Jump to content

P Retondo

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by P Retondo

  1. This sounds like a memory leak to me. Pete, that was a good set of tests and observations. What is strange is that others who have been using this program with similar systems haven't reported the problem. So we need to give Katie all the information and cooperation we can to help isolate the cause. Don't lose hope! I reported a 2008 slowness issue regarding Viewports, and NNA engineers got right on it and solved the problem.

  2. Re: the screen flickering comments, I've experienced something like this as indicated above, but not to the degree some are reporting. So it seems to me that this is a complex situation that might have as much to do with the particular system as with the program itself. I would encourage everyone to post more complete system details. Mine:

    VW 12.5.2 and 2008; WinXP pro x64; Intel CoreDuo 3.2 Ghz; 2 GB RAM; NVIDIA quadro FX 3450/4000 w/ driver

    revit, in my mind your credibility is suspect because of the tone of your posts. I looked at the RA link, and Revit wasn't mentioned. Normally I'd just ignore comments like this, but in past posts you have shown some signs of being more serious.

    I've never used Revit, so I can't comment on the substance, but I have a hard time sorting out your complaint. How about giving us some specifics, such as how long you used Revit and in what context, how long you've worked with VW, and what your detailed comparison is? That would be useful. Crude language, **** or not, is uninformative.

  3. By "blinking monitor" do you mean that the VW window header and the little icons in the upper right seem to blink multiple times when doing certain operations? That is what I am seeing, and I'm waiting to get a good fix on it before submitting a report.

    Because this only seems to happen with complex projects with large filesize, my theory is that there is some kind of memory management going on in the background, and that the program is loading and unloading modules & resources in order to keep total RAM down. Or it could be as simple as some function call repeatedly asking for a window redraw.

    In either case, this needs to be re-engineered. As users, of course, we're more-or-less in the dark about the causes. The best we can do is give very detailed information to NNA. I think Katie is a good person to describe the problem to.

  4. Doesn't really contradict what Katie says. But I've never really been sure what the meaning of a "lineweight," etc., would be for a container object.

    BTW, it's not the active class attributes that would count, it's the class to which the object is assigned (could be one and the same unless the symbol was created to be assigned to a particular class when placed). You probably knew that.

    This does work the way you want it to, if the objects within the symbol are created as you normally do ("use class" for everything), and then you convert the symbol to a group and change the classes of the contained objects.

  5. Andy, my impression is that STEP is not the current favored file format. It was always intended to do much more than IGES, which was mainly for geometric characteristics where STEP was intended to be a BIM-type standard. I'm not sure that enough people are on board with STEP to make it a real standard.

    Maybe someone who knows more than I do about STEP vs. IFC could comment.

  6. You can try converting your plane to a NURBS surface, then create a NURBS "box" by converting an extrusion at your boundary to NURBS surfaces. Then use the Connect/Combine tool to extend the plane to the boundary surfaces. This is a bit fussy, and sometimes doesn't succeed. The DTM method can take more time, but is more certain to give good results.

  7. I wish there were a utility that could copy keyboard shortcut preferences from one version to another, or to restore them after reinstalling VW. AutoCAD stores these "alias" settings in a text file, and it seems to me that since this is such a simple thing it would be possible to extract the shortcuts from one workspace so that they could be imported into another. And if NNA want to go all the way with this, having a mini app that could convert the whole workspace on upgrading - that would be even better.

  8. Look at your model in elevation, and take a 2d section (Model -> Cut 2D Section) at the desired height. You can use this to construct a view of the roof in 2d, or you can use it to create a mask to use in annotation space to obscure portions of the roof you don't want to see. That roof viewport is placed below the 2nd story plan viewport on your sheet layer (just duplicate your plan viewport, change the layer settings to show the roof, add mask in annotation space, and send it back).

    I don't think there is an easier way to do this. Unfortunately, we can't create a section viewport that cuts through the building on a horizontal plane.

  9. This behavior with 2d reshape is just a fact of life. It's annoying, but eventually you will get used to having to hold the mouse button down until you arrive at the desired point.

    Until you mentioned the connection with using the marquee to drag several vertices, I never realized that this is what triggers the behavior. Good observation! I'm pretty sure this is a bug. It is still present in v2008, and I will report it.

  10. Robert, I looked at the ungrouped cabinet, and sure enough, as you say and as revit kept insisting, there are multiple extrudes based on two identical rectangular polygons. I'm left to wonder why in the world a rectangular prism would be constructed from a multiple extrude. Revit, you'll have to pardon me for assuming that an object such as a piece of a cabinet face frame, most logically constructed from an extrude, would actually be an extrude.

    Multiple extrudes are commonly used to create objects such as this:


    BTW, for my purposes and I think this would be true for others, a cabinet face frame would be best constructed by extruding a polygon that models the entire frame, e.g.:


    The joints between pieces are commonly not shown on interior elevations, and if they are, are best depicted by very light, secondary lines. Having the heavy joint lines show up in elevations based on a section viewports makes the drawings look clumsy and unprofessional, so I always have to trace to get usable cabinet elevations (for this among other reasons).

    Although . . . if we could suppress the display of selected 3d object edges, and the joints did not then show in elevation in hidden line view, we could then be more sophisticated in how textures are applied. In particular, we could have the PIOs align textures in such a way that wood grain could be properly oriented. That would be the ultimate kind of 3d object. The same logic applies to door frames, jambs, etc.

  11. revit, again, what you are calling "multiple extrudes" are probably solid additions or solid subtractions.

    When you ungroup a PIO, it becomes a group of solids (or 2d objects, if you are ungrouping it in Top/Plan view). These are "ordinary" objects that can be edited like any other object of their type. The nature of the objects has been determined by the engineer that designed the PIO.

    Petri, I don't share your feelings about extrudes. To me they are the most fundamental 3d object, easily edited, and rely on the hybrid 2d/3d interface that I think is one of VW's greatest strengths. So I would prefer all PIO objects to be designed as extrudes wherever possible, and I don't see the point of having a set of window muntins or a joist, for example, be anything else. A window sill with "horns" - yes, a solid subtraction would be the way to go. Never a mesh object or a generic 3d solid!

  12. Petri is absolutely right about the need to ungroup ("explode" is an AutoCAD word!) PIOs to customize instances in certain situations.

    It would be good if NNA engineers recognized the usefulness of this process, and made components of PIOs easily editable. For myself, I find that extrudes and boolean combinations of extrudes are the easiest objects to edit in most situations, but for some reason some PIOs ungroup into generic solids that are difficult to edit.

    A good example is the creation of specially-shaped windows. VW could not possibly anticipate all the needs of designers with respect to the shape and configuration of window and door parts. My practice would be to use the PIO to get something close, then convert to a symbol, then ungroup the PIO in the symbol and edit the part. Would be, that is, if the parts of the window were logically constructed of easily modifiable extrudes.

    Another example is the current incarnation of the cabinet PIO. It is limited to two doors per cabinet, which makes life difficult when extra lines appear in interior elevations, as a result of having to cobble together a line of cabinets from the PIO. Being able to ungroup the cabinet and then tweak its objects would be the best way to deal with the tool's current limitations.

    PS, revit, "multiple extrude" is a specific object that creates a tapered extrude. I think you meant to say something else.


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...