Jump to content

ericjhberg

Member
  • Posts

    581
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ericjhberg

  1. Are you trying to use the contours generated from a site model?

    If so, then I'm sorry to say that you will have to deal with it for now. I have similar desires for the site model tool, but unfortunately VW has not quite gotten it right. I have been told that this is something there are trying to correct. As a workaround we use the "smart" contours generated by the site model as a base, and then re-draft our "dumb" polyline contours to achieve the desired result. If you choose to do this, wait as long as possible before drafting your correct contours, just in case your design changes.

  2. When using the plant tool to place multiple plants in a grouping, either random or organized by spacing, it would be really nice to see the resulting number of plants in the plant grouping in the object information palette.

    We often resort to "Change Plant Grouping" to essentially explode the grouping, note the quantity within, and then undo. I realize that you can do this through the use of tags, but we don't often use tags. Instead I could envision it being represented somewhere in the object information palette.

  3. Unfortunately, I believe you are right. The plant lines get clustered on any curved vertex or line segment and only really work properly on straight line segments.

    Our workaround is to use clip surfaces to create an unedited area for plant area calculations. We then duplicate those shapes, offset them slightly inside, simplify polygons to eliminate arc/bezier/radii vertices and then create landscape areas with the plant line edges.

    Obviously this is not ideal as duplication just creates the opportunity for redundant errors and more time spent; however, as a workaround, we have found that this helps not only clean up the graphics, but also helps when using landscape areas as 3D plants where image props would otherwise overhang adjacent paving/stairs/etc. The original is retained for necessary calculations.

    This would be a big wishlist item though, a fix to the plant line along curved vertices. ++1

  4. We have traditionally drafted using the polyline or polygon tools when beginning a project and then used the CREATE OBJECTS FROM SHAPES command to change geometry into smart, plug-in objects. We carefully draw our original linework using 'tangent arc' or 'point on arc' drafting modes (never bezier or cubic). We have become aware that, for some reason, creating objects from these shapes (i.e. hardscapes, landscape areas, etc,) irreversibly alters the vertex types of the original linework and no longer allows for the point on arc editing of the converted object.

    I can only imaging that this vertex conversion adds unnecessary memory to the object being created. It also creates difficulties when adding or clipping surfaces and is just more cumbersome and less accurate to work with and dimension later. I have found the only way to maintain the original vertex geometry is to draw the original objects using the Hardscape Tool, Landscape Area Tool, etc. This doesn't always work from a workflow standpoint though as we do a lot of adding and clipping of surfaces to minimize drafting errors.

    I don't imagine this is an intentional feature, and if it is, I can't imagine why. Please fix this at some point.

  5. With Vectorworks implementation of GIS data structures and abilities, and the heavy reliance on Record Formats for storing spatial data, there is no great way of labeling features with attached records.

    Example: City Streets GIS data. Each line segment or polyline segment has a Record Format attached. One field in the record format, titled Road Name. We would love to see a callout/label tool that could read the attached record format and place a label for the road name, in this example.

    This is something that, when preparing larger spatial studies, is very important and would be a huge time saver instead of doing it manually and individually.

  6. For some reason, and I don't know why, the select similar tool does not allow a user to select plants of a similar species. The only 'Select Similar Preference' that I could imagine to have this capability would be the 'Symbol Name' preference; yet, when using that preference in attempt to select all of a certain species of plant (different plug-in object symbol), you receive the message

    "The selected activation options can't be used for this object. Please click on an object which has all the selected"

    • Like 2
  7. Thanks Jim, I see this functionality and it might be useful for different purposes.

    To restate the wish, I can see a need in our workflow for the ability to insert a text string (plug-in object?) that links to a specific viewport (similar to the new Linked Section/Detail viewport functionality in 2016) or sheet layer. This link would then automatically update when a sheet is added, deleted, or moved.

    To provide an example We frequently use the annotation "Matchline - see sheet L1.08". Something similar to this might also appear in a notes block or worksheet legend. It would be awesome if as sheet numbers are added, deleted, or viewports, if those particular text strings updated with the changes.

    I hope this clarifies the wish.

  8. Thanks Christiaan, I think the workflow suggestions are worth exploring as a mitigation of file size and operability.

    The Hierarchical or Folder organization is absolutely critical for us. We often experience Irrigation files that can contain 50+ design layers. Even before Project Sharing, this was often cumbersome. The ability to clean up some of this clutter and better streamline and organize design layers/sheet layers is a no brainer.

  9. @rDesign: Thank you for elaborating on these features. This is very helpful and does shed some light on the issue. We are using 2016, and I still see some issues, even with the added operability.

    1. The projected section trick, changing the viewport projection to perspective or orthagonal after creating the section viewport, does work; however, as was illustrated in other posts on this thread, apparently only in Hidden Line render modes. Not even in OpenGL and definitely not in RW modes.

    2. The Section Line class does offer some added visibility control, but what I was referring to was actually a differentiation between all of the components the section line is actually cutting through. Take for example, a wall with multiple built components (i.e. moisture barrier, cmu wall, mortar, stone veneer). The ability for the visibilities of each class/component to read through the section line rather than on contiguous fill through the section plane. I would like to see layering through a section cut.

  10. I notice that in V2016 there is now the ability to create Detail-Callout Markers that link to detail viewports, so that if that viewport moves to a different Sheet Layer or its callout number changes, the marker responds accordingly. Great!

    I can also see a tremendous need to provide a text string (hyperlink?) that does something similar, linking to a viewport or sheet layer. This way, when a sheet is added or removed from a set, matchline callouts, notes references or other embeded sheet references could respond automatically. It would allow the most flexibility as a text string hyperlink (similar to a standard interactive PDF link).

    Bonus: Prior to 2016 and Project Sharing, the only way we have been able to provide a multi-user environment for a project is by creating separate project files (i.e. hardscape, planting, irrigation, details, etc.) and referencing them together with viewport references. Since we are not completely sold on Project Sharing yet due to a couple of reasons ( see other wishlist thread ) we have not yet made this transition. A way to make similar cross-references across different project files (similar to publish script?) would free up our workflow options tremendously.

  11. Just a thought regarding the clip cube. I am fairly green to the clip cube so some of these suggestions may be possible, but I just haven't been able to figure it out yet.

    1. Provide the ability to turn a clip cube into a 3D View, not just a section viewport. This could support the ability to create cool Section Perspectives that showcase a cut line while projecting the background in either an isometric or perspective view. When you try to create a 3d viewport from a clip cube view, the clip cube disappears and the entire model is present.

    2. Solid modeling of the cut plane. When using the clip cube, it appears that its intersection with an object always shows the bounds of the objects as lines with the centers as voids. Rather, a way to use the class attribute fill or texture to close the shape and show a solid fill for the clipped objects.

    3. A slightly more complex clip cube shape. This counters the idea of calling it a clip 'cube' but imagine a 2-plane cut-away 'L' clip cube line where details in 2 planes could be exposed and then communicated via comment #1.

    • Like 1
  12. In addition, some other considerations for future hardscape tool and operability.

    1. The ability to select multiple hardscape objects and still be able to edit the Hardscape Settings...

    2. If including a border for the hardscape object, make the border color respond to By Class setting rather than a manual picked color that doesn't respond to a change in the class attributes for the border class.

    3. Scoring lines for curved paths. The ability to provide scoring lines for pathway hardscape objects that are perpendicular to the centerline at a given interval.

  13. We were hoping that in V2016, Landmark would add components to the hardscape plug-in objects, similar to those of walls and now roofs in architect. It would be great, when placing a hardscape, to include in one object, the entire profile of a hardscape installation assignable by class.

    This would include, as part of the "slab" thickness, the base materials, any fabrics/geotextiles, drainage, etc. With the new site modifier features of hardscape objects in v2016, site models would respond to the total thickness of a hardscape installation and therefore provide more accurate excavation numbers as a result of base thicknesses. Schedules could then calculate quantities of base materials without having a derivative or hardscape areas. This could also then be used to create simple, self-correcting details for variable hardscape installations.

    I could image a similar engine backing other Landmark plug-in objects such as landscape walls, roads, etc.

  14. Thanks Alan. I have the different prefixes for sheet vs. project information correct I think (S_ vs P_). I also have the box checked under project information to carry that to all sheets; however the problem occurs between referenced titleblock symbols in other drawings for the same project. When I update project based information (i.e. client name, address, project name, date, etc.) in the mother file, and update the reference in the other files, the project based information does not change accordingly.

    Any ideas if there other check boxes?

×
×
  • Create New...