Jump to content

stayathomedad

Member
  • Posts

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

5 Neutral

Personal Information

  • Location
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

983 profile views
  1. I was wondering what you were talking about! Well, it has been 9 years since I updated that. Had signatures turned off and I had completely forgotten that they existed. Thanks
  2. Thank you sir! That worked perfectly. For the sake of clarity - I'm running the latest Service Pack on 2022.
  3. This has happened to me a few times. Every once in a while I will have a file that has different plug-in objects suddenly get a marker turned on. We joke around that the file has Markeritus™. The drawing I am currently working on has a very severe case. As you can see in the screenshot I have Truss Cross text, Truss Cross Symbol and Lighting Pipes in my file that, all of the sudden, have markers turned on. No change in attributes setting can make them go away. If I convert the objects into groups I see that the polylines and polygons have markers turned on. Here you can see a Truss Cross is now three polygons with the Marker turned on. All new similar plug-in objects that I create in the file will have the marker turned on, but if I copy the objects and paste them into a new drawing, the marker disappears. I wish I had a process of correcting this outside of copying and pasting everything or converting all of them to groups. Any input would be greatly appreciated.
  4. I am trying to build a worksheet for my hoists and I would like it to indicate which Origin it is being referenced too. I can populate the X and Y coordinates, but there is not a place for me to populate the Origin name. With the Legacy Hoist Tool this data was accessible. Please update the new Hoist Tool so that we can access that data. Thanks.
  5. @jcogdell Have you had a chance to learn anything more about Braceworks and referenced files? My client has switched over to 2022 and I have learned that it behaves a little differently. The first screenshot shows the truss system 1 foot above the screen. The rigging system is in the active file and the screen is in the referenced file. The second screenshot is after I lower the truss system 1foot to touch the screen. I then change the trim height of the system by raising it 2 feet. As you can see in the 3rd screenshot. The screen now changes height along with the truss system. Also the screen moved but the projection cone didn't (If you look really closely you can see the faint white lines of the projection cone). The big difference with 2022 is that even though the referenced objects anchor to the truss and change height with it, the weight of that object isn't picked up in the load calcs. Even though the screen is set to be a part of the calculations. In VW 2021, the weight of the object was detected and included in the calcs. Please keep me posted. I think making the referenced file/Braceworks link more reliable and definable will help those of us who use Braceworks in the Project sharing environment by eliminating our need to connect an object to the truss in order to include it. This in turn allows us to move the truss without having to check out other users' objects. .
  6. No, it does not register the bumper. Once it finally does recognize the referenced loads it brings in the whole array as long as the bumper and each speaker are set to be a part of the load calculations.
  7. This really isn't a VW question. It's more of a question about printing high quality prints that Vectorowrks has shown me. For years we have generated sheet layers and did most of our final prints by using the Publish command, creating pdfs and then printing at a professional print store (Fedex Office or something similar). But this year we brought our own high quality printer into the office. It's a Canon ImageRunner similar to a lot of the machines used in Fedex Office locations. I now see a lot of differences in the print quality simply based on how I send the file to the printer. I have the same settings whether I publish the sheet layer as a pdf or if I publish directly to the printer. The lowest quality print is if I access the pdf I create through the Publish command and then print through my operating system. I am on a Mac, so I am using the Preview app. I am connecting to the printer wirelessly through its internal wireless capabilities. The quality improves slightly if I use Adobe Reader to print to the printer through the wireless connection. Both of these prints have greyed lines that aren't completely printing to the point I can hardly see them and are very sub-par. The quality improves substantially when I print directly from the Publish command (Still wirelessly). I can clearly see all of the greyed lines as I expect. Some of the edge borders however do not get printed. But I can take the pdf file, the exact same file that I opened with Preview and Reader, and put it on a thumb drive. Walk over to the printer and insert it into the USB port on the printer and then use the printers interface to access and print the files. If I do this I get my full drawing printed as I expected. It is even better quality than when I skipped creating the pdf and printed directly from the Publish command. What is driving the low quality prits? Is it the wireless connection? The pdf creation? Can I get high quality and wireless? Maybe these are better questions for a Canon ImageRunner Knowledgebase, but I thought that maybe someone here might have worked through this also.
  8. Thanks for your reply. Here is another detail to add to the question for the dev team. When I go to the file that has the rigging objects that is referencing in the arrays I can change the trim height of the truss on the second from the left array to 28ft. This is the same height as the array. Then when I use the change trim height command I can now see red highlights for the array. But, when I run a calculation on the system. It doesn't register the load of the array objects. I can then delete the referenced file (the whole file, not just the viewport). Then if I re-establish the reference to those arrays, it can then register the array objects load into the calculations. I have had to repeat this process a couple of times to get it to work. What would be super helpful to me would be for there to be more documentation about the parameters for referencing loads into Braceworks. It is an absolute necessity for my Project Sharing workflow and I wish there was something I could refer to to help me understand the process better.
  9. This process is a bit inconsistent for me, and I don't quite understand the issue. To get the referenced arrays to be calculated I had to delete and re-create the viewport a couple of times. It seems if I do the exact same process sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. When I saved these two files it was working for me. I'm relatively new to working with BW so maybe I'm missing something. The Audio.BWSample file contains (8) indentical arrays. The top four are rigged with objects in the Audio.BWSample file and I ran Braceworks in that same file. The bottom four arrays are on a different design layer. This file also contains a design layer viewport into the second file so that I could see the BW results from both files at the same time. The second file Referencing.Audio.BWSample is pulling in the four arrays in the first drawing and then doing the BW calcs on that referenced data. So as this screenshot shows there is a bit of a difference in how arrays are working in the drawing and through referencing and there may be a couple of different issues playing out in this process. I'd love to know more. Audio.BWSample.vwx Referencing.Audio.BWSample.vwx
  10. Good day Braceworks Puzzle Solvers™ I have a file that has my rigging objects in it and I am referencing the audio, lighting, scenic and video objects through a design layer referenced viewport. The process works great and when I run a calculation it generates an error that shows the (6) lighting instruments upstage of the truss as not attached. This is as expected, since they are not in the footprint or at the height of the truss. I then add (6) lighting pipes and attach them to the truss on top. Now when I run the load calculations I get the following errors. There is a lot of this that confuses me: What causes the "Virtual FEM support gets load" error? Why do those (6) lighting fixtures that were shown as not being connected before the lighting pipes are now showing an error that they are assigned to two structural elements? And, craziest of all - Why do some lights that aren't even on that same truss system now show an error that they are also connected to two structural elements? (Seen on the left side of the screenshot) The only difference between these two drawings is the addition of the lighting pipes. Any input into what is happening would be awesome.
  11. Interesting. I have been calculating referenced objects with Braceworks as I figure out my workflow to use Braceworks in combination with Project Sharing. This has allowed me to access loading data from other user's objects without having to check them out and take ownership. In the Braceworks preferences there is a checkbox to allow calculations from objects that are referenced in. This has been working perfectly fine with all objects so far. I have been able to "attach" lights, drape, screens, projectors and even custom built scenic objects with loads to my truss. The weights of all of these objects get picked up as part of the truss system based on being close to the same heights. I am trying to get my head wrapped around this a bit better so I can understand exactly when and why the referenced objects becomes associated with the truss but what I know now is that if they are close they get associated. This process breaks down with arrays. If I have two hoists and I get them close to the hanging position of the arrays they do not register the array load. But if I hang a stick of truss between two points and get that truss close to the hanging position of the array, the truss will include the array as part of the system. This can be seen when the system trim height is changed and you can see the red highlights around the referenced object. The obvious workaround is to simply not include the arrays in the load calcs and then add in point loads, but if someone has gone to all the work to have it function by attaching referenced loads to trusses that it wouldn't be to much to get it to work with objects that attach directly to the hoists.
  12. UPDATE: It must have something to do with the zero values in one of the Records. Instead of zeros, I entered 0.01 or 1 and the Dead Hang symbols no longer lock up VW. Now I'm wondering which zero value is making this happen but I don't have enough time to sort that out.
  13. Hello fellow Braceworks Puzzle Solvers™ Maybe I am doing something wrong, but it seems pretty straightforward to me. The attached file "Underhung Hoists" works with Braceworks perfectly fine. The other attached file "Underhung Dead Hangs" is exactly the same content except that rather than suspending the lower truss from three ¼ ton hoists I changed the symbol to one of the Dead Hangs. I will be suspending the lower truss 5ft below the top one with wire rope stingers and I thought that this is what a dead hang would model. When I run a calculation on this setup is locks up VW and I have to force it to quit. Any ideas what is going on? My work around is to take the ¼ hoist symbol and eliminate the weight and geometry of the hoist. I fully expect that to work - But isn't that really the only difference between Dead Hangs and Hoists? In the OIP the Dead Hang is listed as a Hoist object. Any input would be appreciated. Underhung Dead Hangs.vwx Underhung Hoists.vwx
  14. Same issue for me. Two hoists works as expected. Even with a hanging angle of 0° on the bumper It is not working properly. I see this behavior if I open up a new file, not just an existing one. This is the first hurdle I need to cross. Once I get the array to connect properly to a single hoist, I then have to figure out how to get it to happen through a referenced viewport. Any tips on that process would also be appreciated. Harry
×
×
  • Create New...