Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1,141 Spectacular

Personal Information

  • Location
    London, UK

Recent Profile Visitors

5,354 profile views
  1. Someone at VW needs to sort out the documentation for EAP, which is inadequate and confusing, and this is demonstrated by the number of threads like this asking how it actually works.
  2. They basically (at least here in the UK) set up the pricing so that if you don't go for service select, and choose not to upgrade for 2 or 3 releases, then when you do want to upgrade, you end up paying the same as you would have done, had you maintained a VSS subscription and upgraded at each release. Therefore the only real advantages of not paying for VSS are: - cashflow if you don't fancy shelling out X amount each year, and would rather pay the whole lot further down the line when you're ready - you think you are unlikely to want to upgrade for maybe 4 or 5 years. But that's becoming increasingly difficult to do as you get trapped in an interdependent cycle of hardware/OS/software no longer being supported There are supposedly various other "benefits" of VSS but I've never really made use of most of them.
  3. I don't feel too optimistic about that producing any results when it's seemingly too much to ask, even for the help documentation on NURBS to be accurate...
  4. Do you mean graphics performance is affected? This is something I've been complaining about for some time - I have mostly given up using floating panes because they seem to end up suffering from various graphics problems (eg jittery motion and strange snap behaviour) and become very irritating to use. This predates VW2022, but maybe it has become worse in 22?
  5. Unfortunately not. As you can see, no response from anyone at VW to my questions above.
  6. yes, this is one of the problems with this kind of method in VW, you don't really have full control of exactly what path the curves end up following. As you say, it's visible in plan at the top of the ramp, in the "outer" curve lines which aren't at right angles to the end of the ramp and this becomes a problem if you want a proper tangential transition between one section of ramp and another. I think the best you can do is get it nearly right via a bit of trial and error. The method described by @axhake in the thread I linked to further up addresses this which is why I'd recommend anyone who needs to produce properly accurate models to have a close look at it. @Benson Shaw hope this doesn't come across as criticism of your suggested solutions; the problems are ones caused by the way VW works.
  7. That seems a sensible way of producing a "good enough" result but I think I'm right in saying that it doesn't create a ramp that is perfectly level side to side all the way along (this can be seen by making a section through it, perpendicular to its centre line, at various points). Achieving this in fact is one of the things that's more tricky than it forst appears, when making something like this. Interesting you think the faceting is less bad than previous versions @Benson Shaw - are you sure though? I can still see it, and one of the problems which the faceting causes, which is that it's virtually impossible to make two perfectly matching curved edges from NURBS curves, is visible in this model if you look at the join between the "core" ramp and the sloping side that you add in your last step. If you zoom in you can see this in OpenGL view, and you can also see it in a section (even with 3d conversion set to "very high". Images below are a cross-section taken from the model.
  8. I think you can solve this if you turn on "automatic drawing coordination" in the document preferences. Then duplicating the viewport will give you what you want.
  9. You want to do something that is actually a bit tricky in Vectorworks, more so than it first appears, for a number of reasons. However .... have a read of this thread: And if you can make sense of that, also have a look at the method described here by @axhake: If you are a beginner in VW you might find some of that a bit hard to follow, but you might also learn quite a bit of useful stuff! It's possible there is a simpler way to deal with your particular problem that would be "good enough", but if you want to do it accurately I'd suggest you look at these links.
  10. Yes sure - I get what you are saying. The problem you describe is additional to the one I describe. But each case is covered by sensible annotation - additional information that can't really be contained in the drawing geometry itself. So, that's why I find it hard to see a world where everyone can simply scale off a model. But perhaps ways of annotating the model in 3d space will develop...perhaps I can ask an element for its dimensional setting-out information and it will tell me what it should be set out relative to. I'd be quite pleased to see the need for 2d sheets disappear (I think).
  11. Even with a brand new building ... with a theoretically perfect BIM model ... there will be inaccuracies in what actually gets built, and that's why it's so important for dimensioning always to be relative to the appropriate reference points. The structural frame gets built with one column 50mm out ... there will be certain critical things that need to be set out relative to that column, and if you measure from the "as built" column position you'll be ok, but if you measure from some other part of the building, you'll be 50mm away from where the thing actually needs to be. Same basic principle applies whether the 'model' is in 3d or 2d. Architecture (and I guess civil engineering to some extent?) is quite different from things like product manufacture in this way ... there is a different expectation of precision, and i think people from other disciplines don't always realise this.
  12. Most architects have a standard note on their drawings telling contractors not to scale directly off the drawing, for good reasons. It's already possible for errors to occur this way on 2d drawings, and so I don't see why you couldn't have the same principle on a 3d model - refer only to explicitly stated dimensions and take the model as a general indication of how things are arranged rather than assuming every last dimension is accurate enough for construction purposes.
  13. I don't think 2019 is supported to work in Monterey. At least not according to the VW system requirements page. https://www.vectorworks.net/sysreq?version=2019
  14. I would go with windoor if it seems to work better than the native tools, because even if it never gets updated from now on, we have no news on when the native tools will ever get improved, and I'm putting my money on "no time soon".
  • Create New...