Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by gester

  1. michael, i've noticed your answer, but i haven't got time to check the result. as i've seen it briefly, the fields (columns) are not the same and vary with each database record. i've actually meant all possible column names that get populated in some records, and not populated in other ones. this would apparently generate much bigger worksheet than the one you've kindly provided. but i'll have to look at this worksheet once again, anyway? thanks, rob
  2. i like one-click solutions, though. there aren't many of them rob
  3. thanks a lot, peter. that was it rob
  4. when i try to annotate the section viewport which is placed on a sheet layer, the lines get messed (as in the enclosed screenshot). is it a bug or a feature? is there a workaround? thx, rob
  5. hi, the project manager asked me for a record, displaying only one worksheet, containing all building elements with their data fields. it means that the irrelevant or non-existing information isn't populated at all (ignored). the table should contain a mix of all building parts, including walls, symbols, slabs, furniture a.s.o., where rows and columns go in hundreds or thousands. the wish seems a bit strange to me, but it apparently works well with him (there are software packages for project evaluation that work this way, using ifc fields for information source). is something similar possible in vectorworks? if yes, is it a combination of database records and simple excel functionality? thanks in advance, rob
  6. the section tool behaves strange in general. it's the same project. here the earth ribbon goes across the sections a and c, only the e (cut outside of the building conceptualisation model sketch) looks rather ok. section c actually looks terrible. the drawing won't display the cut-out in a proper way. i wonder if the cut'n fill calculation can be reliable? have i done anything wrong? it's only 3 pads (marking the bottom of the slab layers) and a boundary. rob
  7. actually i haven't thought of this, but no, it's only one model. i enclose the settings. as i've made some more distance between the pads (now at least 2 millimetres from one another, up to 1 cm), the (newly drawn) section view has changed its appearance. it looks better now, even at the infinite depth, but there is still a ribbon matching the existing terrain slope edge over the cut-out volume and the left pad. is there any optimal pads' distance? rob
  8. benson, the 2d and 3d displays, and all modifiers as well, apply to the proposed model. if it shows any unnecessary existing features then it was not on purpose. rob
  9. and the pads' elevation information. rob
  10. and the 1 cm depth of the site section. can anybody explain what's going on? rob
  11. i've reduced the section depth to 5 cm, but still no clue what's being displayed at all? rob
  12. ray, thanks for the reply. - as for the vwx: unfortunately not, it's a part of the bigger project file. i've made a copy, deleted all other information (dl, sl, saved views, additional classes), purged all unused elements, but the file is still over 150 mb (the original file is 198 mb). btw, how can i further safely reduce the file size? - the pads are not sloping, and they are in a distance of a few millimetres from one another (otherwise the site model wouldn't generate a proper output). the boundary encloses all three pads. rob
  13. thanks, wes. well, it's not the way it's supposed to be solved at all. is there any schedule for improvement completion? rob
  14. hi, i've got a plot with 3 pads on different levels (all within 30 cm), surrounded by one boundary on a sloped terrain. when i try to do a site section i see no pads' levels, only some strange terrain behaviour. i've expected to see the 3 planes, all cut by the pads, and two slopes to the boundary. have i done anything false? or is it a proper view mode? i enclose relevant shots. thanks, rob
  15. i still use the v2012. has the corner window functionality changed in the following versions? i'm interested especially in the bay window feature... rob
  16. hi, i've created walls from spaces of the bigger function areas. now the task is to divide the big areas into room spaces, adding division walls. the auto-boundary feature with 'update boundary' button recognises only a particular single space, cutting out the rest. what is the right procedure to divide the whole pie into pieces? thx, rob
  17. v-g and this is a good question: we have here the scale for the authorities which is mostly 1:100 for bigger projects, and the execution project is always in 1:50, the details in 1:20 to 1:2. i'm just trying to make the best setting for this. rob
  18. thanks vincent, it's what i actually thought. the real reason i ask for the best practice procedures concerns the graphic representation of the architectural drawings, most of all the line weights and hatches (as patterns scale with). is there any recommendation, or is it really of no importance? rob
  19. hi, in what scale do you usually draw in vectorworks (i mean the document settings, i use metric here)? i was accustomed to draw 1:50 in archicad, as it is the scale you can easily go lower or higher, and besides archicad can't scale text (i don't know if it's been improved recently). so the 1:50 seemed to be the universal size to work with. are there any best practice tips for vw in this case? thanks in advance. rob
  20. wes, can you please save it in a v2012 format? thanks, rob
  21. first they would have to port allplan on macintosh, then. rob
  22. reece, thanks for your thorough insight. i'm still waiting with 2014 upgrade. the alternative is but still clear: archicad. i think nemetschek should sell it to trimble. rob
  23. @sbg i did the same. and you think e.g. adesk are unhappy taking your money for the next revit release (or yearly subscription) facing the ifc import flaws? i can see them whine about it already. rob
  24. wes i can't believe it. it's really turned off by default. sorry for the mess and thanks a lot. rob
  • Create New...