jan15

If you use the numeric keypad to enter dimensions (and if your dimensions are of the antiquated feet and inches variety), you know that the only problem is not having a "feet" symbol, i.e. the single-quote character, on the keypad. You have to keep moving your hand over to the typewriter keyboard to hit the single-quote key. I've just switched to a new macro utility, because my old one, mgSimplify, stopped working under Windows 2000. The new one, Macro Express ($40), can distinguish between the keys on the numeric keypad and the same character keys on the typewriter keyboard. So I've assigned the asterisk key on the numeric keypad to generate a single-quote, and now I can enter feet and inches more quickly and fluidly, without that constant rattling back and forth to find the single-quote key.

You can modify the shape just by grabbing any edge and dragging it - min. 1 column, max. 4 columns. But I don't think you can remove constraints. There are always 8 of them. You can hide all of them by double-clicking on the top bar. Then just the top bar shows (which is very small if you've set it to 1 column wide), but it keeps the palette open, and you can double-click again to show the constraints.

Carl, Are you aware that there's a guideline feature built into VectorWorks? Select the objects that you want to be guidelines, or guiderectangles, guidearcs, etc., and pull down Edit>Guides>Make Guide. It's always clear that they're guidelines; and to print without them showing, pull down Edit>Guides>Hide Guides. If you have a macro utility, or better still, if there were a built-in macro utility, people who use a lot of guidelines could assign a single keystroke to convert any just-created object into a guide.

You could buy just one copy to test drive for a month. Whoever does that could use it on shared projects, by just exporting everything to version 9 files. It's only $250, and if you decide against, you can get a refund. But it's unlikely that you'll want a refund. I think it's pretty unanimous that v10 fixed all or most that was wrong with v9, and also added a lot of good new features. I still use v8, but bought v10 just to be able to trade AutoCad 2000 files and do print scaling. And to do my bit to support a good cause.

Maybe you imported a DWG file from someone else, and it had a lot of Blocks (Symbols) in it? Delete the symbols in Resources palette, or cut and paste the parts of the drawing that you want into a new VW file. Otherwise, the only thing I know of that would make a file that big would be lots of raster images.

"Print Current View" disregards whatever print border was created by the "Print Setup" and "Set Print Area" commands. Are you sure you didn't create a print border 2 pages wide, and then use the "Move Page" tool to move that print border to the view you wanted to print? And then maybe issued a "Fit to Window" command to zoom in on the area to be printed across those two pages? That way you would print the current view across 2 pages, though not by checking the "Print Current View" box.

On my computer, a function key - F7 - does that (exits from a group or symbol). It's a real time saver. Other function keys issue other commands that I use often, like Undo, Cut, Paste, Paste-in-Place, Group, Ungroup, Join, Rotate-Left-90, Add-Surface, Clip-Surface, Send-to-Front, Send-to-Back, and Fit-to-Window. Of course, not everyone uses Exit Group or those other commands most often. Each user has a different set of commands they use most often and would like to assign to single keystrokes. So what's really needed is a built-in custom keyboard-macro handler. Then we could each assign whatever commands we want to single keystrokes, instead of being forced to choose between time-consuming pull-down menus and painful Ctrl-key combinations.

Hatch box? Do you mean that square shown in the "Select Hatch" window? VW calls that the "Hatch preview". If that's what you mean, then maybe what you need is to change to a hatch pattern with more closely-spaced hatch lines. So I'm guessing that you have only one hatch pattern, the one called "Default Hatch" (look in the list to the left of the preview). With that highlighted, click on "Duplicate", which will add another hatch pattern to the list, one called "Default Hatch-2". While that new hatch pattern is still highlighted, click on "Edit", which will open a big "Edit Hatch" window, which can do amazing things if you want to take the time to learn it. If you just want a more closely-spaced diagonal hatch, all you have to do is decrease Offset Length (L).

I tried to replicate what you described, but couldn't. I exported from VectorWorks 8 and 10, to DWG v14 and 2000/02, trying various settings in the export window. The result always opened in AutoCad 2000 showing my full VectorWorks drawing in the Model Tab. And there was always one Layout Tab, which contained a single viewport showing all of model space. The only thing that came close to what you described is that objects on the full-size layer that I use for my title block were too small to see, since they were only a few inches wide, as opposed to other objects that were maybe ten or a hundred feet wide. But they were there. Is there a "Zoom All" command in VoloView 3? The AutoDesk tech's answer sounds bizarre. The idea of an AutoCad file without model space is meaningless. It's like talking about a VectorWorks file that doesn't have any layers.

"Vectorization" software does what you want. It reads a bitmap (or "raster") image file (that's where the graphic image is defined by assigning a color to each individual pixel, row by row and line by line), and turns it into a vector image file (where the image is defined by specifying only the key points on geometric figures). The scanner gives you a bitmap image file, such as TIFF or JPEG, and the vectorization program converts that file and then saves it as probably an AutoCad file or an Encapsulated PostScript file, either of which can be imported into VectorWorks. There are vectorization programs for Windows machines for as little as $100. Some of them give you a certain amount of free trial before you have to pay. I don't know what's available for the Mac. Another way to do it is to import the bitmap image into VectorWorks on another layer and trace over it. You won't be able to snap to any points on the bitmap, of course, and having a bitmap in a VectorWorks file slows it down unmercifully; but the vectorization software is not completely trouble-free either.

The place where you click with the paint can cursor has to be completely enclosed by objects that are already selected. And if one of the selected objects is a symbol I think it won't work properly.

For a smooth curve, use Arc by Tangent (3rd option in the Arc tool). Start the next arc at the end point of the last arc, then click-drag till you see the cue "Tangent", then release, and then click again to set the end point of the new arc. Then the two arcs will have the same tangent where they meet.

All you needed to do was change all the layers to 1:1 scale before exporting. And be sure to check the "Scale Text" box in the "Layer Scale" window. And if you want to show your correspondent how to set up her ViewPorts to make it look like your drawing, send a print, or a PDF file, or the original VectorWorks file with a link to the VectorWorks Viewer download page. Maybe someday AutoCad will learn to use scales, and then we won't have to do this.

I learned VectorWorks on my own, without buying any books, and only occaisionally referring to the User's Manual. I suggest devoting several hours to just trying everything out -- not trying to draw anything, but just seeing what the program does: --Select each Tool on the 2D Tools palette and watch what happens as you click and click-drag around the screen. Be sure to try each of the Options for each Tool (select Options by clicking the buttons that appear just above the upper left corner of the drawing). --After that, start experimenting with the Commands on the pull-down menus. Some of them only work if there's a selected object or multiple selected objects, while others apply to the drawing as a whole. I still spend a little time every week trying out things just like that, even after 5 years with VectorWorks. This "General Discussion" forum is the right place to ask questions. Ask as often as you like. Your questions will be easy for experienced users to answer, and they'll make us think we're smart.

Thank you, iboymatt, for the excellent detective work and solution of a major problem with VectorWorks, that of offsetting curved polylines. I never understood why it worked the way it did, but with your suggestion it works the way it should. Your workaround should be posted on the "2D Tools-Commands(Read only!!)" forum, entitled "Offsetting Curved Polylines". Or at least in the "Tech Notes and How-To Suggestions" forum.

Yes, it's just common courtesy to bind any xref's before sending an AutoCad file to even another AutoCad user, and it only takes two seconds. And yet, I often find AutoCad users who've never heard of it and don't know how to do it. In case you run into that: It's done using the Bind (B) subcommand of the Xref (XR) command. The Xref command opens the "Xref Manager" window, and then you select which externally referenced file you want to bind, and then type B or click on "Bind". That makes the externally referenced file into a block in the current file.

Why not just use Print Scaling? That reduces line weights, and it only takes one entry in the Print Setup window to reduce the plot scale for all sheets.

If a facility for displaying fractions is provided, it should not use miniature numerals, as in Runtime Error's post, with the entire fraction taking up as much space as one normal character. It should instead follow the old hand-drafting convention of the 3 in 3/4 being slightly higher than the other numerals, and the 4 slightly lower, but both of them the same size as the other numerals, so that they're legible. But I don't think it's a high-priority addition, particularly if it's true that feet, inches, and fractions of an inch are only used in the US. This issue will not really be solved until we as a nation come to our senses and switch to the metric system.

1. I don't know of any way to prevent that with the Trim tool. In fact, I didn't know until now that it happens. I never use the Trim tool; it's very glitchy, hardly ever actually working, and when it doesn't work compounding the time-wasting by throwing up an error message. I find that very frustrating. But the class-change glitch doesn't happen with the Trim command, which works like AutoCad's Break command, breaking any line crossed by the selected line or polyline into two lines. Perhaps you could use that instead? I always use the Trim command instead of the tool. It works pretty nicely as part of a macro (which I invoke by pressing F9) which breaks the line I want to trim into two lines and then deletes the construction line that I've just drawn for that purpose. Then I delete the unwanted part of the line that was just broken. 2. No alternative to this, either. I know AutoCad joins the end that you clicked on, but I always disliked that and wished it would use the longest end, so was very glad to find that VW does it that way. When I want to join the short end of line AB, I first draw a short construction line across AB, near the joining point, and then use the aforementioned break-and-delete macro to break AB there, so that the Join command will then do what I want. It's actually pretty quick and easy, especially if a single keystroke both breaks AB and also gets rid of the construction line.

Do you have "Snap to Object" on? I find that when I have that constraint on I can snap to a point inside a symbol, though the screen hint is always "Locus", instead of "Point", "Center", "Top Right", "Center Left", etc. While editing a group you can't snap to points inside a symbol (or a group) that's on another layer. In this respect, groups act like un-named sub-layers, and there seems to be a principle that you can only snap to points that are no more than two levels removed.

I formerly worked in VectorWorks on a Macintosh, and wrote DWG files for Windows users on a daily basis, with no problems. It sounds like your correspondent had a problem with his or her particular machine, and perhaps needed to re-boot and try exporting the file again. There's also the possibility that the VectorWorks file was inadvertently sent to you instead of the DWG file, or that a newer AutoCad version was exported than what you can open. If you got the file on a floppy disk, the Macintosh user would have had to remember to format it for Windows. And I recall that Macintosh always writes an extra file which is only used by the Mac OS, and which doesn't show up in the Mac folder, but does in Windows Explorer. In general, the only problem I know of that might arise is with scale, since VectorWorks draws to scale, and DWG format doesn't accept scale. I suggest changing all VectorWorks layers to 1:1 scale before exporting, to make sure that none of the drawings overlap each other when converted to full-size. 91k is a typical size for a VectorWorks drawing without a lot of colors, fills, or bitmap images, particularly with the older VectorWorks version 8.

VW version 8 doesn't have print scaling. That started in version 9. You found a little tick box called "Scaled to Fit"? Where? It must be part of your printer's software. Some HP printers have reduced size printing. My 1220c has it, under Features>Zoomsmart>Percent of Normal Size. There's also a choice called "Print Document On", with a paper size specification. I'm not sure what that's supposed to do, but I know that print scaling doesn't work unless I uncheck it.

You CAN stretch Groups. It's only Symbols that don't stretch. Whereas each insertion of an AutoCad Block can have its own overall size, each insertion of a VectorWorks Symbol is the same size as every other insertion. I, too, would like to have that ability, i.e. to be able to re-size each insertion of a Symbol without dis-associating it from the Symbol definition. I would use that very rarely, but it would be nice to have if it's not too difficult to implement.

A hatch pattern is made up of one or more dashed lines (which the program calls "hatch layers"). DashFactor x RepeatLength = length of the dash. 1/DashFactor x RepeatLength = length of the void between dashes. To put it another way: Repeat Length specifies how far till the next dash begins. Dash Factor specifies what percentage of the Repeat Length will be solid. The remainder will be void. So, for example, to specify the dashed line that will represent the bottom edge of your brick, you want a Repeat Length of 215 + 10 = 225 (from the lower left corner of one brick to the lower left corner of the next), a Repeat Angle of 0, and a Dash Factor of 215/225 = .955555555 You'll need 4 lines like that (assuming the bricks are not stack bond), each with a different starting point. All 4 lines will have an Offset Length of 65 + 10 + 65 + 10 = 150, and Offset Angle of 90 degrees. And then 4 lines to represent the ends of the bricks, with Repeat Length = 65 + 10 + 65 + 10 = 150, Repeat Angle = 90 degrees, Dash Factor = 65/150 = .433333333, Offset Length = 215 + 10 = 225, and Offset Angle = 0 I'd have to draw the bricks to calculate the Start Lengths and Angles. I find it easier to design hatch patterns if I give each of the lines (or "hatch layers") a different color until I'm finished specifying the geometry.

I use a very attractive and legible TT hand-lettering font called "Stylus". I got it from one of those CD's with a thousand fonts, but a google search showed that it's available at MyFonts.com for $21. http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/itc/stylus/ The version I've been using had a couple of problems, one with the spacing of the digit "1", and the other with line spacing. I adjusted those with a shareware font editor. Browsing the MyFonts web site, it looks like the version they're selling doesn't have those problems.