etweed

I like the Station on Polyline tool under Roads. However, it only works w/ certain polylines. I would like the capability to station along a polygon. This would help civil engineers who must station a pipeline that has sharp bends that cannot be drawn w/ the polyline. Most stationing for this is shown like the road stationing is, using the 0+00, 1+00 etc., but no curve data is necessary. Anyway, being that you already have a more complex stationing tool for roads, I would think it wouldn't be too bad to design a simpler tool. I"ve ben rong befoor tho. et

Changing the font WORKS. However the bold/italics still don't affect the callouts.

I have tried this, which changed all the normal text blocks, but none of the callouts have been affected. After clicking on the callout, the Menu has a check beside bold, but the callout doesn't show up as bold on monitor or paper. Same result with Italics.

Callout

Is there a way to change the style, to bold for instance, of callouts? I selected all that were in a specific text class, but none changed to bold.

I can attest to prosado's points. When we switched from mostly macs to mostly pc's, we had to hire an IT Person full-time (not cheap). And as pointed out in his item 4), we pay thousands per year for liscensing. Our company size is <100 people with less than half having autocad or microstation Futhermore, I cringe at having to learn commands. I have not had any problems dealing with autocad files. They import properly almost all the time, and the few times I have problems, I have been able to fix them. I am not sure if it still applies, as it has been a while for me, but I would rather have classes named Contours or Woodsline than 54 or 32. Especially for someone new to my drawing. et

It has happened before but is more of an annoyance than a problem. Unless the fix is obvious and easy, I wouldn't put much time in fixing it.

I set up a centerline for a road and then stationed along polyline. Everything worked fine except it started the stationing at the wrong end of the polyline. Is there a way to force the command to start at the other end or do i need to redraw the polyline starting at the other end?

Under site-vehicles, i have selected the tractor and both types of trailers to display on the turn path. They appeared small so i measured them and then compared them to the pickup truck. It shows the tractor to be < 6 1/2 feet wide and about the same size as a pickup truck. This dimension does not appear to be correct. Is everyone's tractor trailer this small? was it drawn to scale or is mine messed up? It also shows a trailer width about the same and a length of only about 31' is that correct?

I thought i had, but maybe i misunderstood. Was i to create the solids and move the solid that is to be subtracted in and out? "Exiting out" - quitting the program? please clarify if possible.

I found Convert to Generic Solids under a "stock" workspace and tried it, but it didn't work. the subtraction still added. I then tried moving the void-solid up and down through the solid that stays, and it still added it.

Katie, I am having trouble locating "general solids" under the Model Menu or any other. Do you mean convert to 3dPolys or Nurbs or am i missing a plug in?

I have a multiple extrude in which I want to cut a block out of. I created the block, selected both objects, and subtracted solids. However, it added solids solids so that the multiple extrude had the block protruding from it, although the object info pallete identifies it as a solid subtraction. I tried subtracting an even larger block from the solid subtraction, but it also added the larger block. I had this type problem before while trying to cut a sweep, and reported it a few months ago. A friend suggested adding solids to see if the reverse would happen, and i tried it for kicks. IT WORKED! The object has the hole i originally wanted. The object info pallete calls the object a solid addition. If anyone else has this subtraction problem, don't rule out using add solids as a work around. et

The file is in wireframe, so it should not be rendering. We have tried hitting escape but the color wheel continues to spin. When opening the file the screen is completely white and the toolbar grayed, but when the date and time menu is opened in the upper right corner (Mac) and then closed it reveals the "Verifying file" progress bar, which seems to be stuck. This leads us to believe that the file is getting to the point of almost opening but something is holding it back.

We have a file created in VW10 OSX. The file is 9.5 Megs and contains no images, only data. This file has several months of work in it, but will no longer open. Vectorworks brings up the outline of an open file, and then the rainbow colored clock continues to spin indefinetly. The file never opens completely. It does this on two different computers, one a dual 1gHz. Is there any way to at least salvage the symbol library inside of this file?

The two layer linked layers seemingly cannot be successfully combined into one layer since they are in two different views. (front and an isometric) Perhaps I am misunderstanding.

the problem i am experiencing seems very similar to JimmySalmon's. When i use custom renderworks, it blocks out other layers. After some experimenting, i have found that it only affects layers that are lower in the stacking order. In my drawing i have the MODEL layer shown in plan, an ELEVATION layer linked to the model, and an ISOMETRIC layer also linked to the model. Right now I can't get every layer to show unless i only render the bottom-most layer. At this point, can anything be done to get all three layers rendered using custom renderworks?

The 3d objects that disappear are only invisible in the model and one of the layer links. Both of these are rendered using hidden line rendering. The 3rd layer, which is layer linked to the model, is rendered using custom renderworks, and the objects show up here. The culprit is somewhere in the rendering mode. Has anyone else had problems with "hidden Line" rendering?

In addition to the 2d covers I lose, I am also losing 3d components of the drawing. Why? I can work around the covers by adding an additional layer on top of all the others, but have no way of battling disappearing objects. Is this a bug?

I would check quicktime/apple's website to see if it is available. (i doubt it) otherwise, i know many old installation disks (maybe even vw) came w/ quicktime as part of the package. I would also look for updates for OS and VW. I can't remember where they maxed out before they both went to their version 10, but it is possible there is another step up before having to pay for a new version. I must say I enjoy VW 10 and OSX, but then again my company paid for it. It is a different story when you have to pay the money yourself to upgrade.

It seems i recall some discussion several months ago about quicktime 6 updates affecting VW somehow. I believe it was before VW10 came out. I avoided getting QT6 until I had OSX and VW10, and never had any problems. Anyway, perhaps if you update either VW, OS or both, the problem will go away. Otherwise, did you keep the old QT4 or did it get completely replaced by 6? et

I have a 3d model of which i only wish to display part of. I also have other layers linked to the model that give elevation views and isometric views of the area. To fit them all on the page in an organized manner, i have used 2d polygons w/ no pen and a solid fill to cover over the areas i wish to not see. This works great in wireframe or with custom renderworks, but when I try to render it with Hidden Line, it completely ignores the 2d cover and displays the entire model. VW 10.1.2 Eric

Pasting the stairs in a new sheet corrected the view problem w/ the stairs. However, I am unable to import my saved sheets into the new file. arg!

I do not believe there is. It may be possible to write a script that will turn off/on classes in all saved sheets. It may be worth it to you if you commonly work with files that have that many saved sheets in them. Someone w/ more scripting experience may know wether or not this is possible. Perhaps pose the question in the scripting forum.

everything seems to be fine as far as the elevation on the stairs. Regardless, they should show up in 3d and not stay as a 2d object, even if they were out of place.