Material Naming Conventions

Hi everyone!

I’m trying to organize my library of materials, textures and components and would like some inspiration on how to name things. How do you usually name your assets and why?

For Materials, I was thinking of starting with the core material of it and then describing it more, General to Specific, so they are group correctly on a list. ex.:

Wood Veneer_Oak Natural Matte

Wood Planks_Pine Weathered

(Material) (Pattern)_(Species) (Color) (Finish)

Do you guys abbreviate words? use all caps? spaces and underscore? Please share!

Going from generic to more specific is a great way to go. In the Netherlands, a few BIM enthusiasts came up with a standard which is helpful in all stages of the material (design, build, maintenance, restore/reuse, etc)
The goal was to have a method that is clear for everyone regardless the used software.
So abbreviations can create confusion.

name_charasteristic_application

name= main (building) category material (wood, concrete, metal, etc)
charasteristic=general name (Pine, reinforced concrete, sink)
application=how it is used (boards, slab, gutter)

This can be followed by more specific information, separated with an underscore (manufacturing specs)

2 Likes

Well I usually apply the AIA Cad layering standards to my material names using their 4 letter keyword and separator conventions, just as I do with my tags

eg
-CONC
-GLAS
-WOOD-PINE
-FLOR-TILE-01
-PAINT-01 -02 etc (for multiple variations)

so there is also consistency with my tag names

I add the initial dash prefix so I can easily identify my materials from those that may have been imported… again as I do to my tags (layer names) for the same reason

here is a google translation into english for those who don’t know dutch :slight_smile:

EenduidigeMateriaalbenaming_infographic English Google Translation.pdf (236.9 KB)
I did one correction to google… it translated “WAAROM NAA.K.T” to “WHY NAKED”

Peronally I think the AIA keyword structure is a bit more efficient and flexible… but follows the same principle… I have to say I hate those baseline dashes in descriptors when a dash will do

1 Like