Need help with a complex symmetrical Teaching Hospital model
-
One might need to initially import the attached (zipped) 3ds Max 2008 file/s into SketchUp version 6 in order to obtain a functional SU file which can then presumably be updated to the latest version of SU.
If anyone is genuinely interested in becoming voluntarily involved in this potentially most meaningful project (by taking the attached file/s to the next level of functionality), please PM me. Although this forum is an excellent resource for exchanging ideas and work files, it will probably prove much easier to ultimately develop an e-mail based "relationship" outside of this venue ....
I truly look forward to receiving some feedback - either in this thread or via a PM ....
Zipped copy of latest 3ds Max 2008 THC (old style) design
Zipped copy of a slightly earlier 3ds Max 2008 THC (old style) design
Zipped copy of 3ds Max 2011 proposed THC typical ward design
-
Sorry for the bump - but hopefully someone might possibly be interested in doing something with the attached files and slowly pulling this project forward ....
-
Hi Jeremy,
Would it be possible to post the files in 3ds format. As far as I know you can only convert max files with 3DS Max in 3ds files.
Charly
-
Hi Charly
Herewith are attached the two 3DS Max files exported as two 3ds files ....
-
Charly:
Please let me know (possibly via PM) whether you have had any luck with viewing the above files and what you think of them.
I really need your ongoing assistance if you are sufficiently interested to assist me with this extremely ambitious design ....
-
Any other possible takers?
-
@sonofmoose said:
Hello
"I am a registered medical practitioner with a research Masters degree in Psychiatry and Mental Health who is extremely interested in the ability of computers to play an important role in both professional and lay person healthcare education. As a direct result of this interest, I have been working for the past six years on my proposed freeware healthcare education application (simulation) that is initially aimed at high school students."
Not in healthcare field nor architecture but have done technical management of 1/2 billion dollar programs. As you are well aware form follows function and I see your goal above but suddenly find you in the detail of the structure design, water features, parking grages etc. with a considerable time elapsed and I ask my self the question are you stove piped ? I see no relationship to the following discussions and your goal above. I may be worth your time to set down and draft a spec. or specs ( In this case it would be a software or model requirements ). My contention is your goals can be more quickly obtained by possibility a number of modules vs trying build a very complex initial model. Once those basics are done then the integration of those into a much larger model can be done on a timed sequenced basis?
Sorry if I am completely off the mark but I think your lack of progress, the number of questions and vol. support etc. some what supports my thoughts.SoM [Jeremy]
-
Hello mac 1:
I have sent you a PM largely agreeing with your sentiments and requesting possible assistance. Perhaps we might be able to "take things a bit further" ....
[Btw: I would love to hear from you again "Charly2008" .... ].
-
Each clinical facility is currently envisaged as 110m in length and 22m in width. Separated by a 6m wide central passageway, these parallel modules (for want of a better term) permit a 50m wide wing.
Maybe there is a suitably skilled and adventurous modeler who might be prepared to assist me in developing a conceptual version of the proposed macro THC model by examining how to lengthwise accommodate a series of these modules (together with cross passageways for access) into the complex symmetrical design .... ??
-
Hi Jeremy,
any reasonably talented modeler is able to incorporate your 110 x 22 m wide modules into in a floor plan. But where is the sense if you do not know what will occur in these modules.
I'm still not clear what you want to show with your simulation. If you want to show real processes in a hospital you have to orient yourself even in real processes.
The first step would be to specify what should be shown in the model or Modules and how detailed it should be. What medical disciplines should be represented. Then you could perhaps take exemplary floor plans of existing clinics as the basis for the development of the model.
For me it makes no sense to construct a gigantic building and then think about how to fill it. I've looked at your so-called Ward module. A 110-meter walkway with rooms on the right and left side of the walkway. The rooms show some hospital beds. The ceiling height is about 4.5 meters and the thickness of the outer wall is 1 meter. What will you do with it? Of course, one could fill the whole building with these modules, but what should the aspiring physicians to be shown?
You can even ask your Ward module for discussion here because I'm just a simple mechanical engineer. Perhaps there are experts in the forum who are familiar with the hospital planning.
Charly
-
Hi Charly:
It is really good to hear from you again ....
At the moment, I am keen to see how a series of equally-sized modules would fit into the proposed macromodel. [This being the far more complex "double winged" and "double ringed" structure modeled on page 1]. I do (with the utmost of respect) believe that we are seemingly becoming unduly "bogged down" with all of this emphasis on process. I fully understand (from both you and mac1) that these are (quite understandably) vitally important (real world) engineering principles. However, I am looking at this issue from the (virtual world) medical educational perspective - where all these clinical facilities (and their component functional structures) will be labelled and fully explained (but most likely in less professional engineering terms) to the user ....
The 110m x 22m unit (which can easily be converted to a clinic) plan includes (imho) all the major functional structures required for both of these clinical facilities (independent of their clinical subdisciplines) to function (optimally). Maybe (with the passage of time and the considered expert input of a super-specialist hospital designer) the design can possibly be further fine-tuned. However, we do have something "concrete" with which to work and move forward ....
For various reasons, I am growing increasingly keen (desperate) to move forward with this aspect of our much larger project. [You are already in possession of the extensive list of clinical disciplines and clinical subdisciplines that will be housed within the main THC. We surely have the framework to attempt to push forward with this now ....
I strongly urge you and mac1 (as well as anyone else who has the time and inclination to become involved) to assist me with the ongoing development of this model. Admittedly (from the viewpoint of both of your professional training) we will be approaching this task "back-to-front". Please put these concerns aside for a while and see how we can "move forward" with this exercise. We will often be "flying by the seat of our pants" but I believe that we already have a sufficiently strong foundation upon which to build ....
Would the two of you be prepared to work together with me? The time zone difference between the two of you could be made to work strongly in our favour ....
-
Sorry I have to again state form follows function and your previous statements you don't have any budget restrictions is not correct. You have seen AVATAR I guess and they probably spent millions if not hundreds of millions for software, programs , hardware etc. I just cannot rationalize you stated goals on the OP with this obsession with the hospital layout when there are really more pressing problems than it. If you are going to make your project a success then spending time to decided what functions are really needed and a schedule so people asking all the questions can really understand what is required. Is your goal to teach the high school students how to park in a hospital, find there way around one ,or have some type of medical science simulation that they can step through and learn something. Are they off site or in one location and will you be using existing simulations, programming as part of this or just what?
Sorry as you can see you have yet to convey your concept to me
Front to back or back to front has no meaning to me expect your are heading for diaster -
Hi Jeremy
However, I am looking at this issue from the (virtual world) medical educational perspective - where all these [b]clinical facilities (and their component functional structures) will be labelled and fully explained[/b] (but most likely in less professional engineering terms) to the user ....But please, please give us a small practical example where we can see how that should look like! My imagination is not enough to understand this.
Charly
-
Hi mac1:
Well - from the point of software, I effectively have zero budget. I am currently an unemployed person trying somewhat desperately to make some beneficial use of his spare time (when not acting as a geriatric caregiver).
Maybe my obsession with the hospital layout is indeed somewhat inappropriate - but I am looking for a suitably high-impact centerpiece (with a high OMG factor) for our application. There is a fairly well-known maxim that "graphics maketh the game". Our Schematic World Map (which is presently envisaged as the core of our application) currently features extremely simplistic graphics (as created by me). The main THC model is meant to complement (and possibly eventually augment) the series of Schematic World Map tiles representing (in a largely abstract fashion) the individual clinical subdisciplines.
The main purpose of this part of our application could largely be stated along the lines of "finding ones way around the hospital" and explaining the function of the various clinical subdisciplines. I don't presently envisage developing a detailed medical science simulation as this is the property of large university research departments (such as Stanford University). Therefore the underlying purpose is actually rather simple - although I would like to include a fair amount of detail within this model to show the major components of a clinic (outpatients department), unit (ward), etc. [I have already listed these as a series of potentially upgradeable structures].
I am hoping that the user will be able to "walk through" the complex (which can feature a large series of explanatory labels as well as links to the relevant tiles featured in our Schematic World Map). Although I am hoping to eventually develop a healthcare systems simulator, it will not (at least for the foreseeable future) feature any detailed clinical simulations. This is somewhat outside my relevant area of expertise and (as stated above) there is no way in which I can even think of competing with the current major players in this area. However, an application featuring a large (and suitably detailed) main THC (without clinical simulations) appears to represent a more unique concept (especially when it forms an integral part of a greater healthcare system) ....
Therefore the concept is seemingly strongly based upon macro-design rather than overly on process. I am especially interested to see how all the individual clinical (and non-clinical) modules can be functionally arranged within a macro-complex. [Maybe the proposed main THC model can be "ditched" for something more sustainable .... ].
I hope that I have not severely disappointed you with this answer. Maybe it does (hopefully) more accurately explain my seeming obsession with the macro-design. Please (maybe with Charly) try to help me as best as you can to achieve my stated goal (and maybe any others that might follow from this) ....
-
Charly:
The various versions (both schematic and 3ds max) of the 110m x 22m unit that I forwarded to you. This could seemingly represent our default unit. I attempted to explain the comparatively minor series of amendments that would need to be made to this in order to successfully convert it into a clinic. Maybe my explanations were rather poor ....
Please also read my earlier reply to mac1. Maybe (or maybe not) my comments might seem a little more clear ....
Perhaps (if mac1 is prepared to become actively involved with this project) you can forward him copies of your plans and models (as well as perhaps even my corresponding plans and models as comparisons) with any explanatory comments that you might feel are appropriate?
-
To put it into a more abstract question: how do you combine several skp files?
Well, once a file is saved in SketchUp, it can always be imported (and placed/aligned to your liking) as a component into a "master file" or model.
-
Another extremely relevant consideration:
How does one combine (collate for want of a better term) 2600+ of these already fairly large individual clinical facility modules (excluding additional non-clinical facility modules) into a composite main THC building?
This is the issue that currently worries me the most and will undoubtedly ultimately provide the greatest challenge ....
-
Hello Gaieus:
Great to hear from you ....
Thank you so much for that important piece of technical advice that will surely be employed when the individual modules are "collated" into the main THC model. However, my main concern is more aesthetic in nature - insofar as I am really keen to develop a truly striking main THC model (for the reasons previously mentioned) that will function as a detailed "walk-through" facility ....
This is going to prove very tricky indeed - especially as the various anatomical systems (18), clinical disciplines (65) and clinical subdisciplines (382) need to be rationally (systematically) grouped. Now this is what I would tend to refer to as process ....
-
Hello all:
Sorry for the repeated posts - but (as earlier stated) I am extremely keen to try to make some ongoing definitive progress with this most important aspect of our project ....
Upon deeper reflection, I think that a lot of our current misunderstandings can possibly be ascribed to our differing levels of process planning:
[*]On the one hand, Charly and mac1 (being experienced engineers) are looking at the lowest level details involving the microstructure and microfunction of the individual modules that will eventually be collated to form the body of the main THC. I fully understand and appreciate that this approach represents standard real world engineering practice and conventional wisdom.
[*]On the other hand, I (largely due to my complete lack of any engineering knowledge) am looking at the next level details relating to how the individual modules (both clinical and non-clinical) will structurally and functionally interact with each other within the body of the main THC. [Maybe it has been somewhat of a mistake and/or represents a major departure from real world engineering practice and conventional wisdom (although I tend to view it as more of a practical challenge) to initially propose a rather esoteric macrodesign for the main THC (especially as it is potentially hugely constraining) to house the circa 2600 (actually the final figure will ultimately be much nearer to 3000) modules].
I hope that there is a suitable (and possibly even highly innovative) way of overcoming this deep impasse as I sense that you are both keen to assist me and I dearly need whatever assistance that I can readily obtain with this most important aspect of our project. Does anyone have any ideas as to how we can proceed within (hopefully) the coming days ....
-
Jeremy,
What are you talking about 3000 modules, that's unrealistic. It is important to have a realistic basic concept as a starting point. Start with a small basic hospital. Later extensions are always possible.
The basic form of a hospital is, ideally, based on its functions:
- Bed-related inpatient functions
- Outpatient-related functions
- Diagnostic and treatment functions
- Administrative functions
- Service functions (food, supply)
- Research and teaching functions
Define the Services for each function which should be included as a minimum (but please, not 3000).
That would be a basis for further dicussions and we could then talk about further details and working steps.Otherwise you'll notice after a further six years you did not get a step forward.
Charly
Advertisement