest obstacles are getting the drawings for the Structure and the continual updates of the drawings all through the project.

-Ed
 
ed downey said:
As a General Contractor we have begun to use 3D drawings for coordination on all large projects (Approximately over $40 million).

The Large Mechanical guys have been using 3D for their drawings for quite some time and the Architects are moving forward pretty quickly since it helps them sell an idea to the Owner. The MEP Engineers and the Electrical Contractor seem to be the furthest behind at this point in time.

we use REVIT and Architectural Building Systems Primarily with NavisWorks as the Clash Detection Software.

So far the biggest obstacles are getting the drawings for the Structure and the continual updates of the drawings all through the project.

-Ed
Click to expand...

Ed, are these drawings turned over to the owner when the project is complete or do you just provide 2d as-builts?
 
We turn over the 3D drawings to the owner. But at this point the drawings in 3D are in Navisworks since that is the only program (That I am aware of) that can bring all of the different file format types together into one document. Below is a list of the file types that NavisWorks can be used with:

? All trades will use software that can be exported into one of the following accepted files that can be directly imported into Navisworks.
? Navisworks .nwd
? Navisworks File Set .nwf
? Navisworks Cache .nwc
? 3D Studio .3ds, .prj
? Autodesk RealDWG .dwg
? Autodesk RealDXF .dxf
? ASCII Laser File asc, .txt
? Microstation .dgn, .prp. ,.prw
? IFC .ifc
? IGES .igs, .iges
? Inventor .ipt, .iam. Ipj
? Faro File .fls, .fws, .iQscan, .iQmod, .iQwsp
? Infomatix MAN file .man, .cv7
? Lecia File .pts, .ptx
? Trimble File .soi
? Riegl File .3dd
? SoildEdge File .asm, .par, psm.
? STEP stp, .step
? STL .stl
? VRML .wrl, .wrz
? Z+F File .zfc, zfs
? SoildWorks Assembley .sldasm
? SoildWorks Part .sldprt

-Ed
 
We are using Navisworks on the project that I am as well. The general has the full version. I am just using the Freedom Viewer to look at clash reports.

It is interesting to note that Autodesk recently purchased Navisworks for about $25 million if I recall correctly. So we shall see what will be done with Navisworks once the transition is finished.
 
I never heard of Navisworks but it seems pretty cool. Hopefully Autodesk will not try to strip out features and just improve on what they bought.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top