Jump to content

P Retondo

Member
  • Content Count

    1,704
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by P Retondo


  1. I just noticed some weirdness with WGR in 2013 SP1, in a set of files migrated from 2012. Updating an existing reference resulted in a whole series of naming conflicts. The conflicts were between resources in the target document ("Plan") and the same names that existed in the referenced document ("Kitchen") as "groups." Why there are hidden names of groups I don't know. I aborted the update, which did not cause a crash, and cured the problem by:

    1) deleted the reference to "Kitchen" in "Plan";

    2) deleted the circular reference in "Kitchen" that showed the floor plan layer from "Plan";

    3) recreated the reference to "Kitchen" in "Plan," no problem experienced;

    4) recreated reference to "Plan" in "Kitchen."

    So far, no problem with all that, and no naming conflicts.


  2. James, I don't think this is as simple as in AutoCAD, but you can delete a reference in the target file and choose to save the reference viewports and referenced resources. In the case of viewports, a new design layer is automatically created which contains the objects originally referenced instead of a viewport, and the layer in which the viewport existed still contains a viewport, but is internally linked to the newly-created design layer. Because of the new layers, one has to tweak visibilities to get things to show up correctly, but the material is essentially consolidated into a single file. I don't use this functionality, so I can't speak to other issues that lurk in the details.


  3. Improved walkthrough performance to a decent level by the following measures:

    1) changed NVIDIA settings from multiple monitor to single monitor and turned off anti-aliasing

    2) changed OpenGL settings in document to Med detail instead of High

    3) changed VW 3d preferences to midpoint for rotation and "always" for retain 3d model.


  4. Hi Peter, thanks, but don't you want to define the retaining edge BEFORE you update the site model? I'll try updating first and let you know if this works.

    Later: what happens if you update first is the terrain is warped to meet the undesired pad location instead of cutting vertically down to the pad.


  5. Does anyone have a handle on using pad with retaining edge with the "send to surface" command? From reading the documentation, I expect that the pad stays put and the retaining edge would go to the terrain surface. Sounds great, but I can't get anything to work. (Caveat, I am working with a site model originally created in v2012). When I select just the pad and go "send to surface," nothing happens. When I select the pad and the terrain model and go "send to surface," the pad and retaining edge don't move, and the whole site model moves down to some apparently random location. Pad is set to "modify proposed." Another caveat, I'm still working with SP1 until the WGR issue is resolved.

    :-( :-(


  6. Vincent, that is psychedelic. OpenGL is on acid. I haven't seen anything like that. It's just the jumping, the sporadic operation, the reversion to wireframe.

    I found out by accident that if you let a perspective view sit for a few minutes, Walkthrough will give you quite a few seconds of smooth navigation. I reckon this only happens with complex files, but the same project in v2012 was fine.


  7. I just converted a project from 2012 to 2013 and I'm noticing that OpenGL walkthrough is suddenly slow and exhibits strange behavior. It will update initially at like 1 frame per second (big jumps in space), then if I release the mouse and start again, it will be smooth and fluid for a second or so, then freeze and jump around again. I can repeat release and restart and usually get it to work for a second. Anyone else noticing this? I'm wondering if it's 2013 or something I did in my file. Since I never noticed the on-off smooth behavior before, I'm guessing that there's some kind of key frame or cache that's new in 2013.

    (I don't use OpenGL shadows, and changing resolution from high to low does not affect performance).

    VW2013 SP1

    Win 7 x64

    NVIDIA Quaddro 4000


  8. We used to trick data fields into accepting a paragraph return by copying the text in a text object, including a paragraph return, then pasting that into a data field window. If we do that with version 2012 though, the paragraph return is messy (.pdf prints it as a rectangle with an X through it). You can only see this in an exported .pdf, the rectangle doesn't display in VW.

    Thing is, in a file converted from 2010 to 2012, the paragraph returns in our data fields stay fine. It's only when we create a fresh one with our old method that a problem occurs. So that means there is some ASCI character that can create a clean paragraph return in a data field. Anyone know what that character is?


  9. Christiaan, you're probably already aware of the workaround - create a user field column, copy all the values from the type column to that column, then edit the cells you want to be outliers, and hide the original column and display your customized column in the schedule. So, in your example, the PIO would still be a casement type but the schedule could display "tilt-turn."

    Too bad we can't use the formula "= [cell]" in a schedule worksheet . . . or can we somehow? So much of worksheets is a mystery.


  10. We had a similar problem. It was caused by moving a section viewport containing keynotes from one sheetlayer to another. Using Christiann's method we were able to remove the corruption caused. It would be great if VW contained code to self-correct for this kind of thing.


  11. This seems pretty basic, but I haven't been able to find any discussion of this issue. We have a building plan that contains a referenced viewport for another building so we can see both in 3d views. The problem we are running into is that all the doors and windows for that referenced building are automatically showing up in our door and window schedules (although they show up, we can't do any editing since the worksheet reports that these objects are in another file). We don't want these objects from another building to be reported in our schedules - has anyone experienced this and have a solution? Seems like a bug to me.


  12. The animation tool, which I use frequently, seems not to have had any real attention for 15 years or more. I note that the progress information is now more stable, and persists throughout a multi-hour process, and that's good, but much more could be done. The following are my suggestions for revamping this tool, which does so much to leverage the value of 3d modeling for clients:

    1. Greater speed, speed, speed. From my perspective, it seems that greater efficiency in various algorithms could improve speed greatly. For example, it seems to me that the process begins to drag as the number of frames piles up, and other clues lead me to believe that the entire movie is being periodically saved to the hard drive. Instead, if the frames were individually saved and then assembled at the end of the process, a lot of redundant and time consuming processing could be eliminated.

    2. Better management of RAM. The program often stalls and crashes after 100 or 150 frames (even though with 6GB RAM and 1 TB hard drive, I never reach or come close to any hardware limits). I believe these crashes might have to do with memory management and if RAM were cleared of frame batches periodically, and that stuff written to the hard drive for later assembly, things might be more stable.

    3. Ability to pause an animation and take it up again from the pause point later!! This would be a tremendous boon.

    4. Fix the interrupts so that mouse input is accepted at any point in time, especially for systems where multiple processors / cores are being used, as is true for anyone who is seriously doing this kind of thing. We should not have to wait for some mysterious split second to cancel an animation.

    5. Improve the user interface for "along path" animations. It's odd, for example, that the total movie time is set in the initial window, and can't be modified when editing the path. Also, it's not good that the initial speed of movement for the first view point has to be zero. When patching together segments into a movie, that means that when you add a segment, your motion always jerks to a stop and accelerates from zero as you move into the next segment. We should be able to set the initial speed at any reasonable rate.

    6. Add the ability to rotate view in the "along path" setup. In other words, I want to be able to move to a point, look around, then move on. That is currently impossible, since if you go from a viewpoint looking one direction to another looking in another direction without translational movement, crazy things happen.

    7. Add the ability to capture a realtime walkthrough as an animation path.

    8. It drives me crazy that one has to render the initial scene in the desired rendering mode (taking many minutes in most cases), otherwise the movie won't be generated in the desired mode. That is something that we should be able to set as a preference, like in a sheet layer viewport. Also, it drives me doubly crazy that after doing that rendering, and selecting "create animation," the rendering process has to be done again! Wasting yet another set of minutes unnecessarily.

    9. When previewing a movie, get the animation setup windows out of the way so we can see the preview.

    10. Allow the user to save settings preferences (video codec, frame rate, etc.)


  13. A warning about using this preference: referenced DLVP walls do not respect the setting, except in one regard. Components will show up, but you can only snap to the outside edges of walls and endpoints of components. It took us 4 man hours trouble-shooting this problem, and finally discovered that "Hide details" was the culprit, not some kind of corruption or some other setting.


  14. Dave,

    These PIOs are converted from 2010, but are now in 2012. The door glazing contains TWO extrudes (therefore 4 surfaces), the windows ONE extrude. Hence, the darkened rendering behind the doors, and lighter behind windows (trying to paste in a graphic). You can verify this by converting these objects to groups and looking at the pieces.

    Doors_vs_windows.pdf

    Hence, the workaround suggested. BTW, if you can see this graphic, you'll also see the messed up transom window glazing. Strangely, this transom window problem only shows up as your viewpoint becomes more oblique. While you're fixing that, how about eliminating one of the door glazing extrudes? Or are those objects doubling as panels?

    Thanks for the heads-up on the shadows texture option. It did turn out that our legacy texture had shadows turned on, but we don't have the time right now to do the testing to see if that alone was responsible for more than doubling rendering time. Re: other comment, please note that it was the NEW texture that rendered faster, not the old one.

 

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.

×