Travis

The advantage of assigning a layer directly to its Z-ht is that one can adjust the whole layer in the Z-dimension. And thus each layer can be revised from the Layers dialog box. The alternative is that one must Select-All the objects on a layer and then move them together. A process somewhat more tedious (going to each individual layer and moving the elements) when you discover the foundation must be altered. Using Layer Links to create a composit model of the various layers will work equally well with both protocols. Good luck,

Erich, Just make sure Offset Duplications is turned off in Vectorworks-Preferences. Then all duplications happen "in place". Good luck,

You've probably got the crop Class turned off. Or possbly, you've got Class Options set to something other than Show/Snap/Modify Others. Good luck,

mw, When I need that level of control, I model the roof/dormer until it's "right". Then Ungroup the whole roof (including the dormer). This changes everything into individual Roof Faces, which can then have their own textures/details. Good luck,

One (or both) of you ought to take a minute and list these protocols on the How To board. . .so short-term-memory challenged folks like me can find them easier next time. Please.

Good point, Peter. I could have mentioned that we have gradually "converted" nearly every "lineal" texture file into a pair of -V (vert) and -H (horiz) files. Using the protocol Peter describes. Armstrong, you're just jealous because I get to go sno-skiing 8 months of the year and water-skiing the other 8! The runs were pretty limited (and pretty much like mashed potatoes), but we did actually strap on slats in June this year. Water-skied the weekend before (in a drysuit!) on a lake you could see from the ski-lift. I must admit that I really like having 4 seasons and tall mountains.

Making visible additional layers that represent various floors of a building will not be helpful unless you've assigned every layer to Z=0 and then had the foresight to place each floor at the appropriate Z-elevation. The method we use is to do layer links to the floor above and the one below. Adjust the links to reflect "real" Z-height and then lock the links. The active floor can now be edited (including snaps, etc) against the adjacent floors. By setting these layer links for each floor, you have most of the funtionality you were looking for without sacrificing much of EJA's overhead or running the risk of editing the wrong floor (since only one is active at a time). Good luck,

I would be very concerned. You probably ought to stop using (certainly stop "growing") those files. Follow the Work Group Reference?break the link protocol as outlined by Jonathan Pickup's "How to Save a Corrupt File" at http://www.archoncad.co.nz/resources/resources_tips.php Good luck,

I'm pretty sure you have to set units by drawing, rather than layer. Good luck,

With obejct in question selected, click on the Render tab of the OIP. You can change rotation by entering a number for degrees (say 90?) or you can click Mapping to go to a more detailed control panel. There will be times when you can't get a texture to map the way you really want it. I've often then converted the object to mesh which creates a separate panel for each plane. Then from the Mapping dialog, you can orient the texture on the individual planes however you like. Gives a great deal of control. Good luck,

mw, In the Textures folder that comes with RW, you'll find a file called Metals\Plastics\Glass that contains a dozen or so glass textures. We've used most of them and been very pleased. Good luck,

You can update Save Views from the Classes "control" dialog. Highlight the Class you want to modify, then click on the Save Views button at the bottom. This brings up a list of all Saved Views that you can then set the class visibility for. I just wish there was a similar function for multiple Viewports. Good luck,

Yeah, I got it: Just =SUM("Database Column") Sorry, just a little brain lapse.

It seems to me there is a way to summarize (or other functions) database data at the bottom of a column, rather than the top. But I can't seem to remember how. Anyone help?

I agree. And it would be so very simple for them to come that way already. Good point.

OK, I'd agree to a preferences option (or something similar) that would allow the user to create style classes on the fly, but I reiterate how valuable having control in a multi-seat situation is. Using the above approach saves a bucket-full of confusion. Whenever someone inserts a stair (or rail, or window, etc.), they simply add the appropriate class from the Standards file. Then one might modify the class for that particular drawing, but we don't allow users to create new classes without approval. Hard to satisfy everyone, as usual. At the very least, it seems that NNA might do a little better job teaching users how to modify the style\classes.

Actually, you can modify the PIO styles. Please note Petri's response in this thread. http://techboard.nemetschek.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=004198 We've taken his advise and created the list in a Word document. Then whenever VW updates, we just run the Plug-in Editor and update the style names. It's not quite as "intuitive" as Armstrong's wish, but it I believe it maintains better control in a multi-seat situation. Good luck,

alanmac, Make sure you've set the Vectorworks resolution (in the Print Dialog) to 300 for .pdf's. The default is 360dpi. For some reason, that extra 60 lines (or rather, dots) makes a huge difference when creating .pdf's. You'll get both smaller .pdf file size as well as quicker renders. By the way, for complex pages I find it quicker to print to .ps (post script) and then use Adobe's Distiller to batch "distill" to .pdf. As an added bonus, this route yields even more condensed file sizes. Good luck,

Tom, I've used the callout tool extensively without the problem you describe. I'm interested to know which rendering method you might be using. A workaround would be to group the Viewport, enter the group, and place your callouts on top of the Viewport. . .rather than "in" the Viewport. Good luck,

Dax, Both of the above suggestions are excellent. Perhaps you could start with a rectangle or maybe a tee-shaped polygon of dimensions that would approximate a real structure. Issue the Create Roof from Polygon command. Notice that it creates a hipped roof of the pitch and overhang you specified. Click on any of the wall-line center-points to edit that face of the roof, or the whole roof by checking the appropriate box. Use the 2D Reshape tool to edit the shape and/or size. (You can add vertices and thus new faces.) I've learned that the Auto Roof Plug-in will accept edits of more complex geometry than it will create from scratch. I use the "auto-roof" tool a lot. Most often I create a roof from polygon that is fairly close to the desired final product. Sometimes I'll create two (or more) roofs from overlapping polygons, if needed. (For compound pitches, etc.) Finally, try Ungrouping the roof. This will convert it into a collection of Roof Faces. These can then be individually edited. . .such as to eliminate the overlapping areas. It took me quite a while to get my head wrapped around creating roof faces directly from rectangles, so I've generally tried to get where I need to with the auto tool first. I've spent better than 20 years actually building all sorts of roofs: compound pitches, multiple valley/hip configurations, segmented radii in all variety of segments. I've not yet envisioned a roof that I couldn't model fairly quickly and accurately in VWA. Tho it's not perhaps the bread-and-butter of our design operation, I'd buy the program just for this capability. It's a powerful tool! Dig in, experiment. And keep asking questions. Good luck,

You're right, you can only have a Viewport do one at a time. You can, however, stack one Viewport on top of the other. . .say a Renderworks w/shadows under a Hidden Line rendering set to one of the Sketch parameters. We use this frequently for our concept presentations. Good luck,

To further Chris' comment: Anytime our drawings go out-of-house for competitive bids, or if we do a set of drawings for another contractor, we always label the take-offs as Estimated Materials. Never as a schedule. That should encourage the builder to double-check, and after working with you for a while, he'll learn how to adjust the estimate to suit his needs. Good luck,

Delmer, We use the Framer tool extensively. We rely on its takeoffs of walls as a guide only. The two square footage calculations are actually pretty reliable, but the stick quantity can be off by as much as 15%. Especially if you've asked it to frame gable-end or sloped walls. Anything framed using the Joist PIO, and then referenced from a worksheet, is pretty reliable. But this is generally limited to floors and possibly ceiling trusses. We likewise have a fair amount of confidence in the roof framing, provided the individual pieces have been properly labeled. (I'm really aching for a tool that will allow I-joists to be angled as rafters.) It may or may not be helpful for you to have a read through this thread: http://techboard.nemetschek.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=001408 Good luck,

Interestingly, our results are that HLR (and the dashed version) takes 48?52% LESS time. (About half the time) We see a small improvement in RW renders. I'm with matt, maybe do some housecleaning. Good luck,

rb, The short answer is that you'll likely need to create password protection on a .pdf from inside Adobe's Acrobat, not from Vectorworks. You'd do well to do a search on this board as well as the Printing/Plotting board. There are numerous threads addressing various .pdf issues. If that doesn't give you what you're looking for, you need to provide the OS, VW version, .pdf creator/modifier software (ie, Adobe Acrobat) and hardware you're running for any more detailed answers. Good luck,