Jump to content

Samuel Derenboim

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


84 Excellent

1 Follower

Personal Information

  • Occupation
  • Location
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. As described. Working with roof drains is becoming a nightmare with the new edition of vectorworks. This is by far the buggiest, most unstable version vectorworks that has been released to date. 🤬
  2. Latest update broke roof line slopes when having graphics acceleration turned OFF. Techs have advised for previous updates, worksheets referenced via viewports disappeared with graphics acceleration turned ON. Either way , problem persists, and it is quite frustrating. Can anyone confirm they have similar problems?
  3. As shown above - revision cloud tool doesnt work from the native toolbar nor from the convert to object menu.
  4. I added another door size to Marvin patio door catalog and tried to modify Frame finish record. This consistently crashes vectorworks. This has been repeated multiple times, latest version of VW service pack 2. Are entries un-modifiable for catalog items?
  5. Hi everyone, I don't seem to be able to find a node that can create symbols. I did manage to find one that was written by domc, but it only creates a symbol in 3d space. Code is below. Is there any way i can modify the configuration so that the objects being inserted go to 2d space, not 3d? I am trying to create a marionette program that creates symbols from groups - that have certain records. There has been other ones that have been done with creating symbol by object name (including groups) but it only works on single objects, groups do not show up in the 2d annotation space, thus disappearing #DomC v001 @Marionette.NodeDefinition class Params(metaclass = Marionette.OrderedClass): By = 'DomC';import datetime; now = datetime.datetime.now(); y80f5 = now.year;m80f5 = now.month; d80f5 = now.day; h180f5 = now.hour; mi180f5 = now.minute; s180f5 = now.second; ms180f5 = now.microsecond; h280f5 = h180f5-12 if h180f5 >=13 else h180f5; VersionChange1 = str(y80f5)+' '+str(m80f5)+' '+str(d80f5); VersionChange2 = str(y80f5)+'-'+str(m80f5)+'-'+str(d80f5)+'-'+str(h280f5)+'-'+str(mi180f5); TextStatic = Marionette.OIPControl( By +' v'+VersionChange2, Marionette.WidgetType.TextStatic, "") this = Marionette.Node( "Create Symbol" ) this.SetDescription( 'Creates a new Symbol' ) h_obj = Marionette.PortIn(vs.Handle(0)) h_obj.SetDescription( "symbol content (one object) if empty, an empty 3D (3D Locus) symbol will be created" ) s_name = Marionette.PortIn('Symbol-1') s_name.SetDescription( "the symbol name" ) s_sym = Marionette.PortOut() s_sym.SetDescription( "the result symbol name" ) h_sym = Marionette.PortOut() h_sym.SetDescription( "handle to the newly created symbol" ) def RunNode(self): obj = self.Params.h_obj.value name = self.Params.s_name.value vs.BeginSym(name) vs.Locus3D(0,0,0) h = vs.LNewObj() vs.EndSym() vs.Marionette_DisposeObj(h) h_sym = vs.GetObject(name) vs.SetParent(obj, h_sym) vs.ResetObject(obj) vs.ResetObject(h_sym) self.Params.s_sym.value = name self.Params.h_sym.value = h_sym I think the problem lies with the create symbol node. See screenshots below. Seem like i just need a create symbol node with more properties, or just a 2d symbol node. 1. Design layer space 3d view space
  6. arquitextonica, there unfortunately (at least to my knowledge) isn't any whitepaper that would probably help you. Having said that, I've dealt with several very large buildings and was able to make it work. Here are a few recommendations i have done. I can also tell you what i plan to do better in the future 1. Referencing files into one master file is very important. One problem you will come across are stories - and your workflow needs to be be similar in every file. 2. Tagging wall objects/ floor objects/ window objects need to be done in the original reference file - not the master file. This is very important. 3. When working with worksheets, notes, etc... consider each portion of the set of buildings - as a separate building. Worksheets will not be able to be combined, nor will takeoffs. I still need to verify for myself whether or not worksheets can make take-offs for multiple reference files - not just the file it is in. Try this for yourself 4. Experimentation is key. If you have an idea, test it out on a test file to see if it works. You can start with the idea above. Create two different files with two different wall types, roof types etc... Then reference the two in a third "master" file and create a worksheet. Do both wall types show up in the schedule? 5. The master file should be able to have sheet layers. Be careful not to overdo it with the amount of sheet layers in the master file. If you can, split it into various sections. I for one split it into a. plans / rcps (000, 100 series), sections / elevations (200, 300 series), detail sections (400 series) and details overall (500 series) --- each with their own set of worksheets. Think about how you will create the set for each building on the block before you integrate it. This is very important if multiple people will work on the project as a whole. 6. Try to have a file that has all the wall types to be used between all the files separately - that way multiple users can access it. This will be useful when making takeoffs, needing to change wall types, floor types in different files with appropriate descriptions, UL #'s, R / U values, etc... 7. Create a master pdf set of documents in a separate directory for each sheet separately. This is important because rendering elevations and sections take a while. Doing each separately and combining them all (already pdf's) when needed will create a much quicker workflow. 8. If you have additional filing's to do like builder's pavement plans, site plans, do those in separate files as well - as a whole. They are much simpler, but with more complex mechanics when figuring out cut / fill, sidewalk elevations and slope percentages, curb cut depths, and grade / flood plane elevations. there some features that might not work in referenced files like : 1. if a file is reference with a column grid - I do not know if the column grid will show up in the section if the master file is referenced. 2. schedules / takeoffs in referenced files - still unknown. 3. do not tag wall types in reference files. It doesn't work. Its a major flaw in VW I'll add some more if i remember anything else. Hope this helps. As for your question above, classes and design layers are easily manageable in reference files. Just be consistent in the way you assign classes to wall styles, floor styles, window styles etc...If it is consistent, using the eye tool, you can eliminate or turn on elements in a drawing if you have to.
  7. That was why i used the analogy of the material type. Since it is already a "plugin" object - it should remember the custom class configurations as you saved it without having to add an additional record to the window or door. COBie is just one additional custom element. There are quite a few more - include UL designs, noise isolation class, impact rating, and / or other ANSI design categories fenestration need to comply with. Masterspec can be another for classification, perhaps closers or custom hardware for doors / windows. The list keeps going 🙂
  8. What would I think could be even more beneficial is if we can assign custom field information similar to the way material information can be called out. Those fields can be used a multitude number of ways not just limiting to cost code index. Below is an example screenshot for custom fields in a material. Would be great to have similar conditions for walls, windows, doors and floors. What do you think?
  9. Tags in vectorworks are a wonder. In 2021 release (i think ) VW gave us the ability to scale text in a tag - which is wonderful. Another feature that would be great to have is to add constraints to text if the text callout is word wrapped. This is needed because of the way tags are scaled. If the tag is scaled 2x or 3x, the constraints for wordwrap are also limited to the scale. Wordwrap would preferable by unconstrained , or at least an option inside of the tag text options (i.e. constrain some text, others unconstrained...similar to the location contraints in the tag edit configuration)
  10. I understand what you mean now. I've tried using the beam tool, but that's not easily modifiable in terms of depth. The slab tool has to be modified independently from levels in order to adjust its thickness as well. The only other thing i haven't tried would be to use geometry and tie its thickness / width / height to a tag. Not exactly the same thing, but maybe a close second? 🙂 Also, its important to note - the would only be one component in a slab tool that would be able to change in thickness, otherwise the tool would break...It wouldn't know how to distribute the thicknesses for multiple components.
  11. My understanding is that there are some components in a slab that would be relative to levels, others to be proprietary like the wall type below. Some are relative to levels, others to the slab. With a wall however, the thicknesses of components never change. Only their depth does - which isn't really called out on schedules. But what about slabs? When called out on a schedule and a component has different thicknesses, you would have the same slab type appear multiple times on a worksheet if it is to be summarized - however you cannot change any other parametric information like description, additives, etc... to it. This feature would mostly be limited to footings and step foundations, which would definitely be a time saver for sure - but there are are other tools that can do just the same without having to use the slab tool for structural elements. (of course this is an assumption on my part, is this what you would use it for?)
  12. Wouldn't that cause a problem with getting the parametric information to be consolidated for thicknesses in worksheets? otherwise a pretty nice idea
  13. Currently, when doing wall details for wall type components there are portions of a wall that need some extra graphic representation in order to differentiate all other wood stud wall types (i.e. ones with batt insulation, continuous insulation, etc..) or even a sound attenuation blanket. Sometimes the user needs to add extra information to the 'centerline' of a component. Currently, only each edge of a component can have a line type - right pen and left pen. This post is asking for a 'centerline' pen. The reason therebeing is because all other methods have severe limitations to workflow. Let me explain. Other options that are available are - Use specific hatches and / or use a tile. Granted, Tiling is a very useful function when working only with vectorworks. however, when sharing sections plans or elevations with consultants - tiles are converted to bitmaps which makes them useless in other programs. Therefore its use is unfortunately ruled out if working with consultants. There is also the use of different hatches representing different components. However, hatches are very difficult to create from scratch, and sometimes even imported hatch tiles that are complex (like batt insulation) or cumbersome. That is why the solution above comes to mind. Using a linetype is exportable, stable, and very easy to create with using a single backdrop for a core component material. Therefore, I thought of using a linetype as shown below: This however caused a problem when doing sections. If the component is 'flipped' - the right side can appear to be on the left side, and therefore it flips the linetype as shown below. The same thing can be done for slab components and roof components because the problem essentially is the same. Using linetypes in the centerline of a 'slab' component would be that much easier to represent. centerline of components even when flipped would generate a seamless linetype regardless of the side it is cut. Hence the request. Let me know what you think !
  14. It appears this function doesn't existing in VW2022? Do you think Marionette could help in this regard?
  15. Currently the select connected command can select connected objects that are not closed. What about specific 3d geometry that cannot be custom selected by texture or by hand. Can adjacent connecting objects be selected ? Here is an example image. Let's say I just wanted to select the connected geometry of the object circled in yellow. Is this possible? All geometric objects are not grouped.
  • Create New...