cberg

We do appreciate you listening. And sorry if I sounded crabby in the first post.

Here is a corrected version downloaded from BIM-Object and translated from Revit into VW Solids Geometry. Maybe somebody at VW can update their online catalogue resource so that others can download it. K-1155-Fixed.vwx

I've imported the Kohler K-1155 Corner tub into my model from Vectorworks Online Library, and this is what imports. I know corner tubs are not fashionable at the moment. And this model may not be manufactured any longer, but I need a placeholder of this size and shape, while I focus on other aspects of the project. It does highlight the sorry state of the architectural product libraries. I understand no manufacturers want to contribute to it.... Is there any way to clean this mesh up? K-1155.vwx

Has this fix been implemented in VW2026? Edit. It looks like it has. Now CW Panels / Glass can be set by class texture and made to be transparent in Shaded Render and Opaque in Hidden Line.

So. Switching the below attribute class from the wall class to None seems to reset the mullions to a thinner lineweight. My default wall class is fairly thick.

I brought a file that I had been working in VW25 into VW26 mostly to test how the elevations would look with Depth Cueing. And they look better. I did have a question about why Curtainwall Walls Show up as the do in 2d Plan. VW2025 - Looks as I would expect. VW 2026 - What do you think is going on to make the walls look like this? There's no rhyme or reason to the line weights here...

Part of the reason I use these legacy tools is that 3d solids do not support 2d fills. There is no way to convert solids into parametric objects, which is a huge problem in VW. And there is a clarity and simplicity to these tools that vanish when you try to make these tools do everything else BIM needs to do. If VW created a pathway from solids modeling to BIM, we could retire these problematic (from a development perspective), antiquated workflows.

I know VW wants to remove the floor. But please do not remove the floor.

I now see that the stipple tool has uses. As long as you don't remove the mullion or pillar, I am good with keeping. lol

I would remove the stipple tool, which just contributes to file performance issues.

The column tool is useful when you need "architectural" columns or possibly column covers. Most commercial architects don't use them because the structure is more honestly expressed and better served with other tools. However, in residential projects, the column tool is somewhat useful when you are trying to quickly model something vaguely historic. That said, the tool is extremely limited. It would be much better if it could be linked to symbols or an actual catalogue of real-world objects. Unless Vectorworks teams up with a classically trained Beax-Arts architect who excels in software engineering, the tool doesn't isn't useful much beyond schematic design.

@Matt Panzer when you are in the early stages of design, you don't want to think about styles, and setting up objects and using a library of pre-made parts. That's a Revit way of designing. And dare I say, not a VW approach. Vectorworks facilitates flexible workflows and easy transitions between ideas and the final built form. I want to be able to model things quickly (sometimes with solids, sometimes with parametrics), move them around, change their proportions or dimensions, and assess. You need a tool that's nimble. The column tool is deliberate, and that's being very nice. 😀

I use the mullion and pillar tools when I need a quick, parametric vertical object that supports hatches and fills in 2D plan views, such as a wooden post for a deck. It would be better if they could have top and bottom offsets. They should also be upgraded to support materials. Making them legacy would represent a lost opportunity. Columns require more effort to deploy because there are way too many options. 2D plan representation is fussy. And they are intended for structural or architectural elements that require greater consideration. (What's the steel shape? What's the taper of the column? Square, Round? That slows you down....)

The lowly mullion should be reconceived to serve as the vertical counterpart to a framing member. Call it a wood stud/post or a metal stud. Allow it to have heights and offsets like walls, so you can manually adjust in the OIP. If I am dreaming, it should also tilt vertically. Allow it to have different profiles (metal stud, & standard wood profiles); include optional 2D plan options to indicate wood (stud vs. vs blocking). Integrate it with a revamped framing tool. It's odd that the framer tools create parametric objects for the roof framer and generic solids for the wall framer. It's because there isn't a parametric option in the vertical plane, and the tool is ancient! Just my opinion: we need something faster than the column, which has too many options and dialogue boxes to use quickly. Columns are deliberate. Studs should be quick to lay down.

@Tom W. Our posts crossed... I was playing around with @nahekul's file.... If you don't need all the components to have a separate texture, you might be able to render by object and rotate the bottom texture as needed... texture rotation on slabs v2026.vwx