Hi Balkan Architect, Your videos are great as always. Here I would like to add some comments about point clouds. I read below that people comment about the system in which the cloud is located, it depends on whether it is georeferenced or not. I see they clarified it below. I would like to add a few tips to help people who use point cloud to create as build models in revit. - Always pin the point cloud. - Turn off the option to be able to select pinned elements as well as linked ones (Point cloud). - Always use the "fine" options and keep the "wireframe" option turned on, this will make it much easier for you to see your geometry in relation to the point cloud (floor plans and sections). -Turn off the "snap to point cloud" option This should help the modeling to go smoothly and without lag. -Use the scope box and orient the model in the floor plan as you see fit.
yes i was going to write the same thing about pinning the pointcloud, if I don't it flickers everytime you hover over it and is difficult to work with, also I have to have in shaded, not realistic mode.
First move is WRONG ! BAD practice ! NEVER move a pointcloud... Usually point clouds are located in a coordinate system, whether it's geographic, grid or local... If you move the point cloud, you're losing the referential... If whoever provided the point cloud should work on let's say topography... If you return the IFC after modeling, expect issues like random transformations and a lot of wasted time. Instead you should define your project in Revit based on existing conditions, whether it's orientation, altimetry... The world is what it is, by rotating a pointcloud you're not gonna turn the planet around.
When exporting to nwd the revit elements (Piping) and point cloud dont appear in the same location as in the source revit file. Is there something i'm doing wrong? Great informative channel btw!
i do all, i use faro focus 3d scanner, scan the field/site with Sphere Targets, then post-process, rotate, edit, arrange, assing the coordinate, transformstions and so on... then use Microstation/speedikon/openbuildigs/Revit for 3D model, then make a 2D floor plans/Sections/Elevation drawing then documentation.... never ending processes😄
You should check out the Trimble X7 or X9. They fully register your scans on the fly and allow you to export a completely registered point cloud in .rcp from the tablet. No post processing. 2mm accuracy.
mai ruotare la nuvola di punti, si ruota il nord di progetto, questo permette l'importazione di altre nuvole che hanno lo stesso sistema di coordinate. la nuvola di punti non deve essere scalata con Revit, è rischioso e molto impreciso, ma con il software di elaborazione della nuvola di punti. Se ti hanno fornito un file che necessita di questa elaborazione (scalare la nuvola di punti) significa che il file è sbagliato
Been watching this channel for 2yrs now. But rotating point cloud from survey scan is a NO go if you're working on a multi-discipline work sharing file. Better duplicate the plan and use Scope box to rotate its UCS from True North to assigned Project North orientation w/o affecting the original survey..... Great video as always.🙂
@@elviromanovic9086 no it doesn't need to be, local coordinate system is also fine; even if the altimetry datum is the height of the first scan and orientation is how you dropped the first scan in the first place, like he said, especially in a multidisciplinary work environment, nobody touches the point cloud, everything will fit back into position; moving point clouds is bad practice, period. That's why it is pinned when you import it anyway. And yeah even if you work alone, nothing tells you that the point cloud won't be used by another office later on in the future... Well I'll tell you what's gonna happen... he'll find your IFC hanging in the trees in a forest nearby, lose 2 hours to put it back where it should be and stuff pins into a voodoo doll thinking of you 🤣
@@trollenzYes, that's also one possible solution. But there are some clients that's always asking for georeferenced model. And for that, they need to adjust that georeferency first to point cloud (when I say georeferency, I mean position on real world location). The Swiss and German clients are mostly like that. You insert point cloud, then Revit ask you that that point cloud is far far away from internal zero of the project. Then first step is to find point cloud and see approximately coordinates. Then you close project, open new one and move project base point on that location. Then again insert point cloud and that point cloud will be on real location. I work on similar cases almost daily.
@@elviromanovic9086 yeah thanks I know what a coordinate system I'm a licensed surveyor... I was only saying that yes, it's important when the point cloud is georeferenced, but not only in that case, basically it's ALWAYS important, so no, it doesn't "need" to be georeferenced. In any case, Revit doesn't handle coordinates systems properly anyway, because it doesn't hold into account scale factor (Civil3D does, regular AutoCAD doesn't)... So basically, even using the survey point properly in Revit, the stuff you draw in there won't have the same real live dimensions, difference can go from marginal to insane depending on the projection system used and the scale of the project. That would be interesting to discuss this fact on the channel, not a single architect I've worked with is aware of that.
Can I ask why you would use a point cloud? If you cannot use it, other than as a base which you immediately simplify, is it not easier and cheaper to use a standard survey?
point clouds are fast and accurate specially for small details that will be missed or hard to read from survey points. as you can see all of the sweeps, windows shapes and insets and details are here. for interior part it'll do even better. in conclusion: accuracy of details + less time to make a detailed base model.
@@danialsoozani Yes, I would agree that where a high level of accuracy is required a point cloud would be sensible. Although, I had imagined though that you would be able to convert this to a mesh and use it with all the detail (natively). In general, I've modelled lots of existing buildings and the minor details can typically be well approximated. I think I would struggle to justify the expense of a point cloud survey. My experience from the few quotes we have requested over the years is that they are a significant magnitude more expensive. Have you found this & what's you experience of the time taken to produce them?
@@Architect_Works softwares like meshroom can create a mesh as you may already know (photogrametry) but they are so heavy, I use blender to simplify them. I didn't have experience with point clouds directly, but in my recent project our head of revit handed me a very precise IFC file and told me they did it using point clouds and tbh it was extremely accurate. (it was a renovation project so the existing details mattered a lot specially for structure and plumbing). I believe the idea behind it is: "it's better to have a 3d detailed reference to model over it rather than 2d surveys (you get what i mean by 2d, it's not necessarily actual 2d but couldn't find a better word for it:D )
@@Architect_Works you've got two options: either ballpark it, wet-finger style, and deal with surprises and inaccurate plans months down the line, or do it the right way from the get-go.
@@Architect_Works I work for a company that not only sells laser scanners but used to offer scanning as a service. To get a complete survey scan of the building in this video it would've ran about $2,500.
