P Retondo
-
Posts
1,914 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Marionette
Store
Posts posted by P Retondo
-
-
Also, "Volumetric Properties" (under Model tab in my setup), and "3d Properties" under "Machine Design".
-
Yes, Peter, that is exactly what I do as well! I guess we could try our hand at Marionette, but unless I have a lot more time on my hands that I expect, that isn't likely.
26 minutes ago, CipesDesign said:I can draw the sectional profile and extrude so much faster than the &^%$ dialog (one of the worst in VW's). So that is often what I do. The huge bummer is that the sill is not attached to the window!!
-
Don't get me wrong, I love parametric objects. But as the name implies - "parametric object" is a term straight out of coding - it is a software design concept, not an architectural (or engineering or theater design, etc,) design concept. The danger is that as designers we can be steered and nudged by the assumptions of the code engineer. At what point do the design professions become captives of categories and limitations imposed by engineers with a different set of experiences? CAD should expand our creative capability, not limit it! CAD saves enormous amounts of time and creates great efficiency, but it should not limit those economic incentives to a standardized design palette.
Speaking for myself - I know others might differ - I find the mind-body connection in design works best when I have a pencil or pen in hand, and I have complete freedom to engage with abstract form without the intervention of more mechanical concept containers. On the other hand, I want to go to 3d CAD as soon as possible to lock in precision and to look at things as they truly appear in 3d, as opposed to my hand-mind guesstimates. My ideal parametric object, to get to the point, would be one with a graphical interface. Take a stairs, for example. I really don't want to design from a window with pre-selected options and a tabular, sequential arrangement requiring the input of numbers & checkboxes. What I want is to draw the stairs in plan, then have the parametric take over to generate a 3d object that can then be edited with precision, allowing revision & further input as to tread thickness, tread overhang, construction type, etc. I can do that manually, so I reckon there is no reason a parametric object couldn't be designed which would do the same thing but way faster and with greater power with respect to revisions.
Another example: door and window sills. We shouldn't be limited to the sill assumptions of the VW window object, which are based on windows from the 19th century. The sill could be an extrude, defined graphically by the user and saved as a type, instead of by a sill input window with 7 or 8 confusing parameters. Same with window jambs, which almost never are rectangular prisms these days. I'm sure I could go on, including the limitations of door types, the fact that "overhead" doors are incorrectly modeled not to overlap with the jambs, etc., etc.
-
4
-
-
Tom, from experience, if you are working on an airplane, anything larger than 15" doesn't work too well. I also find it is very nice to have a touchscreen - just a personal preference.
-
On 11/21/2016 at 11:07 AM, line-weight said:
Sometimes - well, very often - I want to place something relative to the model's 0,0,0 instead of the layer's 0,0,0 or the Auto-hybrid's 0,0,0. That's all.
Yes, lineweight, I agree completely with your idea that there should be an option to paste in place either 1) relative to the Z–height settings of the layer being pasted to, or 2) relative to the Z height settings of the layer being pasted from. That way, in the case of 1) you could duplicate objects from one layer to another to replicate them on a different story, or 2) move objects from one layer to another without having to adjust their height.
-
1
-
-
I don't have time to read through this thread thoroughly, but to toss in my 2 cents' worth: 1 - "BIM" is a bit of a misnomer. What most people mean by "BIM" is 3-D modeling. Embedded information, which is the real meaning of BIM, is not seen on screen and the term seems to have nothing to do with the topic at hand, except to give it a certain cache. 2) Layers are for selective visibility, and getting rid of them would do away with a major capability of VW. Having both layers and classes gives us more control. I can't imagine anyone who really knows VW would seriously consider getting rid of layers. 3) I'd say that if you can't handle layers, just use one - except that you would lose the "story" capability. I find stories problematic anyway because when you paste an object from one to another, it doesn't account for the Z level baseline of the layer being pasted to, and appears at the wrong height. So I don't use stories, but from a logical point of view, as others have pointed out, it would be more sensible to tag objects as belonging to a story whereby they would augment their Z value by that story's height relative to the 0 datum. I can understand why VW engineers originally set up the story capability as linked to a layer, because that's how 2d was being done - different levels of a building were sorted by layer into separate floor plans, and this was being done before there were sheet layers.
I do agree with the basic premise that it could be possible to model the whole building on one layer if we had appropriate ways to output horizontal sections mapped to floor level sheets, and if there were a more logical way to handle the "story" parameter. At the same time, I for one would find it very inconvenient to be unable to isolate sets of objects by layer. It would get to be an unholy mess to see anything.
-
I group objects, then enter the group to get rid of the other distractions. Setting a working plane and "looking" at it is the way I've always worked. You can also save that working plane with a name to invoke it later.
-
Iso, here are the things I would check first: do you have this problem with other file types, especially in that same folder? Are the vectorworks files in question marked "read only" when you open the properties dialog box for the file? Create and save a new file to that same location in vectorworks – does that file have the problem? Do you possibly have an issue with an administrator name or password?
-
Andy, yes, you have me right – individual extrudes for individual pieces of wood so grain can be applied in the correct direction!
-
Some great advice in this thread, from different perspectives. Much appreciated!
-
Peter and Jonathan, thanks - the custom leaf is also incorrect, as you probably know, and the parameters can't be adjusted, so - right! Not the answer. And I agree completely about the grain direction issue, the only way to model a door or window correctly is to construct it from scratch and place it in a cased opening. Not sure if Windoor can handle these things, I used to have it, but didn't keep up.
PS: NNA, it would help if these parametric objects, when ungrouped, would break down into individual extrusions so that it would be easier to construct an object from scratch starting from your stock object. As it is, we don't have logical "pieces" after ungrouping.
-
1
-
-
jmartin, what you are looking for is the "Horizontal Text Alignment" option (see the OIP above). Select "Right," and your text will align properly to your leader. I don't know why there isn't an "Auto" option for that parameter so that leaders with text to the left could automatically align properly. It's a pain to have to enter that every time such a callout is created. It's only a problem with multi-line text, single line seems to align properly.
-
I've attached a file that shows the difference between the way VW models a panel door and the way it is actually constructed. These differences matter. Please consider re-working this PIO, along with a multitude of other PIOs which need consultation with real-world architects and manufacturers.
-
4
-
-
Alan, it sounds like it couldn't be an issue with the file or its location since you don't even get to the window where you would browse for a file? please let us know how this works out – I use import survey functionality all the time, and I'm still debating whether I should install my v2017 upgrade.
-
Alan, I always use "Remove Gaps" in the OIP - not sure if that was available before v2015.
-
The insertion point is the (0,0) point in your symbol edit space. Edit the symbol by moving it so that the desired insertion point is at (0,0) in that edit space.
-
3
-
-
I create layers for upper and lower wall trims, and just copy the objects to those layers I want to trim to. Not really a big problem, you don't have to move things back and forth that way.
-
Alan, my understanding of it is that the reference is automatically created when you create a viewport from an external file. So you get to save a step, I think.
-
Ben, it looks like you might be snapping to some hidden line - try isolating the problem the way Alan did with an unambiguous test. BTW, please include what version you are using! I haven't encountered your issue, but I haven't downloaded 2017, still working on 2016.
-
I guess these are hatches associated with a texture. In playing with this type of thing, I can see it makes a difference whether you have selected "Plane" or "Auto-align plane" in the Render tab of the OIP. "Auto-align plane" seems to line things up correctly, where "Plane" can put things out of whack.
-
Are these hatches or textures?
-
It makes a difference which wall you click on first. The wall you click on second in a capped L join runs through.
-
Bear, check class visibilities in your "base" file. Are there any differences between A/B and C? In the class settings of objects or of the DLVPs themselves?
-
I've had problems with auto hybrid objects, but I've heard on this forum that a lot of visibility issues have to do with the "cut plane elevation" setting. In tinkering with this object type, that setting remains mysterious i.e., I can't make an object below the cut plane disappear, but, like I say, allegedly it does something. You also have the key visibility options, 2d only, or 2d and 3d. There are also settings related to the class of the hybrid objects, and it can happen that an object appears on screen after it's been pasted, even though it's class is set to invisible, but once something is done it disappears. As a VW user for over 25 years, I still can't figure out why auto-hybrid was invented, but one thing is for sure - they require a lot more study and understanding than I've been willing to devote to them. A lot of manufacturers seem to favor these concoctions in their downloadable content, and it's been nothing but a pain.
I tend to think that Art probably has the right idea. In edit space, select all and press <ctrl+6> to see everything, that might clarify what is in the object.
How do I create detailed section ?!
in Architecture
Posted
Mohammad, Alan is correct (as always!), but for me it is less time-consuming to just draw the section in 2d based on the 3d geometry, which I take from the old "Cut 2d Section" tool. Otherwise you have to put in all the structure in 3d objects, and get the various class settings for the section viewport, etc., to be just right. Even then, the last time I tried it there were graphical shortcomings that didn't quite make the grade.