cberg

For those who are more landscape design capable.... Is there a trick to importing a georeferenced tiff image into VW? I know the tile is 10,000' x 10,000', per the GIS xml data (attached), so I was able to scale the image manually. I tried setting the document units to Survey Feet and Meters. Per VW Help... https://app-help.vectorworks.net/2021/eng/VW2021_Guide/Import/Importing_georeferenced_images.htm Both times the resultant image scaled at 1111.11' When I imported the image in QGIS, it came in perfectly, so I know the file works. It is too big to post. Also the image color is better. Geospatial xml data is attached for reference. VW Import Result (Scaled and Rotated) QGIS Import (Looks a lot nicer) 40001400PAS_PEMA_2022-fin.pdf

Maybe a different approach.... The AEC Roof Framer tool is an alternate way to model standing seam roof. I find playing around with RW textures somewhat hit or miss, and the results usually look a little flatter than I would like. Set the framing to .25" x 1" (6mm x 25mm) and move to the top of the roof face.

Thank you all. I will investigate all methods above. @jmcewen The production manager was looking into notching the bottom of the rail to help the fitters know where to place the vertical posts. The cuts save a lot of layout math/time). And since the steel pieces are now cut automatically, it's not that hard to deliver the bottom notches, provided I can deliver a proper STP file shape. (We are experimenting...). But the split tool method is intriguing. @Jeff Prince I had started this model with the pipe thickness extruded / extrude along path, which was maybe the start of the problem. Starting with a solid extrude may have made this job easier. @VIRTUALENVIRONS I will think about your zero thickness solution.

I want the result to look like the two pipes on the right of the image above. I have not figured out how to achieve that using the geometry highlighted in orange. To fabricate the rails you would notch the bottom of the top rail, and create a cutout "fish mouth" for the vertical post. The only way I can do this, is to rebuild each rail section with a solid throwaway piece. I was wondering whether there was another command that I wasn't considering.

What is the best (quickest) way to "cut out" these sections of pipe so that the cuts make sense from a fabrication point of view. If I use any of the booleen solids commands, I get leftover pieces of geometry which are not easily cleaned up. I can make solids that correspond to the pipe shapes that can act as cutout geometry. But that's a lot of extra 3D work. Just curious how others would approach this type of modeling situation. There has to be something i am not considering. Pipe Cutouts.vwx

@Tom W. Just curious. How do you use materials, and exactly how do you consider them to be a game changer? I know they exist but I certainly do not make much use of them. When they came out I thought that the materials container would allow you to separate fill attributes from section cut graphics. For example you could have a steel piece cut in section with a hatch but showing solid in plan. When I realized that’s not how materials worked, I sort of lost interest…

@Jeff Prince VW is looking to expand its presence beyond the current (mostly captive) user base. You and I have a pretty good inkling of what will be in the new release, and we can always click on one of the links above. (Using a VPN and deleting cookies afterwards, if need be...)

@Ruby S Your explanation is very helpful. I have often clicked on the cards to read more about a given roadmap topic. Sometimes, I want to provide feedback. However, the feedback section felt less inviting. Now that I understand VW's logic, I might comment on one or two. It would be great if you could link the feedback section to our Forum ID, where most of us have a more established presence.

@E|FA Thanks I did not see this. @E|FA Thanks, I did not see this. "Not Important" might be more neutral than a dislike/downvote button. But it sounds like the VW development team wants us to use the "Nice to Have" category, which seems much less straightforward/honest. I still think the feedback should be sorted by industry discipline. That way, VW might see that the modernization of the wall tool, for example, might be more important to its architect users than the implementation of an IFC Construction Classification system. (Theoretical example) More direct feedback would be especially important in the In Development / Active Research phases. It would be useful to periodically get some VW feedback regarding the user-generated responses. "We heard what you said, and we are prioritizing this in our next releases..."

When I preview the Roadmap, some improvements are more interesting than others. However, the feedback section seems skewed toward validating a specific result. I wondered why the VW Roadmap feedback form does not include a “Not Important” category. Certainly, VW might want to structure the questionnaire to prevent different VW user groups from down-voting topics that may not be relevant. For example, I do not know what a GDTF file is, nor do I ever generate MVR reports. This could be solved by asking what version of VW you use or what industry you primarily work in. I am also not sure why you need a name and email to provide feedback. Often, folks are leery about providing this information.

Thanks @bcd I do try to search for things before posting. But I struggle with VW search function. Eventually, I did find this wish list thread... Interestingly no VW employee responded regarding why it was removed. I wonder if anybody at VW saw this.

VW 2023 used to have a look at Working Plane Shortcut/Button in the top toolbar. VW put this command behind a pulldown menu (alternately in the Right Click - Document Context Menu). Is there any way to get this back into the top toolbar? There are times when you really a one-click solution....

Does VW disappear or gray out? Sometimes the application grays out and appears when a pop up dialogue box is open somewhere, possibly off screen. It might appear that VW is not responding. if you are working on multiple monitors what happens when you unplug and gather all the windows to the primary computer display? Can you quit (as opposed to force quit) using command + w? if you haven’t already done so, you may want to turn off the confirm before auto save setting off. I vaguely remember having those sorts of issues a long time ago when I had that setting turned on.

Sigh... Service pack 6 and this bug has not been fixed.

That makes a lot of sense. Everything is built off the walls (as you would from a construction perspective). I like the idea of developing a interiors/finishes layer to help manage the 3d Information.

@GregG Very elegant models. I have a lot to learn design-wise. I am curious how you organize the model.... Regarding your file.... Do you do all solids modeling or do you use walls + whatever it takes? I like walls for a bunch of reasons, and I like them as parametric objects. However.... they don't play well with solid modeling. A few observations... Walls + Solids, for example, cannot be joined into an autohybrid; and autohybrids are hard to edit once made. If you add solids to the wall, then it becomes a nightmare to edit or move the wall. Wall features don't turn corners. Mouldings objects are already hybridized, so they dont join up with other solid objects. Do you put all the trim on classes or layers? C

I am interested in learning how folks organize architectural projects with lots of architectural woodwork and trim from a BIM perspective. I tend to build and class the walls, by construction phase—New, Existing, Demolition. The trim is then developed as a set of add-on features. I class woodwork according to whether it wants to be on or off in plan/RCP. (A_Trim Doors, Wall, Ceiling Trim, Base, etc). Ideally, walls would act as a container to help manage all this architectural detail. But for whatever reason, they do not. (Walls need some serious modernization.) I’m curious to know how others would tackle a project like this. The photo below describes the type of space I’m currently looking to document. @Paolo Your Mouldings Plugin is a must for this type of work... Thank you!

@Jonathan Pickup It takes a lot of effort to keep 2d plan/rcp sheets free and clear of 3d junk. Adding 3d detail can wreak havoc on plans or have unintended consequences elsewhere in a set. Going back through a set to make sure nothing was messed up is more tedious than switching out changed PDF sheets. (my opinion only).

Unfortunately version control is best managed at the PDF level not the BIM model. (For the reasons you describe.) Tedious as it may be, managing PDFs manually (option 2B) is the only failsafe solution. At the end of the day the primary deliverable is still the PDF drawing set. Archive your model after each release. So you can preserve the model at a given point in time.

Are there any answers to this question?

It looks like this was submitted as a wish list request in 2014, but it was probably not implemented.

Is there any way to show the slope dimension in fractions instead of decimals?

Thanks Pat. I think I've mostly gotten this to work.

10.5 years later.... Is there any way to control dashed hidden line thickness?

If you don't mind, I will send to you directly, because there is client sensitive info in the files. C.