Jump to content

line-weight

Member
  • Posts

    3,716
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by line-weight

  1. 55 minutes ago, Tom Klaber said:

    @Art V @Tom W. 

    If we look at wall sections, there is no material in our office that we show as different hatches in different cuts.  We have made them the same.  In my option a wall section is a diagram and the hatches have a KEY that tells you what the material is.  We seldom would want to try and get a hatch to accurately display geometry.  For repeated elements like studs that would show up in a plan cut but not a section cut, we draw those separately.  

     

    So the ability to separate plan cuts from section cut fills is not high on my list personally.

     

    I'd say I tend to agree with this.

     

    It would however be useful if certain materials could hatch parallel to their orientation - primary example being sheet materials like plywood.

    • Like 2
  2. To be clear, when I say horizontal section I mean literally a horizontal section - not one involving any hybrids or 2d symbols. So if a door is modelled correctly in 3d, it will be correct in my plan.

     

    However you're quite right, this sets me up with lots of annotation, for example door swing lines. This may seem crazy and would be for larger projects, but for the smaller type of projects I do (lots of non standard detail) I've decided it's the "least terrible" option for now. It's less time consuming for me, than fighting with plugin tools.

     

    Unlike you I don't have to worry so much about IFC and so on - I just need clear accurate construction drawings.

     

    I hope that some day the time will come that I don't have to have this kind of home-brew solution.

  3. That's a great example of a real world situation that VW can't currently deal with properly.

     

    My solution here would be probably be to create the inner insulation layer either as a separate wall, or as directly modelled solids. I then make my floorplans as horizontal sections to allow me to make the cut plane where I want it, and for it not to section that inner insulation layer.

     

    For the dashed "something overhead" line, I would add this manually as an annotation in the sheet layer viewport. I've not yet found a reliable way for VW to automatically give me dashed "overhead" lines in the right places. So I give up on that and do it manually. Of course, this means I have to keep on top of any updates by adjusting the viewport annotation as necessary.

     

    Very interesting that you have written your own code to produce window and door plugins (I see a door frame with a stop on it - hooray!).

     

    If individual users are writing their own code to make usable doors and windows it makes it even more ridiculous that VW still cannot supply us with this as a basic and fundamental part of the programme we pay for.

    • Like 2
  4. This is a problem I'm experiencing in a VW2018 file.

     

    If this is a problem that fails to replicate in later versions, I suppose there will not be much interest in fixing it, but in case it does:

     

    - The attached file is a stripped-down version of a working file (which is quite complex with a large number of classes and saved views). I've deleted all the geometry but the problem can still be seen. To replicate:

    1) Open the organisation dialogue

    2) Select the "classes" tab and the "visibilities" (rather than "details") button

    3) I've numbered saved views SV 1 through SV 4. And there are 4 classes named CLASS A through CLASS D.

    4) You will see that CLASS A is visible in all saved views, and classes B, C and D are not visible in any saved view.

    5) Try setting CLASS B to be visible in all saved views (by selecting CLASS B in the left-most pane, and changing the settings in the saved view pane at far right).

    6) Now select CLASS A in the left-most pane.

    7) Now select CLASS B again, in the left most pane.

    8 ) My result here is that VW has retained the "CLASS B = visible" settings for SV 3 and SV 4, but it has reverted this setting for SV 1 and SV 2, which have CLASS B as invisible.

     

    It seems that VW does not want to remember changed settings for SV 1 and SV 2, but it will do for SV 3 and SV 4. I can't figure out anything about SV 1 and 2 that is different. Any ideas why this is happening?

     

     

    classvis_test copy.vwx

  5. I was hoping that the new "material" resource was something that I could apply to an object or component, which would then define how it appeared when rendered/drawn in elevation/drawn in section. As well as containing data about the material itself. And that this would replace my current method of using class to control these things.

     

    Reading the above, it doesn't sound like this is the case. It sounds like it doesn't release me from using class to define these things, but somehow operates in parallel and not consistently. It sounds a bit of a mess.

     

    It seems particularly odd that it can't control appearance in a section cut, because in fact a section detail usually has the purpose of distinguishing different materials - hence all the different section hatches that are conventionally used in construction drawings. Materials are only sometimes indicated in elevation views, and often by a note rather than a fill.

    • Like 4
  6. On 9/15/2020 at 8:12 PM, Mark Aceto said:

     

    Are you using it on an 11-year old Mac running a 5-year old OS, or is your signature out of date? I've had no issues with vw2019 or vw2020 on any of my Macs running High Sierra / Mojave.

     

     

    It's not quite as bad as it looks as it's a heavily refurbed mac pro.

     

    But the issues I'm talking about are not performance issues. I'm talking about core functionality and tools that don't work. These aren't anything to do with my machine or OS. I'm talking about the amount of time I have to spend modelling things like windows and stairs from scratch because the VW tools can't produce them properly. And a multitude of smaller things that would be useful if they worked, but they don't. They just don't work, and no-one is fixing them.

    • Like 3
  7. 12 minutes ago, Mark Aceto said:

     

    vw2019 is the Snow Leopard of VW.

     

    It's also the first version to introduce multicore (albeit limited to 3-cores). If everyone on vw2018 (or earlier) upgraded to at least vw2019, tech support call volume and troubleshooting in the forums would be cut in half. Every version before vw2019 gave me "Command+S" PTSD, so that to this day, I still manually save every 10th keystroke.

     

    I have used vw2019 a bit (doing some external work, on another company's license, but on the same machine) and 95% of the things that waste my time in vw2018 are still there. As I believe they are in 2020, and I'm expecting in 2021 too, but let's see.

  8. On 9/12/2020 at 11:55 PM, Tobias Kern said:

     

    hi senthil,

     

    thnx for your answer.

    i think the push/pull tool has so many capabilities, in so many ways.

    thats why i love sketchup so much, easy and intuitive manipulation of 3d objects.

    btw i love vw very much too, but sketchup is way faster in work with 3d solids

    (in my way i build 3d content).

    im so fast in sketchup, i wished i could reach this speed in vw too.

     

    vw is getting better, but have some major limitations.

    these limitations have to go.

    i know sketchup is only a polygon modeler, with other weaknesses.

     

    for me as user, in vw i also want the easy, intuitive and fast way to

    work on and with 3d objects. vw has to many different 3d modes/objects:

    3d polygon, point objects, nurbs, subdivision, ...

     

    often i have to convert one mode into another, because i cant do

    some specific operation not in that mode and that is, i think

    we users dont want to do. with every conversion come some lost.

     

    make it easier for us. one kind can fits all,

    if possible. why not all 3d objects are solids, but the surface is calculated

    like the need is for (read below).

     

    3d objects exists of points, edges and surfaces.

    points and edges are relative easy to descripe andcalculate in 3d space

    surfaces are different and can be calculated in different methods.

    common are. quad faces (like subdivision), triangulated or nurbs surfaces, and maybe many more.

    so i think the method surfaces are build is the hardest way in the developing.

     

    so whats to do in my opinion:

     

    - only one mode for 3d object with all strenghts of the above mentioned, if convertions are neccesary do it in the code background of vw

    - push/pull tool to manipulate edges, points, surfaces (most work can done with one tool)

    - the surfaces are build by three different modes: quad faces (like subdivision), triangulated or nurbs-surface

    - you can choose which surface mode is standard for new objects, but you can convert the surfaces mode into another if it fits better for the needs

    - a new scale tool for 3d objects like the fantastic sketchup scale tool (watch some videos of it)

     with the skp scale tool you can do some good operations like mirroring, or give the object a new height, lenght, width in the direction (x, y,z) you want

    - gumball like rhino, maybe a gumball could do the scale operations i mentioned two lines above and do the push/pull operations

      a gumball is not the badest idea for that, because the gumball is visually easy to understand how it works.

    - more usefull 3d commands like rhino have

     

    it is a matter close to my heart, that vw is getting better in 3d modelling,

    because i see the possible potential in this software.

    if i was a billionaire, i would give you the money to make my wishes come true.

     

    / / /

     

    you mentioned subdivision modelling in your answer. i know i can do

    some specific operations with this method, but often you never stay in that mode.

    if you want to do other operation like creating a shell, or whatever.

    you have to convert and loose some strengths.

     

    greetings from germany and hope i had descriped my ideas with an relative good english

    tobi

     

     

    please also read my ideas here:

     

     

     

    Agreed on all of this.

  9. 32 minutes ago, Tobias Kern said:

     

     

    yes, there is nothing to add.

     

    i like most of the new things each year and vw is getting better in some cases.

    … but always get disappointed, whats done with windows/doors and stairs.

     

    so a big big please to vectorworks devs from me too …

    … give us architects more love. 🥺

     

     

    It seems like there is no point asking, or saying please.

     

    Lots of people have been asking for this, for many years.

     

    Every year, VW chooses to ignore this. I honestly don't understand why. It's a joke that it's marketed as "BIM ready" when (just for example) it's been putting windowsills on back to front for at least five years.

    • Like 1
  10. On 9/8/2020 at 3:19 PM, Samuel Derenboim said:

    3. The Material resource, will it take over the class control of materials in door and window plugin objects????

     

     

    I'll be very interested to see how this works too.

     

    At the moment I use material "classes" throughout my drawings, something that works OK but is a bit "homebrew" and it always worries me that setting up drawings with my own systems makes them less future proof and more difficult to share information with others.

     

    If (and only if) the "material" resource concept has been well thought through, then it will be very welcome, rather than something that just adds another layer of complexity to drawing setup.

    • Like 4
×
×
  • Create New...