Jump to content

P Retondo

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by P Retondo

  1. Thanks, Jeff. I wonder if it has something to do with which version of ACAD I'm exporting to. I'll check that out.
  2. @jeff prince Are you stating this as a NNA engineer?
  3. @jeff prince When you select "Export DWG layers as : layers", your layers should become separate layers in ACAD. That's the way it has worked in the past, and since it isn't working that way now, that would be a bug - correct? The behavior in v2020 is not consistent with behavior in previous versions, or at least that's what I'm trying to confirm with other users. Having all your layers come into ACAD jumbled into one layer is distinctly unhelpful to most of my collaborators.
  4. @jeff prince Jeff, thanks for your input. I worked with ACAD for 4 years, so I am well aware of the layer/class issue. My purpose in bringing this up here is to find out if this might be a bug so I could report it.
  5. Jeff, thanks. I have layers with different stories of a building in separate layers. I want the same layer structure in the exported .dwg, exactly as you describe. I was wondering if anyone else has noticed that this doesn't work any more. The way I know this is that my structural consultant complained that everything was in the same ACAD layer. I imported my .dwg back into VW, and everything came in as one layer - I don't maintain a license of ACAD anymore, but I trust that what the engineer told me is true. I had to export separate files for each story.
  6. Jeff, I don't want to export classes as separate layers in .dwg, I want to export layers as separate layers in .dwg. Used to work in the past, but now it doesn't seem to.
  7. Anyone else experiencing this problem? When I export a file, with multiple layers visible, to .dwg and select "Export as dwg layers: layers," the resulting .dwg has only one layer with all objects crammed into it.
  8. I hope this doesn't confuse you, but I ignore the "stories" concept completely. "Stories" offsets each layer by the story height from "ground," which is marginally handy if you want to modify story heights, but I prefer a simpler system. (Bear in mind that you can change things from project to project as you work into the software.) I just name layers by story number, with each layer set to 0 from ground, and move objects up by my floor-to-floor height for 2nd and 3rd stories. I use the "layer wall height" parameter to set the heights of my walls. These fields are accessed by editing the layer in question. When you look at a set of walls and 3d objects from an elevation view, you can select them and move them or align them to make sure everything is right. Check your doors and windows - there are some parameters in the info palette that set their heights, just play with them looking from the side to get them right. Also, when you need to extend walls up or down to meet something, use the "Fit Walls to Objects" tool in the AEC dropdown menu. I set up special layers just to make that easier. For example, suppose you want your first floor walls to go down to a foundation footing. Create a 3d polygon at the desired height, put it in a special layer, and extend your walls down to that object. The beauty of that is that your doors and windows automatically stay put after that operation. Have fun! PS: the reason I never adopted "stories" (i.e., "layer elevations") is that when you paste an object "in place" from one layer to another, it doesn't carry with it it's "actual" height when the layers have different heights above 0.
  9. The Navigation palette is not part of the Workspace. Sounds to me like you should start out by having them uninstall then reinstall Vectorworks to get a fresh start.
  10. I defer to Pat's superior knowledge. But, if your client has customized their workspace, having their actual .vww file will make your interface identical to theirs, as an added measure to Pat's Designer disabling script.
  11. The other thing you can do is have your client email you their workspace settings file (.vww file). Rename it to something distinctive, enable that, and you should have only their workspace and all preferences for shortcuts, etc.
  12. Unequal leaf is for swing bi-part doors only. I don't know how to do what you want unless you create a custom symbol (see "Use Symbol Geometry" for doors). I would create the configuration I wanted using the bi-part doors tool, then convert to group and edit the way the door looks in plan, then convert to symbol, and check "use symbol geometry" when inserting where you want the door to be.
  13. If it helps anyone, I figured out the correct worksheet formula to substitute into the column reporting rough openings for pocket doors: =IF((G4=('Pocket Bi-Part')) | (G4=('Pocket Simple')), ('Door'.'ROWidth'+'Door'.'Width'), 'Door'.'ROWidth') Provided, of course, that column G reports the door "configuration."
  14. In the real world of construction, a pocket door is placed in an opening roughly twice the width of the actual door. The Vectorworks door schedule is blissfully unaware of this reality, requiring laborious workarounds in the report worksheet. Wouldn't it be possible to easily change this parameter to report the real rough opening required? Speaking of this workaround, the best way would be a column with an "if / else" method, but since one does not know the proper Vectorscript variable names, it's not possible to construct a cell value "if type = "pocket door", = R.O.*2, else = R.O".
  15. Matt, I don't know what version you are using, but if it is recent, you can turn on GDI+Imaging (VW Preferences, Display tab, last option). Then you can set the opacity of a 2d object fill in the Attributes Palette. Placing a white rectangle with opacity around 70% would give the effect of a grayed-out look to the object below. If you want a viewport that shows object below it, you have to assign a layer transparency (if GDI+Imaging is "on") or assign a transfer mode of "Overlay" to the layer if GDI+Imaging is "off."
  16. You need to create a design layer with "Overlay" transfer mode selected instead of "Paint." That layer when converted to a .pdf can have an assigned opacity by %, allowing you to vary its transparency.
  17. Nocolas means to check your video card settings via the control panel app to see if the default processor is the GPU, not something else.
  18. Thanks, klinzey, I will check out those situations. Regardless of that, this is a user interface problem that VW needs to rectify. There should be one and one place only to set the visibility and shadow-casting properties of a light source for ALL rendering modes, and other toggles that affect this behavior should be removed. I had not noticed these changes up through vw2017, but since I started using vw2020 all of a sudden my former methods for lighting are not working.
  19. Mike, I’m having the same problem with version 2020. All of my lights (not in symbols) show up in OpenGL renderings but do nothing in Renderworks. What gives? Anybody know?
  20. I've tried using the Custom Cabinet tool in v2020. It only draws a "Eurostyle" cabinet - can't draw a face frame, can't even draw a side scribe. Does that gibe with the experience of others? It can't draw a box with unequal drawers, you have to do separate "boxes," which is not how anyone making cabinets would fabricate something. Am I missing something, or is this truly another tool that VW or third party engineers laborered over that promises more usefulness than it delivers? Or is this just a "teaser," and a more capable version is available with "InteriorCAD?" Sorry to sound negative, but either the limitations are real, or the actual power of the tool is not evident. I think it's important for VW to get feedback - and to summarize mine, nice idea, but not anywhere near where it needs to be and I would much rather have seen fixes to the window, door or stairs tools. I'll still have to end up creating custom cabinets from scratch using generic 3d elements, so this feature cost VW money and does nothing for me. For what it's worth, though, the interface with highlighting of elements is very much in the right direction. PS, ungrouping the object results in a set of extrudes - brilliant! Maybe I can use it after all as a starting point. I like the fact that the face elements are slightly spaced, which allows them to be revealed in 3d with the shadow created.
  21. Pat's comment may come into play, but I also find that if there are too many joins to a wall, it cannot be dragged. I have to remove one or more joins, then it will work. It seems like the program could be improved so that it doesn't get stuck like this.
  22. @Helm If you read all of the thread, I think you will see that architects of all nations are talking about a few general things upon which we would all agree. 1 get rid of the bugs and obvious unintentional effects (such as window sills overlapping a non-existent bottom frame), 2 increase the number of parametric types to match the real world of common options (such as multiple sliding doors with interlocking stiles), and 3 make some common plan detail depictions more flexible and better aligned to practice. On top of that, I think many people would like 4 allow profiles to be defined by polylines, and 5 construct the PIOs out of extrudes so that when we "explode" them we can work easily with the parts. With all these improvements, we will still follow the methods of moving to precise detailing that you describe and that most of us practice.
  23. It's probably easier and better practice to flip the plan by flipping the sheet layer viewport, assuming the mirrored unit is identical. You can use flipped viewports to assemble a 3d model if that's needed.
  24. @mattryan I don’t think I was of much help! But good on you for sticking with it and figuring it out!


7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114


© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

  • Create New...