Jump to content

Kevin C

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kevin C

  1. This would be a great idea. The problem occurs whenever anyone mentions that they have a 'workaround'. This just means a bodge, not fixed or working properly, just a bodge. I am getting tired of 'workarounds'. Can VW please try and produce tools that represent actual construction methods and not representations.
  2. Depends how your drawing is setup. I insert all of the house blocks as symbols into the layout The plot number (along with floor Area / bedrooms / In-curtilage parking / Handing / External finishes / Garden areas etc.) is contained in the attributes and displayed as part of the symbol on the layout. I use that to generate the accommodation schedules. I have a "Plot Report" worksheet in my resource manager which creates a simple spreadsheet that chronically orders the plot numbers. Any plots which get added or removed away, show up very quickly in the spreadsheet and the plot numbers can then be updated on the spreadsheet and they are updated in the layout. The 'plot report' is used really as a checking tool as for my last layout (426 units) would have stretched across about 2 A0 sheets vertically!! - VW still cannot 'word wrap' spreadsheet. Shame on you.
  3. Could I ask that if looking at the windows and doors then can you reassess they way that doors and windows are inserted into walls and how they interact with openings as they are sadly very poor. Solid wall construction went out with the arc - why do VW still assume we build solid walls. Allow us to determine the insertion mode and insertion position of a door / window. What I mean is allow us graphically to chose where the door frame snaps to: The outside face of the frame snaps to the inner face of the outer leaf and is inserted using the outer edge (frame) as the insertion point etc. (My preferred option) But to do this in VW you currently have to place the object then move to suit - very time consuming. Also when inserting the object, VW takes the entire wall thickness only - doesn't matter how many components make up the wall but to have an object positioned properly in a wall, it has to be inserted then manually adjusted by using the 'offset in wall' tool, which is fine, but beware if you change anything later as your offsets will all be wrong and have to be updated. Fix the internal and external wall detail components - work OK in 2D - but in 3D they do not (never have done) Sidelights in windows - Does not work whatsoever when you have any wall detail components selected Thresholds - Does not work whatsoever when you have any wall detail components selected Window cills - Do not work at all (Never have done). Again VW seems to assume that wall constructions are solid. THEY ARE NOT. Lintels - I mean structural lintels (what holds up the inner and external leaf of a wall) Openings adjoining multiple wall types - It is not uncommon (actually quite often) for a door or window jamb to be placed at a split in a wall construction, or a change in construction. The jamb tool does not allow for different LH and RH jambs and head detail - It is (wrongly) assumed that the same detail exists of all sides of the opening. This is just not true Could go on, but then you would just loose interest.
  4. Would ask that any improvements to the roads tolls be made available to Architect and Landmark. Have mentioned in previous posts that the ability to define filled polylines as roads would allow complex road geometries to be formed - similar to the 'create a slab' from 'create objects from shapes' but please remove the need to have pavements etc. just allow us to create the road with narrowing / widening, spaces for parking cars etc.. If we want to add a pavement or footpath - we could create it as a separate road object. Please please for the next release as none of the roads tools are of any use for creating anything but the most basic of shapes.
  5. It is really unfortunate that the road tools have never really worked properly. I tend to agree with Art V that not many people use the roads tools, as to be quite honest they are pretty useless, unless you have road pattern which contains no features and all junctions are a right angles to each other. I am also perplexed as to why the 'better' roads tools seem to be intended for VW Landscape (although I don't think that they are that much better). Can someone tell me if I my understanding of the design process has been wrong for the past 30 years. Example: Piece of land for sale - Client is residential developer. Say the site capacity is approx. 75 houses on a greenfield or brown filed site. Architectural, Engineering and client collaborate to determine best access to site, site constraints, existing wayleaves, SUDs location etc. Initial viability layout prepared - Architectural ONLY. (Either old fashioned set tip pen and tracing paper or VW - whichever feels best for site) Client signs off sketch proposals Bid Layout prepared - Architectural with engineering input (only if required for bid) Bid layout costed by client then submitted. Assuming bid is successful. the next stages are normally as follows: Detailed site design - Architectural and engineering ONLY Landscape Architect appointed - (but only if client deems it necessary for the development). It is not uncommon for landscaping to be conditional on a planning consent Planning consent applied for Planning Granted Building Warrant applied for Building Warrant granted Commence site works I have read on some replies to posts from people that they don't understand why people are constantly complaining. I have invested over £16,000 in vectorworks over the past 8 years. I cannot afford to go elsewhere. This is one of the biggest frustrations that I have with VW. There are now far better tools out there, but for me to change all of the licenses over would put me out of business so I am stuck. To make the system work all that really is required is the ability to convert a filled polygon to a road - without pavements, then attach pavements or service verges (or a combination) to the road. There will be people out there saying that what about road centrelines and stations etc. Simple, make defining a centreline (a simple polyline) part of the conversion to a road basis and that could then be used for generating stations etc.. Also if we controlled the location of the centreline, we (the engineer in this case) could properly model the cambers, gulley locations etc.so that a fully integrated DTM could be produced. It would also mean that the cut and fill could be more accurate - give the road the thickness of the make-up and any capping and it would then be included in the calculations. Sorry for the rant. I had roads sussed last month for a 35 unit site and the client loved it (unfortunately we didn't win). Went to do it again for another site and it just doesn't work as this site demands a more novel approach incorporating Designing Streets which means Have to just draw lines and arcs to form the roads. Kevin.
  6. Peter, Just came across your post. There is a very simple way of importing dwg files without corrupting your VW datasets. First - Save your work and close the VW file (just in case the AutoCAD file is c**p and crashes VW) then do the following: Open a new black VW file (No template) Import the dwg file - You may have to try a couple of times to get the scales, geo-referencing etc. correct Go into the Organisation palette and change the fill and pen settings to what you want them to look like - As a rule I always switch the fill off and make everything a single colour (usually black). Change all the objects attributes to "by Class" - My preference as there is nothing worse than working in a file that has multiple objects with different settings in the same class. Save the file There are two options to import the data. Option 1 Open your VW file Create a new layer and make it active Go back to the file you created for importing the dwg file - copy everything (cmd+c) Tab back to the VW file and "Paste in Place" Option 2 Open your VW file Create a new layer by using the "import Design layers" function and choose the new file you have just created. Select the layer in the file (it will be the dwg file name - unless you changed it) Make sure "import layer objects" is selected Click OK Doing it these ways, you will be given the option of accepting or over-riding you VW settings for everything that you are importing and over-rides the undo lock that happens when you import a dwg file
  7. Just installed SP1 hoping that this problem was fixed - NO it hasn't. This is a serious issue. This problem did not exist is 2011,2012,2013,2014,2015,2016 - There has been a change to the graphics system. This is not as simple as a bug - there is a fault in the software. Oh and BTW - the "Update catalogue" problem is still there to. Jim, It has been assumed that we are working far from the origin - This is not the case, your response is based on the drawings being set up incorrectly. The drawings are set up correctly, the site plans (in my case) are either directly imported survey files or directly imported ordinance survey files. The procedure which is carried out each time is as follows: Create a new drawing (without template) Import topo survey or OS Map (settings as per Screen Grabs) - The topo would be imported in 3D if it is 3D, but VW seems to prefer importing as full 2D files (quite often the surveyor thought a few 3D blocks into the drawing, this just makes everything 2D). Go into the class settings and turn off the solid fill on every class (why are classes filled by default??) and then change pen settings to what I want Save file as a VW file That then becomes the base file for the site Create my layers for masterplanning and start drawing It is important to remember that the coordinates must match the GPS or OS coordinates in the survey files for the northings and eastings or I cannot generate coordinates or align the drawing with third party data (such as google maps) One of the great things about VW is to be able to rotate the view and work orthogonally, (so I am not having to twist my neck every time I look at the screen) and always be in a position to return it to normal with a simple click of a button - This is something that Autodesk does not have to the same extent. When I am working in a 2D environment and the site layout does not require the use of full 3D modelled files, I just use a symbol on the drawing to represent the house - this works fine, but when trying to work with a referenced viewport. Ie. referencing multiple model files to create a full model for client presentation / planning etc. I am unable to snap to points in the referenced viewport when the viewport is rotated. Please do not tell me that I am no longer able to work in a GPS coordinated environment. This is just the problem in this specific instance, it is endemic in 2017.
  8. Just to hopefully finish this one off. None of my drawings are ever set up on a shifted user origin When drawing site layouts (masterplans), the base drawing is always brought in as a OS Map in its original location and using the original units - metres (which is coordinated to actual GPS coordinates). This will allow for a topographical survey to be directly reference in and it will be in the correct location. The house block symbols are inserted - These are drawn as close to the 0,0,0 as possible with the bottom LH corner of the block usually set at 0,0,0 It is common (and I would say good) practice to rotate the view so that offsets can be made and be sure that they are all on the same plane. also makes it easier for dimensioning and everything else if you don't have to skew your neck when looking at a drawing. By drawing this way - you can be sure that everything is in its correct location (relative to GPS) If I am setting up my drawings up wrongly - please tell me as I do not know how to set them up differently.
  9. @Art V The issue is with converted files - Ie live projects. I do not have the time to "test" scenarios - that is what the software development is for. For projects which are in an early design stage, yes workarounds are a possible solution as you do not need to get production information out to tender or site and have to worry about everything being coordinated. But for projects which are live and information has to be issued it is not acceptable for temporary solutions to be proposed. There are a couple of nice features in VW2017, but the bugs in the system at the moment mean to me that they are just not worth it. Take the resource browser for example, to use it to its full potential it it has to sit as a floating palette and take up a large portion of the workspace, but to use it on a day to day basis - it really has to be docked which means that access to the additional funtions is extremely limited - unless you have massive or multiple screens (I'm working of a 27" iMac). Also - what has happened to the startup interface - I don't want to see a hazed over desktop it is very annoying to the eyes - I want to be able to access my desktop when I don't have drawings open, leave it as clear space please or blank it out !! I was also very exited to see a specific handrail / railing tool as this is something which VW has been lacking for ever, until I tried it - it works well as a standalone tool but is useless for use inside a building if you want to link a stair and landing balustrade. Say you start at the bottom of a stair go up to top of the stair and continue along the landing and return into a wall, pretty standard stuff, but the tool does not attach between levels and stories, and will not go up a stair - WHY!!! I am very quickly coming to the conclusion that VW2017 in its current form is broken and I may have to export all my live projects back to 2016 and uninstall VW 2017 until this problem is sorted - Just as well the batch file conversion facility doesn't work this year or I would have been more angry with this upgrade than I am at the moment.
  10. I have the same problem as well referencing floorpans into a site layout and only being able to snap when the page orientation is set to 0 - This did not happen in VW 2015 or VW2016. I have checked and the site plan is geo-referenced (as it should be) and each of the houses are drawn at the origin points on their own file (or very close to). I could create a local coordinate system, but I am not convinced that that will fix an error in the software. Once you move off a grid, it is very easy to forget the transposed coordinates (especially if there is more than one person working on the project - as I have in my office). I would also be unable to issue setting out coordinates as the setting out coordinates are generated from the site plan which is based on the OS grid. Also when registering new properties with the keeper (Register of Scotland), I am required to issue a dwg file with all properties and boundaries located on an OS grid - so a local grid cannot be used. There is definitely a graphics problem with VW2017.
  11. I have this problem for all tiles and fills - problem still exists after changing display to best compatibility. If you switch between design and sheet layers, the sheet layer and output seems to be OK but the design layer is will change rotation all of its own accord.
  12. I am Stil unable to import any revit file apart form the smallest manufacturer's block. I have attached a standard file I received from a Revit trainer who I know but I still cannot open it - It just hangs at "importing elements - 99%" Can anyone else try and see if they can - Or is it just me?? (Included as a zip file as the uploader won't accept revit files. rac_basic_sample_project.zip
  13. Thanks Jim. Do you have an indicative release date for SP1?
  14. Jim In response: My account is an administrator No - Always standard install No errors during installation No Me - Read & Write / admin - Read only / everyone - Read only File attached iMac_-_Kevin_C.spx
  15. I haven't been able to import anything other than a manufacturer's product file as yet. The files I tried to import were around 15MB and VW just hung without importing them completely. What I have found with the graphics problem is that as soon as I seem to have an issue with odd fills and lines appearing and disappearing, losing zoom function - in other words complete hang-up of VW. I have to save the file, quit and restart VW and everything is OK. There is obviously a problem somewhere, and I think it is related to the graphics module.
  16. The libraries are the standard stock libraries stored on the computer. I haven't gone near the company libraries yet which are on the server so there are just the stock libraries which ship with VW.
  17. Yes, quite a few bugs but there, but I wouldn't be getting the new Macbook Pro anyway. It is a lot of money for a glorified laptop and since my office runs full blown iMacs, there is no justification. I do have an ASUS N53S laptop which I use when WFH. Will see how 2017 does on that.
  18. I am an administrator (on the Mac). I presume that you are running PC which gives you the option of running each program as an administrator - Mac does not. As far as everything else in VW2017 working well, we are having quite a few problems. Major issues with Graphics - 2 machines are on iMac 5K retina with 4GB cards. Haven't loaded up on the older iMac yet (it is a 2011 i7 with a 2GB card. Text not displaying properly - mirrored / upside down / back to front / at an angle until the file was re-opened and all the test selected and refreshed (callouts only for some reason) Tiles and hatches no showing in the correct orientation - In the design layer but properly in the sheet layer, I had one guy in the office this morning almost pull his SO FAR. I do like the resource manager though, but pity that none of the bigger issues have been looked at again - Stairs and handrails for example. Someone needs to look at this seriously as I am still unable to use handrails for any project. Haven't had a chance to try out the walls and roofs yet, but as there was nothing in the update blurb, I am not holding out any hope that basic improvements have been carried out. Vectorworks is not just a design tool, it is a production tool and the software has to move past the 'pretty picture' and provide for production information.
  19. Does anyone know how to stop the pop-up for "Vectorworks Libraries Update" which pops up every time I start VW. I updated the libraries when it was installed and now every time I start VW - Getting a bit annoying.
  20. I have been trying unsuccessfully to carry out a batch conversion of my 2016 files to 2017 but the batch conversion tool doesn't seem to work. anyone else had the same problem. I store all of my VW files in project folders on a NAS server and it worked perfectly well when converting from 2015 to 2016, but not this time. Thoughts anyone??
  21. I have managed to download and sport a manufacturer's file (tried the Velux) and it seems to work - very disappointed with the result though imported as a wireframe model with no attributes (editable or otherwise) - less detail than an ifc import. I did however try and download the 2 sample rvt files (basic sample project and advanced sample project) from the Autodesk website and both failed to open - VW just hung. Question, Is there a file size restriction with revit import, as this could cause problems if I want to say to my Revit clients that I can now work with the whole team without having to force them to export to ifc (which does not go down well. Also - why is it only import and not import/export (ArchiCAD has both). Kevin.
  22. Hi Wes, Thanks for that. However, that only works when the individual component values are being entered into the system and does not allow for thermal bridging to be calculated (this would normally be carried out by other specialist energy software -which I have and am certified to use, for U-values, SAP Calculations and linear thermal modelling) Example: Modern timber frame wall, as per the specification in my post contains specialist membranes and low emissivity service voids and cavities to enhance the overall U-Value of the structure. The insulation and service void are both bridged by the timber studs. Details: Timber studs - 140mm thick infilled with 120mm PIR board (lambda 0.022) and and a 20mm thick low-e service void (declared R-value of 0.655) both of these components are bridged by the 38x140mm CLS timber studs at 600mm Centres. Convention states that 25% bridging is applied to the insulation and service void to account for the timber studs. - Entering the lambda value of each component only works if you can also add the bridging fraction (and the bridging element resistance). Breather membrane on the OSB facing the cavity (min. 50mm thick) - again a high performance reflective membrane with a declared R-Value of 0.655 (Protect TF200 thermo in this case) The external leaf in this case is an existing sandstone external wall, but could be anything as its just a rain screen The internal plasterboard (in this case) is double sheeted due to the fire resistance requirements of a flatted property. As you can see, although the software is smart, unless it has an approved U-value calculator built in (for each country that uses the software) I would not trust it to give an accurate value in terms of thermal efficiency. I need to be able to select a wall and know that the U-Value is correct or be able enter in an overall U-Value for the structure. If I need to convert it to an overall R-Value, so be it - its not difficult to do. In relation to the overall reported 'R-Values' for the generic wall constructions in the software - they are all US (imperial) R values, even when the project is being designed in metric, so are all wrong, or rather the software has not converted them to metric. Example, all of the timber frame walls have a pre-determined R-Value of 0.17, I calculated "nbl_Ext_Blk-Cavity-CBPBrd-TmbrFrmInsul-MtlFrm-GypPlstrbrd" and the R-Value is 5.184 which generated a U-Value of 0.20 I do have one question in relation to the default timber frame wall styles though (specifically the UK ones). Who on earth decided on the standard constructions. No-one uses particleboard in a timber frame - you won't get an agreement certificate for it! and no structural engineer will sign it off, because they are nothing like what is built as standard practice (or have ever been) - from my experience at least.
  • Create New...