Jump to content

P Retondo

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by P Retondo

  1. Anyone have any quick guidance about how to change the 2d objects view preference in Unified View Options via a VS routine that can be invoked with a keyboard command? I wish there were a macro utility that could capture VW commands and automatically transform them into VS language the way Excel can with Visual Basic.
  2. You can create a worksheet function. Assign a class to the lines you want to total, and create a worksheet cell with the following definition: =LENGTH((C='[classname]'))
  3. Starting with this roof: Ungroup, draw a polygon in plan that encompases A and C up to the hip of B. Get rid of A and C and edit B to incorporate that polygon. Then you end up with this: Faces B and D do not join at a hip. To fix this, join D to B using the same "Join" tool used to join two lines Click D, click B, and get this:
  4. Boh has the geometry basically correct. To fix this: If your roof planes are not already separate objects, ungroup the roof object so that it is a set of roof planes. Then make a polygon that outlines the edges of your roof A, bearing in mind that it will extend beyond the eave of roof B as Boh illustrates. Then double-click on B, paste-in-place your polygon and add the two. Then, after exiting the roof plane edit space, join all your roof planes using the "Join" command. The roof tool isn't designed to automatically generate a roof of this shape. If you start with a polygon, it will assume that you want all your fascias to be at the same height, and will add a valley and extra plane at the intersection of A and B. You have to go through the plane editing process every time you want to create a roof like this. I always start with a simple rectangle, get a hip roof, ungroup, and edit the planes. If you do it that way, you won't usually have to join planes, they will already be aligned correctly.
  5. Wes, I actually construct my wall components in the way you do. I did a little experiment, and found that ONLY if you disable all of the component classes do you get an acceptable result. The image below shows (top): all component classes disabled, and I added a gray fill to your wall class; (middle): just siding and interior finish component classes disabled; and (bottom): no classes disabled. Although I think your suggestion is workable in most cases, I often apply the component classes to other objects in order to quickly assign the class attributes, and those objects will disappear if I follow your method. And besides, I still argue that the previous "show components" as a viewport option was easier and worked just fine the way it was.
  6. I just jumped from 2017 to 2020. I haven't experienced the problem you have observed, but I seldom use hidden line rendering and have spent only an hour or two using v2019. The best way to deal with top/plan view with this kind of object is just as you say, to create a hybrid 2d/3d symbol. A quick way to do that is to convert a copy of your 3d object, either directly to polygons or by composing a convert-copy-to-lines, and applying a fill.
  7. My guess is that it's a bug or software limitation. If I were you, I'd do that unrendered portion as a separate rail and call it a day!
  8. I've been using VW since 1994 MiniCAD. The original genius behind Vectorworks was Richard Diehl, who had this great idea of hybrid objects that showed elements in traditional plan view, but also intrinsically contained all the information to be displayed in a 3D view. As far as I know, he was the originator of that idea. When Richard sold the company, and even before that, he handed over design to engineers who, in my humble opinion, have not respected the pure genius of his original idea and have cluttered the software with their own less focused ideas. It is what it is, you won't ever "rip the lid off it."
  9. Wes, I used to uncheck "show components" in Viewport advanced preferences. I don't want to eliminate all the components or turn off classes, I just don't want to see components at 1/4". So that is a big change, and the "low, medium, high" detail settings are not at all the same. BTW, if I turn off component classes, things like gyp bd and sheathing just disappear, and all we see is the wall framing component. Sorry, but to me this is just one more example of VW sloppy engineering and lack of consideration for the professionals to whom their software is supposed to deliver for my yearly payments! For example, viewport at "medium": Same viewport at "low", missing door double line, jambs, and French doors in closed position: Unacceptable!
  10. Thanks, Mark - I double checked, and my Unified View settings include displaying screen and plane objects. Tried "active layer only" both ways, no difference. Pat, the more I think about it, the behavior of screen 2d objects in 3d edit space is probably a bug. Try it.
  11. Pat, thanks for chiming in. Following your suggestion, if I change my 2d preferences to "Working Plane Only," I can create a 2d object in the 3d edit space that persists as a "Symbol Definition" type (just the fact that this additional 2d object type exists is a red flag! Kluge!). If I use my standard "Screen Plane Only" preference, the object immediately disappears and is visible as part of the 2d symbol. If this difference in the result depends on 2d object preferences, I'd call it a programming oversight. If a Layer Plane object can be automatically converted to "Symbol Definition" type, so could a Screen Plane object. I can't get an extrude to persist in 2d edit space - that's where I can't replicate what you are getting. It immediately disappears, and shows up in the 3d symbol. It actually disappears even before I complete the extrude operation. I don't understand why the "old way" had to be changed - if it ain't broke, don't fix it!
  12. As I use 2020, more disappointments. Editing 3d portions of hybrid symbols is impossible, you have to create the object outside the symbol edit space, then paste it in. Can't turn off wall components in Sheet viewports without losing important door and wall graphics. Based on these alone, I wish I had stayed with 2017. I just have to wonder whether the engineers consult with actual architects when they make these changes, changes that in my opinion have no plus side. Hoping to find the silver lining promised by one of my trusted VW compatriots!
  13. It's not the answer you want to hear, but I create a NURBS curve for the entire handrail and extrude-along-path. The system I use is to draw lines at the appropriate height in each elevation, convert to NURBS, draw arcs from above and convert to NURBS, reposition things so endpoints align (you can also join), then compose into a single NURBS. After extruding, edit the profile and reposition it - in your case, make sure the center of the circle is at 0,0. Example of a railing created by this method:
  14. The new system for hiding wall components (low / medium / high detail) is a big step backwards, unless I don't understand something. With low detail, much of my door and window graphics disappear along with the components! Bad. Is there any way I can just turn off wall components like we used to be able to do?
  15. In the past, I have created hybrid symbols by converting the 2d objects to a symbol, then creating the 3d version in the 2d edit space. Then the different modes automatically separate themselves. With v2020, I can no longer do that. As soon as I create a 3d object in the 2d edit space, it disappears. I can no longer put together a 3d object from parts, add and subtract them, then exit the 2d space. Nor can I add to a 3d object it its edit space, since every time I create a 2d object for an extrude it disappears. Very disappointing lack of understanding on the part of VW engineers regarding our typical workflows. Or am I missing something? And now we have the highly complex "component" system for hybrid objects. Not worth the time to get into that, in my opinion. Is there any way to opt out of that?
  16. After consulting with tech support and doing a lot of testing, it seems like this is a combination of font, object fill, and GDI+imaging. What the image shows is my preferred font (Tekton Pro, which is an .otf font) superimposed on Arial, which is a default font that appears when Tekton won't display properly. There has been a problem for several years with GDI and Tekton, and I've heard, all .otf fonts. Turn on GDI, and Tekton is rendered as Arial. Why both of them appear in this circumstance is a mystery, but there it is. The fix is to create the animation with "None" class set to solid fill. For some reason, the problem doesn't occur with those settings. To add to the confusion, the fix does not work in my file, which was converted from vw2017 to vw2020. So for this file I am changing my default font to a non-.otf font for solar animations.
  17. The good news so far: they fixed the problem with 2d object type preferences changing when editing a Sheet Layer viewport crop! The bad news: many more crashes, pretty unstable for a SP3. A bit slower than the version I have been using for a while, 2017. Not driving me crazy, but I will update this post as I go along.
  18. Anyone have a solution to doubled text in a solar animation time-title? Looks like this: It looks like the text is casting a shadow., but there is no object actually below the left 80% of the text. BTW, I attempted to search for community posts on the topic "Heliodyne AND 2020 AND solar animation." It returned something like 180,000 items. Someone needs to fix the search engine on this board!
  19. I haven't downloaded versions of VW that I have purchased since 2017. Can someone tell me from experience whether the window PIO has been improved since 2017? For example, when we create a casement window in 2017 (and previous versions), the sash is placed at the center of the jamb. No casement window in the world is built that way. Just one example out of dozens of shortcomings. Any joy in 2020?
  20. Glad you agree! You may recall a thread a while back where users tackled the question of how to draw an arc tangent to given points on two circles. We found a solution and proof to that problem, and though we can construct such an arc using techniques similar to how you typically draw tangent lines, it escapes me why these basic calculations can't be reliably incorporated into VW tools. BTW, although I find that the problem that started this thread does not exist for me in v2017, Mike has found that it does. So something a bit arcane is going on.
  21. Kevin, do you really think this is acceptable? Tangency geometry is pretty straightforward, you could construct a bulletproof algorithm in less than an hour. I just think there is some careless engineering going on.
  22. In the version I'm currently using (2017), tangents behave properly with respect to being 90d from the corresponding radius line. The only odd thing is that when snapping to the end point of a horizontal line, the tangency sometimes flips 180, and I have to use the <alt> key to get it to snap to a point on the other side of the circle. Maybe something was fixed incorrectly between then & now? By the way, the reason I haven't installed my 2020 version is that I keep hearing about problems with v2020, and no fixes to longstanding problems or deficiencies that make it worth the effort to switch. I'm pretty sure I'm dropping out of Service Select and upgrades this year. Any advice to the contrary would be appreciated! VW v2017 SP5 Win 7 x64
  23. Let me add, multi-track sliding doors with lapping stiles. This standard door type has been available for more than 30 years. As far as I know, not possible with VW2017 (I have later versions, but never use them because there is no incentive to do so).
  • Create New...