mike m oz

Check out the suite of add ons purchasable from VectorPlug-ins for US$36. The VP MULTIPLE LINE EXTEND tool in this suite will do what you want. http://www.vectorplugins.com/ [ 11-17-2004, 02:04 AM: Message edited by: mike m oz ]

Check out the suite of add ons purchasable from VectorPlug-ins for US$36. The VP MULTIPLE LINE EXTEND tool in this suite will do what you want. http://www.vectorplugins.com/ [ 11-17-2004, 02:00 AM: Message edited by: mike m oz ]

If you live in Australia there is a CAMERA TOOL included in the Australian / New Zealand version of ARCHITECT which makes it very easy to do what you require. It allows you to define precise views in a graphic form in the model. If you live eklsewhere - better hope someone develops a tool which you can buy.

Better 3D snapping is a must. But while your about it NNA how about returning the 2D snapping to the precision levels of MiniCAD 7. The current 2D snapping is problematic at best and particularly frustrating with the polygon tool where quite often the polygon won't close even when you think you have. Often you end up with another vertice adjacent to it.

What you need to do is create new dash styles over and above the standard number in the dash pallette. If you then draw lines of these types and copy/cut them and then paste them into another document this will add them to the dash styles in your destination document. For the future what you can do also is modify the dash styles in your template files and save them as new template files (overwriting the existing ones if you wish) . This will at least make your new work have the desired dash styles. Hope this helps

A postscript to the above comments: If you are dealing with compound curve paths be very very careful in your use of static path templates lest the sweep of the vehicle, rather than the tyre path, catch you out. Make absolutely sure in the documentation phase, or if you are uncertain at all during the design phase. A little bit of consultancy fee may save you a lot of grief. Once the context is there as an AutoCad drawing (ie. an export of your VW drawing) the actual vehicle path simulation takes very little time. You can then watch it and pick up any problems very quickly.

Peter P You need to be very careful using static turning templates to try and work out whether a vehicle will get around compound curve paths. The vehicle behaviour is affected by the successive curves and this is exacerbated if there are trailers involved, or the vehicle is articulated. You would be best to seek expert advice from a Civil Engineer about this. They will use one of the add ons for the dreaded AutoCAD which allow you to simulate a given vehicle driving along a user defined path. AutoTrack is one add on that I am aware of - it is very impressive. Have you also checked what is available on your UK Department for Transport website. I also just did a quick Google search for AutoTrack - if you go to www.savoy.co.uk you will be able to see an animation of how it works. It is also obviously set up for UK standards which will suit you admirably. I am sure there are other standards available for other parts of the world as well. Sometimes as architects etc. we just have to accept that seeking expert advice from other areas of expertise is essential. Knowing when to do this is the important part. [ 11-13-2004, 11:39 PM: Message edited by: mike m oz ]

Jnr your anxiety is unnecessary. I have been using VW 11 right from its first release and there have been very few problems. The frequency of problems has in fact been less than with VW10.5. The benefits of the new features in VW11 far outweigh the very few minor problems I have had, and the learning curve is not difficult. Give it a go - you will get a pleasant surprise.

In my experience 3 things which slow VW down are: - multiple light sources casting shadows - multiple solid additions and/or subtractions - round elements. Only use the light sources you have to and turn unnecessary ones off where possible. With solid additions and subtractions - turn them into Generic Solids or Nurbs where you can. With round elements: - think about the scale and whether they need to be modelled round or not (sometimes a hexagon or octagon or even a square will suffice if they are small visual elements eg. balusters). - reduced the 3D resolution while you are working on the model to make the machine have to do less calculations. Only ramp it up for the final outputs. The problem with round edges is that they can very quickly add many billions of calculations if your not careful. Other tricks: - Use classes to your advantage: - through saved sheets you can control what is visible and what is not visible. eg. for most exterior views you don't need the interior detail, and vice versa. - Adopt a stage set philosophy and only model the detail where you have to. A final few thoughts: - check that you don't have multiple layer links throughout the drawing resulting in duplicates in the same layer - check for corrupted objects (The window wall tool gave me a real bad experience of this not that long ago with very bizzare OpenGL rendering results) [ 11-09-2004, 08:45 PM: Message edited by: mike m oz ]

Jckii I am also on a mac and yes they must be dropped in loose. Maybe something went wrong with the 'expanding'. Try getting the latest free version of Stuffit Expander and download and decompress them again. After you have dropped them loose into the plug-ins folder make sure they are there and that the category is correct before trying to add them with the WORKSPACE EDITOR.

I went and downloaded the Shamsul Adnan plug-ins and put them into my VW10.5 plug-ins folder and I am able to see them in the Workspace Editor They are MENU items and are located in a folder called Shamsul's. To provide access to them it will probably be best if you add a new appropriately named menu to your Menu Bar. When in doubt about where an added plug-in is located you can check its category (& therefore folder in the workspace editor) by going into the CREATE PLUG IN dialog box under SCRIPTS on the ORGANISE MENU. Scroll down until you locate it and then hit the CATEGORY button. Voila - all will be revealed. Then exit without making any changes to the plug-in.

Your best option would be to purchase a copy of Windoor 11 from OzCAD here in Australia (www.ozcad.com.au) You will find the details through the ADD-ONS tab under PRODUCTS. This add on will allow you to do the muntins how you want them. In fact it will probably satisfy all of your door and window wants and more! "WinDoor 11 is an add-on for VectorWorks 11, that creates simple or complex windows and doors which are fully editable parametric objects. It allows design and documentation to happen more quickly and provides increased control over component sizes, greater flexibility with door and window designs, better line weight and class control, and the ability to do corner and bay windows with a few clicks. You will also find support for a much greater range of door and window styles for both residential and commercial construction, than the standard VectorWorks objects provide. If you would like to see how the latest version works, there is a downloadable demo version below, along with a series of QuickTime movies that explain WinDoor's capabilities" Good luck [ 11-16-2004, 09:42 PM: Message edited by: mike m oz ]

Unfortunately the reality is that OpenGL just isn't as good as QuickDraw 3D was. If it was still viable with VW I would go back to it in a flash - it gave better and quicker rendering results. It seems that this is the trade off that we have to accept by Apple switching to the "industry standard" (ie. Wintel standard) of OpenGL for rendering. Perhaps we should all hassle Apple to bring it back.

I like iboymatt's view of sections: "Live Sections means basicely that a majority of work can be done in 3D. after all sections are vertical sections plans are horizonal sections elevations are just a section taken just outside the building." It would be great if it could be done this way - I can see a few problems with the hybrid environment however. BOA and SketchUp manage to do it so it shouldn't be impossible.

The capability to have different classes for the top, sides and underside of roofs so that different fills could be used for each surface would be a boon. Even better would be if the fascias and gables were separate entities providing even more choice. This could then extend to the application of textures. An absolute must however is the ability to fill or texture the gable walls independently of the roof. eg. the roof could be tiled with the gable wall boarded.

One problem I have just picked up though. If you use associative dimensioning the 'red square indicators' don't rotate - they stay where they were relatively. Its a pity that you can't either: - visually turn them off. (they tend to clutter the drawing up and in instances like this are a nuisance) - globally make the associated dimensions non associated (to my mind this is an essential option which must be added) Better still would be a comprehensive updating of the dimensioning protocol - but that is another story!

I tried the JHEarcht suggestion of drawing the separate parts orthoganally on design layers and then assembling them in a sheet layer by rotating the appropriate viewports. seems to work fine on a simple drawing so can't see why it won't on a more complex one. A bit of care about information in the lap areas would allow this to work. Nice one JHE. To my mind the other suggestion of using symbols and varying the insertion angle of them would also work.

I've just upgraded to OSX 10.3.6 and many of the gripes included here about performance on the Mac platform appear to have gone. For example: - The OIP now responds instantly - The OpenGL rendering is substantially quicker Seems to me that this may have been more of an OSX issue than a NNA issue! This must have been quite frustrating for the NNA Technical People, and I for one apologise to them for thinking that these were problems they hadn't addressed. Try upgrading yourself and see if it solves your problems.

Repost because I accidentally missed typing some of the information - sorry about that. I've just upgraded to OSX 10.3.6 and lo and behold the delay in the OIP registration has dissapeared. My conclusion - it was an OSX issue rather than a NNA issue! Try it for yourself. [ 11-07-2004, 07:36 PM: Message edited by: mike m oz ]

I've just upgraded to OSX 10.3.6 and lo and behold the delay in the OIP registration. My conclusion - it was an OSX issue rather than a NNA issue! Try it for yourself.

There are too many reports both in this forum and elsewhere about VW being slower on a mac than a PC. The big question is whether the problem is NNA or Apple. From what I have observed the problem is Apple compounded by the rather ordinary implementation of Open GL on Apple computers. To me it seems that Apple needs to get its act together pretty quick lest it loses more users to PC. The Apple advantages seem to get less and less each day - and this being the case one increasingly has to ask oneself why we are wasting our money on an evergrowing marginalised computer. Brand loyalty has its limits - and at the end of the day a computer which works is more important than sexy look!

Only one problem with the print to PDF option in OS X - the result is absolute rubbish. I was severely embarrassed with a client using this option. I sent the results to a client without first checking them - despite setting the print output option in VW to 300 DPI the result was absolutely awful - I naively thought that setting the print output option in VW would ensure a good result in the PDF output. Haven't Apple conned us there - to get a good PDF result you have to invest in Acrobat professional. I was surprised to see that 'learner' says that the problem with PDF is that the file is too big. From my experience this is usually only a problem where there are embedded images. Otherwise the PDF files are substantially smaller than the drawing file. The easy solution to the problem is to give your printer a copy of VectorWorks Viewer and get him to print direct from the file. And by the way there is no point zipping a PDF file - the PDF file is already compressed and zipping it will in fact make it larger!

POSTSCRIPT It would be nice if there was an option to do Duplicate Arrays by Radial parameters - ie. angle and distance. Would be useful for drawing things like purlins in sections. Can be done in a defacto way by selecting an item and then dragging a copy using Option Drag. Supsequent copies will 'remember' the offset distance if you have the Offset Duplicates option ticked in VW Preferences. Sometimes difficult to get real accuracy using this method however - usually easier to do the maths.

You can use a couple of features to make drawing in obscure angles easier: - Temporarily rotate the grid to the required angle under SET GRID (you can also relocate the origin as necessary - before you do this make sure you can reset the origin back to its exact location - first place a locus at 0,0 and lock it in place) - Use the alternate cooordinate system under ANGLE SNAPS - For Duplicate Arrays at angles draw a line to get the exact X and Y coordinates and enter these into the Dialog box fields. When drawing at angles it is important to have the dimension units set to high levels of accuracy - particularly angles which need to be set at a minimum of 4 decimal points. Alternatively you may want to check out a VectorBits tool which allows you to rotate a drawing - from memory there are some limitations, but check it out. The Exterior Wall Dimensioner Tool is problematic at best - better to do all of your dimensioning manually. NB For the angled dimensioning to be accurate you will probably have to to rotate the grid to get reasonable functionality out of the Dimensioning Tool.

Comment 1: Why don't NNA implement it in their PIO's then. For example If it was an option in the Window Wall PIO the PIO might actually become useful. Comment 2: BOA's geometric dependency is much more than equally spacing out an element within an object (like mullions). it is like an extension of the Parametric Constraints which which adds intelligence. For example - it will adjust window spacings in a wall. - it will provide additional elements once a predetermined threshold is reached. What i am asking for is more intelligence so that the modelling becomes more intuitive.