Jump to content

P Retondo

Member
  • Content Count

    1,806
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by P Retondo

  1. It's faster to do the methods I outlined instead of exporting and importing a .dwg. Otherwise, your workaround is fine (and creative!).
  2. Without getting into any questions of why you want to do this or what you are actually trying to accomplish, just taking at face value that you want to end up with 2d line versions of what you are seeing on screen: You can select the links and convert to lines (Modify->Convert copy to lines). This will not capture any 2d elements, only 3d objects such as walls and roofs. If you want to capture 2d elements as well, work with a viewport (i.e., create a viewport from the layer that contains your links). If you convert a copy of the viewport to lines, it will capture the 2d elements. If your viewport is at a scale different from the Sheet Layer scale (it usually is), you'll have to scale up the resulting group of lines by the inverse of the Viewport scale.
  3. P Retondo

    Hatch

    Mike, thanks, and thanks to mike m oz as well, for pointing out the usefulness of the Ceiling Grid tool. It works the way we wish the hatch attribute would work.
  4. Islandmon, your question is a significant one. At what point does viewport customization become a bureaucratic nightmare? We already have major control over what a viewport can do - perhaps what Christiaan would like should be done by more "traditional" VW methods? Is that a fair inference from your question? Christiaan and link, maybe you could offer us an example of a situation where you would want a hatch to appear in a viewport differently from the way it appears in a design layer.
  5. P Retondo

    Hatch

    I assume you are talking about assigning the hatch as a fill via the Attributes Palette. In that case, the hatch is applied in such a way that it aligns with a fixed point in space - so that if you move the object, the alignment of the hatch pattern to that object can change, while the hatch pattern itself remains stationary. It's as though there is a hatch pattern that fills the background of the drawing, and the object is a window looking out onto that endless hatch field. How do you set the "origin" of the hatch pattern applied in this way (the original question in this thread)? I'm not aware that can be done without a tedious process of editing all the levels in the hatch.
  6. May be an Architect package item: Tool sets->Dims/Notes->Date Stamp
  7. Depending on what version you have, this could be the corrupted workspace problem. If you have a custom workspace, move it to your desktop, deleting it from your workspace folder, and then try to boot the program. If it now boots, you know that was your problem.
  8. Currently if we use the hatch command, as opposed to using the Attributes palette to apply the hatch, we can control the "origin" by where we click in the object to be filled. The method I often use is to apply the hatch at a particular point, note how I'd rather apply it by drawing a rectangle, and offset my click point by that distance. It would be great if we could have the ability to control the insertion point of hatches applied by Attribute Palette. Specifically, if there were "offset" fields for a hatch, and if those fields could input numbers based on a vector (e.g., two clicks at the corners of my rectangle), we would have convenient control over how hatches are applied.
  9. P Retondo

    Hatch

    If you use the hatch command, as opposed to using the Attributes palette to apply the hatch, you can control the "origin" by where you click in the object to be filled. Just apply the hatch at a particular point, note how you'd rather apply it by drawing a rectangle, and offset your click point by that distance. By the way, it would be great if we had the ability to control the insertion point of hatches applied by Attribute Palette. Specifically, if there were "offset" fields for a hatch, and if those fields could input numbers based on a vector (e.g., two clicks at the corners of my rectangle), we would have convenient control over how hatches are applied.
  10. Katie, I believe the request is for something that would automatically create the graphics shown on the right in this image of two walls of different thickness: It's pretty easy to add a line or two to do this, so I personally don't feel a great urgency about it. More important, perhaps, would be to get outer cavities to wrap around the ends of walls, and, in this case, to wrap through the change in thickness:
  11. Don, for example, if I have 1/2" ply and 7/8" stucco, I often create a 1 3/8" outer cavity with a stucco texture for rendering. VW will snap to the line between outer and inner cavities for dimensioning to face of stud.
  12. This would be very helpful. By the way, if you carefully place a locus at the apparent intersection of the axes, it will almost always appear at (0,0), and then you can snap to that.
  13. It would be great to be able to define the rotation of a texture assigned to a class. This is particularly crucial when using PIO objects that can take their textures only from a part class assignment.
  14. JC, agree with 1 and 4, although 1 is already possible to work around. Regarding 3, you can align walls when changing the thickness if you use the wall type capability, and change the type in the OIP (not sure if this works in version 11). I would disagree with the idea of 2 - you can't ask the program to change the mathematical description of a CAD entity based on an appearance factor! Well, you could ask for that, but the implementation would create a disaster!
  15. I often combine my wall cladding elements into one wall component, so that with cavities or components displayed I see only the outer line of the wall and the stud line. There isn't any 3d modeling advantage in showing hidden components within walls, such as the boundary between sheathing and outer cladding. As noted above, viewports will allow you to choose between displaying components or not. An easy workaround is to do all your dimensioning in the viewport annotation space with components visible, then turn off visibility of components for the final plot version. Then you can dimension to face of stud. At 1/4" scale, you can't really see the component lines anyway, even if they are displayed.
  16. Francois, thanks, but the scenario you describe was not the issue. The bug I reported has been confirmed and, hopefully, will be fixed soon.
  17. Marietta, word is that NNA is working on providing the ability to rotate coordinate systems in an upcoming release. Right now, you can't easily do it, though there are workarounds - for example, you can create a layer link of your survey in your design layer, and rotate it so that it aligns the way you want.
  18. Mclaugh, I have to disagree with you about the usefulness of taking a reading based on comments here. Further, complaints are not linearly proportional to the size of the user base. Users who have read about an instability issue in a thread here are not likely to immediately repeat the complaint, therefore the volume of complaints is damped once they are voiced. I now regularly skip threads regarding crashing on the Mac OS because there is nothing I can learn or contribute on those issues - and there are quite a number of those, compared to crashes in Windows. I have nothing against the Mac product or systems, and it doesn't mean I wouldn't consider purchasing a Mac. But I think my earlier statement is a fair and considered observation based on a number of years' participation on the board. BTW, my wife is not nearly as sanguine regarding Dell computers. She uses a Dell laptop (Inspiron) that has had quite a number of problems.
  19. Eric, again, it would be easier to advise if you could tell us more about what you are trying to do. Based on my experience with both programs, I don't think you are going to find what you are hoping in VectorWorks. The polyline tool can't be made to work by dragging in a direction, enter number, click and drag in another direction, type one key and <enter> to change modes, etc. It just isn't set up to be used as productively as ACAD's tool. On the other hand, you can do some of these operations using the VW polyline tool - it just takes a little more effort to tab through the data fields (at the top of the screen) to get to the "L" field, or if you are working orthogonally, you can tab fewer times to use the "x" or "y" fields. Changing modes (straight, arc, etc.) is accomplished by hitting the "U" key. The biggest drawback is that you can't control the radius of an arc easily, or its other characteristics. On the other hand, I would challenge anyone to get results faster in AutoCAD when compared against using methods more "native" to VW. For example, the following polyline was constructed using the "Add Surface" tool very quickly: Similarly, you can draw lines and arcs and combine them into a polyline using the "Compose" tool. These are the methods I use most often, and having used both programs, I definitely prefer the more intuitive and additive processes that work best in VW. These processes are more flexible for designers, as opposed to the data-entry orientation of the ACAD polyline tool.
  20. You can stretch a rotated rectangle using the 2d Reshape tool. Click on the center of a side and drag. Look for the "perpendicular" or sometimes "parallel" cue to know that you are stretching it orthogonally. Enter a distance in the "L" field of the data tab if you want to stretch it a particular distance. I believe that the rectangle is an object defined by two points in VW's geometry core (my speculation). If true, asking them to change the definition might create much more trouble than it is worth, as many other modules of the code are likely dependent on that definition.
  21. "BIM" stands for Building Information Management, more of a database concept than an CAD design and visualization idea. But if you are asking, why can't VW do what ArchiCAD, and maybe Revit, can do with "live sections". . . we've been wondering that for a while. Suffice it to say that VW is making enormous progress towards something that much more expensive programs got to first. To expand on the use of the Section Viewport, many of us work in 2d atop the "live" section to make the graphics more acceptable. One can do this in the annotation space using constructed 2d objects. We can also use the "2d Section" tool (add this to your workspace using the workspace editor) to get the boundaries of all cut 3d objects - or you can convert a copy of the Viewport to lines and scale it up by the inverse of the Viewport's scale.

 

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...