Joe-SA

It is not too difficult to put your WinDoor PIO into a symbol and add a separate classed 3d object where you need it . I have done this in the past with custom muttin patterns that the PIO can't make on its own such as diamonds. Not ideal but workable. Joe

I have experienced this. I think its a bug. I'm going from memory now but I think it came about jumping back and forth from 2d to 3d views. I was able to fix it by regenerating the plug-in or entering and exiting the symbols. Perhaps it was regen from the 3d view. At any rate, it was annoying but by fiddling with I was able to make them go away. If I recall, however, the problem often would re-occur and I had to keep an eye on them before any plots. I never did find a specific cause. I haven't had the problem for a year or two now.

Its been a long time since I did animations but I would suspect its ram or free hard drive space related. Your hard drive needs to store all of those renderings and then link them all together into one single animation. Someone with more recent experience might be able to give you more detail. When I used to do animations and ran into these types of issues we ended up using Virtual Reality Panoramas. (I'm talking 12+ years ago). Since you are already doing a 360 degree animation this might work better for you. If you are not familiar with them they are a single rendering that wraps the full 360 degrees around a single point. When you view the VR Panorama it is interactive and you can control panning left and right and a little bit up and down. You can then link these points together so you can 'step' through a large model. I once created an elaborate VR Panorama that had numerous view points inside and outside the model..maybe 12. Your cursor changes when it is over a VR point within the rendering and when you pick it you jump to the next point. You could tour the whole building and it only took 12 renderings instead of 20 renderings p/sec over the course of a couple minutes. (we did that too with the same model) There is some time consuming work with regards to linking the points and default views, etc. But like I said, it was 12 years ago and I don't know the state of these tools today. I would hope much better then what I worked with. Good Luck

I can't speak specifically to the -DRAWING LIST- tool because upon first trying it we discovered (and confirmed with tech support) that it did not function with custom title blocks. Our alternative was to add a boolean field to the Record Format where we were storing our title block data and then create a custom worksheet that searched that Record Format...bringing in only the sheets that had this field toggled on. Once the Drawing List Worksheet is formatted the way you like its easily used job after job. I always ran into issues when we would work on a project that we had to divide up into multiple files. I could never get all the titleblocks in the different files back into one Drawing List. However, I recently created a symbol that contained the Record Format data and now use the 'referenced' symbol capabilities to bring that symbol, and thus the title block data, spread out in multiple files back into a single Drawing List. The symbol can be edited while working in the 'satellite' file or the 'referenced' symbol while in the file with the Drawing List. The change is then sent back to the 'satellite' file. It took a lot of customization but in the end it works well. I wish something similar had been a standard feature. Good Luck with the Drawing List tool.

As far as I know there is no way to have multiple people work on the exact same file simultaneously. However, you can create a project that contains multiple files that use Design Layer Viewports to reference data back and forth between them. These files can all be worked on simultaneously and the references can be updated whether or not each of the files are open. We typically create the main model from a single file and then break out other disciplines such as structural, HVAC, electrical, and interior sheets into separate files. If you are generating building elevations in viewports from a model you could reference all of your model layers into another file and generate the elevations from that file. Live sections can also be done this way but you may have to manually draft your plan section marks. I'm not finding any way to get a plan building section mark created by a viewport section in one file to reference into a sheet layer viewport of another file. In a design layer viewport in another file, yes, but not into sheet layer. Hence, manually draft the marks for now. Details of course are almost always broken out into separate files with reference only design layer viewports. You can still create cropped sections from your model for use as background but details are largely independently drafted. I'm sure you will find lots of different organizational methods the more people you talk to. Joe

Some wrinkles in this class overrides discussion some might be missing that I don't think have been mentioned.... When you define your Wall Style you must set your wall attribute lines within the style to be controlled by the class you draw your wall in. If the original Wall Style is not set this way the class overrides will never work. In addition, I found an oddity with this. 3 tiered class names do not always respond to class overrides yet 1 and 2 tiered class names do. I was setting up classes where I could model my foundation and footings using Wall Styles. By default they show up the way you typically see them in plan. However, in elevation I want to override the foundation walls to be dashed while in section I want to override the dashed footings to be solid and filled with concrete. I struggled with this until I dropped my class names down to 2 tiers...then all worked well. In the end I have the following classes: Wall-Exterior, Wall-Interior, Wall-Footing, Wall-Foundation, in addition to all the Wall-Component-____ classes. One other comment on general information organization....I've never been an advocate of using classes for items like 'House' and 'Garage' to control visibility. Those items are much better organized on different layers. Classes are best used to control attributes of building components. Its a rare occasion when I use classes for visibility. One example, I always have a TEXT layer paired with every floor plan layer. REAL objects go on the plan layer while SHEET objects go on the TEXT layer. I tried adding furring to concrete walls as a component and turning it off for my foundation plan but the concrete components that remained would not display properly. I had to abandon it. I was trying to simplify the insertion of basement windows through both furring and concrete but for now its still a two stage process for me. Insert the window into the furring wall with an extended sill and cut a separate hole in the separate concrete wall.

I'll give this workaround a shot, Benson. It looks promising as well. Either way I'm left longing for a complete revamping of EAP's. Joe

No, cutting and pasting the path does not work and I agree, not much use if you need them to relate to the rest of your model. As stated earlier, the origins inside each EAP will not align with the drawing origin nor each other for that matter and therefor cutting and pasting paths between them will always create objects in an incorrect location. I'm starting a new project today and I'll give my 'starter' EAP idea a try and let you know. Joe

I'm getting your 5 points Benson, but your are losing me with your 3rd paragraph. Are you starting with a 2d polygon profile with a 2d polygon path for these EAP's with Fix Profile on? It appears you are describing a 3D NURB profile rotated and attached to the end of the path and set perpendicular to the path. 'Staged' if you will where the extrude would begin in the first place before you run the EAP. How does this fix the origin of the path to the origin of the drawing? Won't the path start point still be offset meaning cutting a path from drawing into EAP still results in a shifted EAP? Joe

I'm not sure what Fix Profile even does. Every time I check it in VW2012 the EAP fails to generate. I need a Fix Origin toggle as mentioned. The very first point you click to start your path profile defines the 0,0 origin of an independent coordinate system that is unique to only that newly created EAP. I want the 0,0 origin of my EAP to be exactly the same 0,0 origin of my drawing. I want to be able to snap a 3d path around part of my roof edge and wrap a crown moulding around it in an EAP. Then I want to snap another 3d path around a different section of my roof. Duplicate the first EAP and swap in the new path. My second crown should show up exactly where the original path was created on the model. It won't be. The new EAP will be shifted to the origin of the first click of the first path. You will have to move the second crown into place. I thought I would be able to create a work around for this but the best I got is always starting your path at the origin and then creating your path. After creating the EAP edit your path to take out the first leg. You can't do this prior to creating the EAP. It just puts the origin at the first remaining point. A new idea I just thought of would be to create a 'starter' EAP with the correct origin and then always create your EAP's by duplicating this first EAP and cutting and pasting in both your desired path and profile. If you know you have a series of EAP's all with identical profiles...like a series of gutters for instance...this might be big time saver. Joe

This was prompted from reading the previous topic on auto numbering but thought it warranted its own topic. Let me say I agree completely with that post. I want to draw referenced section lines vertically on my elevations and building sections and link the numbers directly to an existing section viewport. This could work with an independent mark that just links text. On a different level I would love it if somehow the plan location of these vertical section marks were linked to the Section Viewports as well so a shift in the plan mark moves the corresponding vertical mark. All this while keeping the line length customizable. Currently if you take a Plan SLVP with section marks and display it in an elevation the sections marks stay in the same spot as the plan view. Let me toggle them to display vertically where they belong or have them disappear if parallel to the screen...or just have them automatically shift with each view change. They display in isometric view in DL's but I'm pretty sure they stay on the screen plane only in SLVP's. On a slight tangent from this I'm trying to figure out how to get plan Section Marks created in a central file to link to satellite files where I develop structural or mechanical plans, etc. I don't believe there is a way. I've taken a Section Viewport and from Section Line Instances turned the marks on in an otherwise empty Design Layer. I have then DLVP'ed that information into my separate satellite file and have displayed the referenced marks well in the design layer. However, there is no way to get those marks to display in the satellite files SLVPs. This is due to the fact that only SLVP's that are toggled on in Section Line Instances will display them and no section can look out into satellite files and control display. I'd ask that added to this request any section mark displayed in a Design Layer also gets displayed in a SLVP that references that Design Layer regardless of the settings in Section Line Instances. Even without the Satellite File issues I'm having it is a hassle to manage both DL and SLVP lists anyway. Don't take away the SLVP list but this suggestions reduces a lot of clicks. Joe

Just checked and Julian Carr's Worksheet On Drawing PIO does work in VW2012 and does produce angled or vertical text in a single worksheet row or partial row. We bought this years ago (VW12?) before vertical text was possible in worksheets. I believe he abandoned its development about that time (or even earlier) as it became obsolete by VW2008. I did get a crash the first time I used it in VW2012 but it worked fine a few times thereafter. It doesn't appear the WorkSheet on Drawing is on his website anymore but he may be convinced to make it available. http://www.ozcad.com.au/ Joe

Just in case your missing them, the linear material and repetitive unit tools are essential for filling in sections with appropriate hatch and detail that doesn't come in with the model...such as roof sheathing, shingles, etc. For full building sections I usually just fill the cuts of the section viewports entirely without showing material down to the 1/2" gyp or 1/2" sheathing. Larger details show this information. This brings me to a major wish list item. We need a new viewport type called Detail Viewport or a special kind of multi-zoned crop feature so we can take a single large scale wall section and introduce multiple cuts to shrink the height or width of the section down to fit on a single printable page. Currently, to maintain viewports as an underlay for these sections you have to start with a viewport cropped to just the wall you are detailing and then copy that entire viewport to create two smaller cropped viewports you can bring together on either side of a cut line. Sometimes you might have 3 or 4 of these individually cropped viewports just to make a single vertical wall section with a couple of horizontal cuts. The question then is...where do you annotate? I've created an additional overlay viewport for all 2d overdrafting and annotations. Sometimes I've kept the base viewports while other times they get turned off and I just keep the overlay viewport if the details have been completely re-drafted. Cumbersome and confusing especially when you put 3 or 4 walls sections on a single sheet. Mind you this is all sheet layers - SLVP. I think I tried this with DLVP's and then drafting over them but I think I hit a snag but I'm not remembering what it was off hand. Worth taking another look at that process. Still wouldn't replace the need for a new multi-zone crop tool. Maybe used with both DLVP and SLVPs. I believe Revit has a tool that does this exact task. I haven't used it but I'm told you just define the horizontal and vertical zones of the detail and customize what gets shown and what doesn't. It then takes out all the negative space for display. We need this. Joe

Nice drawings! Your right, for the 3d break away drawings my method won't work. I was speaking from a 2d construction document aspect for the presentation. Here is an example: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/21682894/GeneralUse/Attic%20Plan.jpg As mentioned I could turn off the Wall-Interior class to show just the perimeter and also turn off the plumbing class, etc. I suppose I could also render the the roof plan to approximate something like your drawings. The attic floor slab is masking the area below. On Roof Components... I've started sandwiching multiple roof objects together to make my own components. Good for creating sheathing overlapping crowns and independent soffit and construction depths. Not so easy to manipulate future edits or cutting holes, however. At this time I don't care about linking to walls. Just give me components with independent overhang extensions and end conditions (square vs plumb). Joe

When you are inside the Settings of the PIO you can Browse to the Default Stair configurations. This file is in the Default sub-folder of your Library folder in your Vectorworks application folder. Create your own stair configs and save them as symbols into this same file and you can recall them straight from the Browse feature of the Stair PIO. Do the same for all the other default objects...wall styles, hatches, textures, Custom Door Leaves, etc. Joe

Yes, that's all it is. My comments about classes and methods of achieving a nice gray tone to the background were just ways to enhance the output further. The base method, however, is quite simple. Put your roof and walls into two separate SLVP's instead of one. Place a masking polygon in between them. Perhaps with floor slabs a masking polygon isn't even needed anymore. Just turn on the floor slab beneath the upper walls and you get the same effect. Joe

Speaking just to the Dropbox setup... I have our entire Library on Dropbox. Here was my method. Once copied to Dropbox I renamed the original library folder to Library(original) so it was saved but ignored by VW. I then created a new Library folder and created alias' to each folder located in my DropBox library. The only exception here was Favorites. Each users Favorites need to be pointed to their own installation of DropBox on their own drive so these had to be created at each station. Once created at each station, however, all worked well. Even without any Favorites the Vectorworks Libraries folder in the Resource Browser got to the DropBox library correctly. One caution, I originally tried to just create one alias named Library linking all contents inside to DropBox but the Favorites conflict caused VW to error out because the paths set in Favorites confused it. Keep Favorites out of DropBox. This setup allowed for all Default Content from any tool that references Default content to pull it from the DropBox libary. Anybody who adds anything like a symbol or a wall type back to the library it becomes immediately available to all other users. I created this setup because I had one guy who works from home 2 days a week but still needed access to our common library. This way he has it because its all part of his DropBox on his computer. Even from home, however, if he is on-line with his computer he is syncing with DropBox and always up to date with the latest revisions. Even if its only a few minutes after an update. Joe

The tried and true method would be to make a symbol from the window plug-in and then independently create 2d only and 3d only objects inside each symbol component so each display the way you want them to. You may be able to put the wall segments suggested previous right into the symbol. You might have issues making each look seamless but with some fussing you can usually get past that such as inserting symbol without caps and/or texture mapping, etc. This is never the first chosen method but usually works as a last resort. Haven't used the Symbol Hole Component much since introduced but could be beneficial here at some capacity. Joe

Are you asking for a CornerBoard image (the boards that cap the siding profile at building corners) or for a trim profile that wraps a window opening? or both? Incidentally, Vector Depot has a suite of tools known as Mouldings that does trim at openings. I haven't used it but it looks like it would be a great add-on. Joe

The method I describe adds flexibility to how you display the end result in your SLVP's. The modeling process is unchanged and therefor remains 'simple'. Future edits to roof objects would be more simple having to manipulate one objects instead of two for each face that spans 2 stories. I am intrigued by the 3d view of the story showing the roof planes beneath the cut, however. Back in about 1995 I was working in DataCAD and they had a Clip Cube feature that allowed you to draw a 3d cube and either display the interior or exterior of the cube. Display feature only...no cuts were made. It would be like adding a Z base and height to our viewport cropping. Wouldn't that be slick? Joe

Not knowing the shape of the roof you are making let me say...sometimes its best to make your roof out of a collection of Roof Objects and not try to make the entire roof out of one single object. Most dormer roofs, for example, are better as stand alone Roof Objects that you snap to holes cut into the main Roof Object. I never use Roof Faces because of the poor (and very different from Roof Objects) control of textures. This is despite the ability to extend and connect Faces to other objects. Faces also don't interact with symbols if you wanted to insert a skylight. The ability to extend a roof plane to another object really needs to be added to single plane Roof Objects at least if extending individual planes of a multi-faced Roof Object is too complicated. Joe

Still works. In the past year I've made the jump to having my finished CD elevations generated about 99% from my model. No more elevation drafting. Not crowns, not siding hatch, and thanks to your PIO not corner boards, either. Once I got a handle on setting line weights by class and using NURBS curves in all my EAP objects I got very good and acceptable results. Even surprisingly good results. Joe

oh, one other thing.... Don't forget the use of viewport cropping. If you have a small second floor over a sprawling first floor you can crop this background viewport just enough to give context to the second floor without showing the entire first floor around it. Joe

I might be misunderstanding your intent here but I do the following: Create a viewport to the floor plan only including all knee walls and gable walls. Create a second viewport that contains the roof plan. Stack the roof VP beneath the plan VP. In addition you could take the roof only viewport and add grayed first floor plan to it. Then you can draw a solid polygon stacked between these two viewports as a mask so the second floor plan stays readable but you still see your roof and perimeter first floor walls that surround this plan. Creative use of classes allows you to turn off furniture and cabinets on first floor if you wish. You could even dash the first floor lines and or turn off the interior walls all together to show just the perimeter walls. Whatever you wish. If the gray layer toggle isn't good enough set the gray tone in the Use Layer Color setting in the design layer and print with this toggle on. Then the surrounding info can be as light or as dark as you want depending on the depth of the gray you choose. Since its in a separate viewport it doesn't mess with your second floor plan at all. If, however, graying your original first floor plan layer messes up your display elsewhere you can Layer Link (are these still around?) or DLVP to a different layer...call it 1-background or something. Set that layer to a gray Use Layer Color and then reference that to your viewport. Original first floor plan is unchanged. In the case of a balcony looking down to the first floor this method fails to show the actual horizontal cut through the roof at the second floor level but we would typically be satisfied with the second floor plan, roof plan, and first floor walls all showing and skip the actual horizontal roof cut. One caution, don't toggle on gray layer AND set Use Layer Color. You actually get a double lightening in the VP. Use one or the other. Touched on a lot of topics here. Hope its not too confusing. Joe

Love that Extrude Along Paths can be co-planer. Crowns on gable rakes are simple now when they used to be too much trouble to bother. However, I'm still longing for Julian Carr's 3D manager. Here is a list of things it could do 10 years ago that current EAP's can not do but should. - multiple objects per extrude - class settings of each object determine texture allowing for multiple textures in one extrude - Symbol based profiles allowing for sharing of profiles easily between files through the Resource Browser and the creation of default libraries of common profiles. Also allowing for quick reference to a profile when you want to create another identical EAP that just has a different path. - and I might still be able to make some progress on the technique here but in 3D manager I would be able to keep the origin of the profile and path common with the overall file. When I had 6 different objects that had different paths but identical profiles I could just draw the new path and cut and paste it into a duplicate of the symbol(3D manager) or now the EAP object and regenerate. The new object would show up exactly where expected. Unique origins for EAP's make this impossible. - rotation and orientation seemed to be very predictable. I'm constantly flipping and rotating in the EAP to get what I need. I may have some things to learn still on this but it would be nice if I could match the origin of the path object to the overall drawing origin so I can cut a path drawn in the drawing into the path setting of the EAP and have the object show up in the right place. I also can't stand the origin of the profile defaulting to the center of the profile object. It would be nice if I could select a locus point in addition to my profile and the EAP would assume I want my origin at the locus point. Never do I control the final location from a center point but some offset distance which means I always have an additional edit for final location both for path location on the drawing and for profile orientation to that path. Neither should be necessary. Joe