Kool Aid
-
Posts
559 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Marionette
Store
Posts posted by Kool Aid
-
-
SETOBJECTVARIABLEBOOLEAN(h, 702, TRUE);
is supposed to ?Mark Object as Structural?, which one assumes to mean that such custom objects are treated as Structural in section viewports.
However, when one says this magic word, nothing happens.
Has anyone had success with this?
-
The dongled (EU) version works on both platforms. Same serial#, same dongle.
-
Tobias and Petri,
In 2009, four new Functions have been added to the Database Worksheet to handle roofs.
RoofArea_Heated
RoofArea_HeatedProj
RoofArea_Total
RoofArea_TotalProj
These will quantify the ?heated? and ?total? areas of a roof plane, calculated either along the slope of the roof, or projected on the ground plane. The ?heated? area is the area that does not include an overhang, which is defined here as the area upslope of the projected roof reference line. The ?ROOFAREA_TOTALPROJ? area is currently what is returned from a roof-slab using the AREA() function. See the attached illustration.
Turns out these are useless functions in non-McMansions, but certainly do what is promised. (Actually turned out that way a long time ago, I just didn't have the energy to report it.)
Firstly, one cannot generate a report of roofs. Secondly, surely there are situations, even in the U.S. of A., where unheated areas are under the roof.
Nice try, but no cigar.
-
Are there any real benefits to be gained from the more expensive model in
a) VW+RW
b) Photoshop and/or Aperture?
-
Well, let's try. The same objects are sectioned along two slightly different lines:
-
Are Section Viewports just another useless ?feature? which does not actually work?
In some section viewports, even in the same file, not all sectioned objects are interpreted correctly. Moreover, various Advanced Properties have very odd consequences: Merged Cross-sections may fix some problems, but not necessarily all. Some sections behave as expected, some badly.
Detected in VW 2009; in VW 2010 the situation is even worse? A lot worse!
(Hard to explain, I'm afraid.)
-
Sure you can!
Hopefully the people you have paid money to can help you. You know: Mr NNA.
Ohh, forgot: they've decided to protect their Intellectual (!) Property from their paying customers. Tough!
-
Update to the current version. Then imported DTM point data is, for better or worse, shown with Stake objects that can show the elevation.
-
Hear, hear!
(Whoops: most members are, I believe, Americans, so bare with me while I rephrase: Here, here!)
Layer, class and object type (at least) should be shown in all tabs.
-
I'm almost there. Now I can have either a traditional, ventilated flat roof or a reversed one (eg. trafficable roofs).
Turns out that creation of the roof segments this way is acceptably fast: draw a line, move a point.
So, my wish has been granted! (Well, the actual wish still is ungranted and pending, but I have a solution to the problem at hand.)
-
Aren't the preference files changed only when one quits VW?
-
I'm sure that 99% of members understood that the reference was to your ?solution?.
My tool will, when finalised, to be extremely useful. As my tools always are.
-
Isn't this the wish list?
Nothing from me is well received at NNA: their stated policy is that only requests made in a grovelling tone are considered.
-
Even easier: make a duplicate of the application?
Can be in the main VW folder.
-
Most definitely another useless workaround.
Well, that was fun!
Plan:
-
Yes, I could to that, too.
Actually, at present my system works ?in reverse? to your requirement: main versions (actual issues) have letters, minor ones can have a number: A, B, B1, B2, C, D.
-
Yes, of course. I just want to test the approach first before entering the realm of insulation, waterproofing and such: to check how long it takes to triangulate a complex roof manually.
-
All these are horrible ? but oh so typical - workarounds! I can't tell a prospective user, who is looking at ArchiCAD, Revit & VW, to do things like that.
OK. Rolled my own. Here's the prototype. In hindsight, the approach is better as the roof is created from arbitrary triangles, with drain where-ever, as in reality.
-
Not all flat roofs are simple rectangles? Try the same with a polygon-shape with even 10 or 15 vertices and varying angles.
(A Roof is in fact a group of roof faces.)
-
Once again, I lost a prospective user because of the McMansion -myopia of NNA.
It is not possible to design flat roofs with VW with any ease (not even with 3D-snapping) since roof faces still cannot have a negative angle.
For the information of NNA: in many countries flat roofs are the standard and even in Finland, at least the top levels of multi-storey car parks have flat roofs. There are places and situations where a flat roof is used as a rain water collector. And so on.
No, it can't be flat-flat: there needs to be drainage. That needs to be at least notionally shown in sections.
-
You wish? (My drawing/revision management system can handle that, too.)
-
That fast!
As an old-timer, I had serious doubts about the string parsing/conversion. In my time, that was really slow?
Good to know: I may in near future need to program an entirely new system that processes fairly large text files very often. So, thanks for the help, Dexie!
-
I think once you actually price that option out, you will find it to be less than cost effective.
VW Fun-da-mental manual @ FedEx:
Sorry, we can't create Signature Manuals out of this file.
Your file should be:
* Letter size document
* Between 3 and 740 pages
-
Exactly, dear brudgers, exactly!
The shocking cost and deliberate waste of trees caused by ?local? printing can't be justified by an attempt to save trees.
Printing the 1800 pages with my famous colour laser would, especially in the tree-saving duplex mode, take quite a few hours at quite a few W/h.
So, the open licence should only apply to offset printing.
DLVP anomaly: z-location
in Architecture
Posted · Edited by Kool Aid
This is curious! In a job file SLVP:s DLVP:s appear on wrong overall z-levels while in a section SLVP everything is hunky dory. Of course in a test file the latter applies to a DLVP as well??
Anyone seen this or am I dreaming?
Section
Design layer
(Here the slab should be on top of the beams, not far below.)
VW 2009