RDS Casa

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About RDS Casa

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Occupation
  1. I understand the theory, but these are planning elevations for a very sensitive site... I can't risk going in with clunky drawings. If it changes after planning, I don't care about the subtle set of elevations - they will not be a construction set, are are not likely be used again. For the construction stage, they'll be a ton of iterative changes I have no doubt, and there I will use the bim model. But at this stage, if my client changes it after sign off for planning, they can pay for me to change the drawings! Thanks
  2. Thanks, but I'm trying to keep it in the design layer, so I can convert to lines and then play with all the line weights and add little bits I've not modelled . I can't find a way to have this kind of render in the design layers view ports?? Thanks again for your time.
  3. Just searching for the same answer. I'm actually setting up sectional viewports in the design layers, then at the final stage, I take the hidden line renders, and covert copy to lines, and then monkey about with them to get a subtlety I can't get straight from the model with out putting loads of time into to it. I just find it quicker that way. So I don't even have the option of background render setting in design layer viewports (...do I??). Ideally I'd turn on the shadows, trace them or even just see what happening on the complex stuff, then approximate them as a polygons with opacity. Does anyone know how to do this in the design layer viewports? I know its not seamless workflow, but I can make simple models very quickly, and add all the detail manually. For me this is quicker, even if means the odd bit of reworking if things change. Suggestions appreciated. Thanks
  4. Hey, Yep, spot on, as soon as I moved the boundary to be over the loci, it worked just fine. Thanks
  5. 10 years later I have this exact question. I added the 3d loci to the site data using edit source data... it does not work. VW2018 SP2. Any suggestions?
  6. Hello, I also have a site model subtraction question, which is how I have found my way here. What if I want to build a tunnel, or a partially underground (with terrain on top) building in my site model? I have a building on a steep slope. Its partial recessed into the hill so the the entry level is the 1st floor, the ground level drops with the slope. This is simple and there are lots of good tutorials on it..... But, where the hill curves around, I need to send a tunnel so it pops out on the other side, i.e underground accommodation with terrain on top. Essentially the site model needs a hole through it? Whats my best strategy? a conventional model using the pad with retaining wall site modifier, then put a mesh landscape lid on top (just a mesh object) ? or is there a tunnel modifier that I can't find? Thanks anyone.
  7. Ok, this would work. Also, you have made me think I can just copy and paste the script from the pass node, into the script for what ever node I'm replacing, then wire the new input node into the front end of this. I tried the copy and paste trick before, but if you try and replace a single output node, with a double output node, it really does not like it. I never considered the using the pass first. Thanks as always
  8. Well I've got somewhere by hacking together a few nodes. This node provides a pop up, where if custom is selected, it defers to the input dimension. It also outputs a string associated with the choice made. But, if custom is selected, a value entered, then a standard option selection made later, it does not change the displayed custom box. Or grey it out I don't know if this is possible, but its a start at least. #fjs 19.12.17 @Marionette.NodeDefinition class Params(metaclass = Marionette.OrderedClass): this = Marionette.Node( 'Popup custom' ) this.SetDescription('The values returned set out in script') input = Marionette.OIPControl( 'Popup', Marionette.WidgetType.Popup, 0, ['custom', '150mm', '200mm', '300mm']) input.SetDescription('an OIP control representing the options designated within the script editor') d = Marionette.PortOut() d.SetDescription('The resulting value in document units') dim = Marionette.OIPControl( 'Custom (if selected)', Marionette.WidgetType.RealCoord, 0.0) dim.SetDescription('A numeric OIP control that accepts unit indicators') string = Marionette.PortOut('string') string.SetDescription('an string corresponding with the option selected in the OIP') def RunNode(self): units = vs.GetPrefReal(150) input = self.Params.input.value if input == 0: self.Params.d.value = self.Params.dim.value/units self.Params.string.value = 'custom' if input == 1: self.Params.d.value = 150 self.Params.string.value = 'standard' if input == 2: self.Params.d.value = 200 self.Params.string.value = 'standard' if input == 3: self.Params.d.value = 300 self.Params.string.value = 'standard'
  9. Hello, Does anyone know an easy way to switch nodes with out rewiring? I have a increasingly complicated network. I need to switch out a real input to a slider for example. It might have 10 wires coming out the back. Thanks
  10. Hello, is there any solution to this? When I try it on another file, I can get a worksheet to drive record data, but this does not push through to the marionette object parameters? So If I change it in the table, it changes the record and field data, but then the height (for example) in the data tab, just becomes inconsistent with the shape tab. When I change the shape data, it does indeed override the record data again, so its definitively one way... did anyone find the 2 way more involved solution? Is it possible to put in an update button on the object? to get data back from the worksheet?
  11. Ah, awesome. Thanks
  12. Strange. Try this. Is it a 2017 thing? many jobs here are on site and are in 2017, and we really don't want to convert if we don't have to. I know they say its fine, but sometimes it isn't (been there before). New projects are starting or converting to 2018, but not the ones on site Thanks. simple attributes problem.vwx
  13. I have some networks in 2017, so without the valve node. They are working, but all I need to do is set the attributes of the objects. But when I use the attributes node, and the shape never gets made, it gives an error command. I assumed this was because there was no object to apply the attributes to? This can be recreated quickly with a simple rectangle node. Attach inputs to width and height, then put the attributes node at the end. All fine if the inputs are 2 and 3. But if an input becomes 0, and the rectangle does not get made, it returns an error and identifies the Attributes node. Thanks for your help as always.
  14. Thanks @Alan Woodwell So the Max item on a double if can work like a If this OR that true, then true, if both true then true, if both false then false ? neat trick. @Marissa Farrell I tried using your if self.Params.obj.value != vs.Handle(0): extra in the attributes node, to stop the node falling over if something is not there. Can it work in this capacity at the top? Where am I going wrong? I added the python 4 space indentation to everything below it? def RunNode(self): if self.Params.obj.value != vs.Handle(0): if self.Params.IN.value != 0: h = self.Params.IN.value if vs.IsFillColorByClass(self.Handle): vs.SetFillColorByClass(h) else: vs.SetFillBack(h, vs.GetFillBack(self.Handle)) vs.SetFillFore(h, vs.GetFillFore(self.Handle)) if vs.IsFPatByClass(self.Handle): vs.SetFPatByClass(h) else: vs.SetFPat(h, vs.GetFPat(self.Handle)) if vs.IsLSByClass(self.Handle): vs.SetLSByClass(h) else: vs.SetLSN(h, vs.GetLSN(self.Handle)) if vs.IsLWByClass(self.Handle): vs.SetLWByClass(h) else: vs.SetLW(h, vs.GetLW(self.Handle)) if vs.IsMarkerByClass(self.Handle): vs.SetMarkerByClass(h) else: ok, style, angle, size, width, thickBasis, thickness, visibility = vs.GetObjBeginningMarker(self.Handle) vs.SetObjBeginningMarker(h, style, angle, size, width, thickBasis, thickness, visibility) ok, style, angle, size, width, thickBasis, thickness, visibility = vs.GetObjEndMarker(self.Handle) vs.SetObjEndMarker(h, style, angle, size, width, thickBasis, thickness, visibility) if vs.IsPenColorByClass(self.Handle): vs.SetPenColorByClass(h) else: vs.SetPenFore(h, vs.GetPenFore(self.Handle)) vs.SetPenBack(h, vs.GetPenBack(self.Handle)) if vs.IsTextStyleByClass(self.Handle): vs.SetTextStyleByClass(h) xOrigin, yOrigin, xIAxis, yIAxis, xJAxis, yJAxis = vs.GetFillPoints(self.Handle) vs.SetFillIAxisEndPoint(h, xIAxis, yIAxis) vs.SetFillJAxisEndPoint(h, xJAxis, yJAxis) vs.SetFillOriginPoint(h, xOrigin, yOrigin) if vs.GetOpacityByClass(self.Handle): vs.SetOpacityByClass(h) else: vs.SetOpacity(h, vs.GetOpacity(self.Handle)) self.Params.OUT.value = self.Params.IN.value
  15. Hello, I'm trying to create a marionette object that has similar input method to the steel section tool in VW. Here you can select from a series of default sizes or options, or you can tick a custom boolean, and input the parameters yourself. In the steel tool, the choices are greyed out without the custom boolean ticked. This would be ideal, but I think I read the the OIP can't change like that in an marionette object? If it can't do this, is there a way to override preset choices in a similar way? am I going to need 2 objects, a standardised one, and a custom one? Thanks