RussU

Ok... I need to assume that it's file specific. Can't replicate in a new file, so I take it back. The only significant thing is that I imported a 850kbDWF file, which in actual fact had a ton of data in it... but the curves and arcs were faceted to a million straight lines, so it was actually very heavy in terms of vertices. There's an issue where geometry or line work which is miles away from the origin can cause problems, but this one was all tight around the origin... One other (and tiny issue) is the scale command. where you measure an existing distance, and then input a new one (option 2 in the menu I think) When scaling stuff this way, you need to either do it four or five times, or change the file tolerance to .001 or similar (I work in metric) Seems that the initial dim "grab" doesn't load the dialogue with the floating points, so you get an approximation on first attempt. That issue has been around for years, so not flagging anything new. Sorry to alarm and sensationalise about the locus issue... I'll go further and see if I can replicate it properly... rather than moan straight away. and yes... I'd love to have access to the last 41 service packs I've missed!!!!

Hi Everyone. I've got a line which I want to divide evenly with locus points. Go to Modify, drafting aids, then Line into segments. I've been trying various values from 2 to 50 and in all sorts in between, and when the operation completes it takes an age to give me control back (Black screen, spinning mouse timer) Then, when I realise I want a different value, I Undo... this takes an age too. really bogs me down. happens every single time. Didn't notice it pre SP4, but that's not to definitively blame SP4 for it. Not sure what's going on under the hood, but to do the same operation with move by points tool, in distribute mode, happens immediately and nicely... But the undo after is still incredibly laggy and slow. Granted, I do have an imported DWF on another greyed layer behind, but whether it's greyed, invisible, deleted or anything the file still lags. Done restarts and all sorts, and can replicate every time. Anyone else noticing this? Windows 8.1 x64 - VW 2017 designer SP4

Although not a modelling tip, I made a huge ramp like this a few years ago based on client drawings. The main issue with the as-built version was the change in pitch on the tighter radii... Along the long edges it pitched very gently, and at the tighter rads it pitched very steeply, especially on the inside corner. The model prototype demonstrated that the internal pitch of the tight rad was far too steep, with only 1 in 12 allowed in the EU... so we ended up doing flat "landings" on the tighter ends, and then only pitched up the longer sides. This also had the side effect of offering a good surface to get on and get off... So.... Looking at your design the ellipse is split in two, with a gantry between the halves. So, might it be an approach to extrude your surface in plan, and then simply rotate it a little in elevation to match the environment? That way you don't get the tightening on the corners, and it's a lot easier to model and much cheaper in the final construction too.

I find this one of the most useful functions of all... saves a lot of align/distribute functions. Have you checked your resize buttons at the top of the screen? you'll have "resize off" "resize" and "resize multi".... switch resize to off Do it.... it's a superb tool

Are you doing it visually or via a menu command? when dragging, there's a modifier key for copy... ctrl+drag on PC. Doing it numerically you can move with the modify->move command, and to copy (and array) you can use the move by points command in the basic tool pallete. Also, when ctrl+drag, visually moving, press the tab key to bring up the data bar. you have distance and angle on the first pair of inputs, then relative on the second (±x ±y is your cue), and then absolute co-ordinates on the third pair of inputs. Stick with it, it's a much slicker workflow when you've adjusted to it. Also, as with most programs, invoking a tool and pressing f1 will bring you up the help page, which are very well written, often with short videos on a lot of subjects.

One option I would love to see, is "convert to hybrid symbol". At the moment, if you have 3d and a 2d overlay, it makes the symbol a hybrid.... nice. When you convert a PIO, you either get the 2d, or the 3d, so you need to do it twice and combine... not a major hardship, but another step I work in a similar industry to yours, so it's very broad from job to job. This is exactly the discussion I wanted to have. How people work and to understand other peoples workflows, to improve our own. As I mentioned I tend to start with parametric where possible, and then break out to custom when needed.

Absolutely agree... this should be rolled out for all users, restricting to a design product just ruins the fundamentals experience... Also, I'd like to break out the pallettes so I have classes and layers in side by side menus, rather than flicking between the two... although nested classes are a great organisational tool Do you think it could be useful to instate a quad view (top, front, side, perspective) similar to what you have in the bulk of other 3d apps? or do you like the current way?

Hybrid, as in 3d, with a 2d overlay? or autohybrid? Do you go to the effort of wall insert options?

Hi everyone, I'm really interested to to hear what people think of the many tools and workflows in VW. I've been using VW since v2008, and generally had the full "Designer" package, which is what I use today. While some tools, like stairs, structural shapes, site model, fastenings etc. are really good and quick for initial layout, when my designs becomes more complex and more "custom" I tend to break it out into generic geometry, extrudes etc. During Initial file set-up the parametric and plug-in objects are really handy, but when you have something very specific in mind I've found it much quicker to directly model the item in question, rather than trawling through dialogues and drop downs, with a lot of hit and miss. (Sure, this is probably because I didn't learn the tools thoroughy enough in the first place, but often I want something which is not supported anyway) So my initial plans and first stage designs are full of quick and easy plug in objects, but end up with a very VW look and feel, but as the design matures I end up with custom modelled content, and almost no parametric items at all. I'm really interested if people think this is a normal workflow, or if in general folks try to keep eveything as parametric and do everything through dialogues and the OIP. What do you find quicker? Therefore, personally I would prefer to see development focussed on generic modelling and texturing tools, rather than the Plug in stuff. To that end, I get a lot of comments about why I use Designer and not Fundamentals (Although I do enjoy section viewports, drawing number co-ordination and the Navigation panel!) What's your two cents? I'd love to know what people consider to be the "normal" way

As it happens, I tend to do this most of the time. There's two advantages, firstly you get the reference line which ties the two drawing numbers together, and secondly if you set a depth to the section then you "cull" the geometry beyond it, making a re-draw much quicker (much less to calculate than a side view). You're right that there's a conversion in these VPs also. If I'm really pushing the boat out, like we have sketch and renderworks styles, it'd be nice to have hidden line and dashed hidden styles as well. Although the current workflow isn't bad at all.

This is a great revision. because when you need to relink a section to another viewport, you can get the name in one click, rather than tabbing the oip over and back to find out. personally I never rename views, but everyone is very different.

I'm on PC, and I like to model a lot in OpenGL, ortho projections. Feels really natural. When I'm just working on a layer plane, the ctrl+middle mouse button orbits around nicely. I often use the flyover tool as well, for specifying the centre of rotation. I do a lot of setting new work planes and drawing geometry, but when I go to orbit, the axes are correct with regard to the WP, but feel odd when you orbit. Is there a central setting which I can toggle this behaviour on and off? so I can get the natural feel back? At the moment I'm setting a temporary WP to a layer plane and then going back to the WP after I orbit. EDIT: Working planes to not affect space navigator use, only mouse wheel orbit....

Great!!! What a lovely resource! Don't forget the sketchup 3d warehouse too, that's a brilliant place for quick and easy models and the like

Plus 1 on this!

I was just teasing! I seems like everything is possible in a script, but I just thought it shoudl work out of the box. Do you know something we don't I expect you're a beta tester already, so I'll absolutely read into that!!! Insider dealing. I have just tested it on a simple sheet... I have four viewports of a steel frame, numbered one to four... I make a duplicate and all new viewports on the new sheet are numbered as five... just tested on 2017, sp4. Sorry, you're Right, I do generally have B-1 so the duplicates become B-2, B-3, and although in the navigation pallete they are numbered correctly, all of the title blocks display B-1. This isn't great as the workshop only see the printed files and not the filenames. Absolutely... We have "update viewport and plug in objects" before export or printing, so a quick rebuild of the title block database should cover this.... But I do remember that @JimWmentioned that a "fix has been found, but not implemented yet" in this post Why wouldn't it be implemented yet??? Crazy! Tested at this end also... The Publish list can't find the sheet if it's renamed... Quite often sheet renaming is a requirement when working with outside parties, and it breaks saved sets and so on. Thanks for looking into it though... I do love to hear "what's going on under the hood", as it increases my understanding of what's reasonable and what's not.

Hi Everyone. I've been using Evermotion models and textures for years, and they're very very good. I've just noticed (and this might be old news) that they're giving some of their texture packs away for free. https://evermotion.org/shop/cat/423/free_products I've only used the first 3 packs before, and am now downloading the others. Lots of useful stuff in there. Enjoy

Just a quick suggestion. After a few months a file can quickly swell to enormous proportions, some sheets showing full, very busy viewports, some showing tiny details and sections. At the moment we have a global setting for 3D conversion resolution. Low, medium etc. like we have a sheet DPI function, is it possible to have a sheet layer override, so sheet 1 can be in High 3d accuracy, and sheet 2 can be low etc. etc. When redrawing a full on, high detail section at high detail, firstly it takes an age, and secondly the file size can be huge. To be able to control it on a sheet by sheet basis, like we can with rendering DPI, would be very nice! Thanks!

And here's some example files. It's a bit of a conveluted workflow, but it does work... I hope it makes sense to those who are interested, and of course and suggestions whatsoever are all welcome. You'll notice that it relies heavily on good referencing, good naming and especially good drawing number co-ordination. You might need to re-reference the files on your local machine if they come up as broken. VW_Example.zip

Although the sheets display with wrong numbers on duplicate, they're clearly correct on the "internals" of the program. As you mention, a simple edit title block and cancel corrects them. So a "Refresh numbers" button should set them all straight (Pat Stamford enters stage right with script in hand no doubt!) If I'm being super picky, it would be nice to allow names to be re-used... I don't mean between sheets, but a design layer AND a sheet layer AND a Symbol of the same name. at The moment, I'm prefixing... l-B1, s-B1, d-B1 etc. My workflow (for those who are interested) when detailing Steel is to; 1) Design up the frame in a file, using extrudes, structural shapes, plates and drills etc. 2) Use a symbol for repeatable parts (especially laser plates) 3) Symbolise the individual beams, B1, B2, B3 etc.. usually with the prefix of p-B1 to denote its a part 4) then symbolise the "assemblies" of each lump. so a-Beam1, might have 1no. B1, 3no, p1, 5no p2 etc... 5) do the general arrangement and erection drawings in that file 6) make a new manufacture file and reference in the symbols (for a two way relationship) 7) Make a new layer for each part, B1, B2 etc. and centre to origin, and rotate each part. 8) Make a sheet for each part, often by duplicating and adjusting layer visabilities. 9) annotate each part and assembly, using worksheets on each page to list the parts needed for each assembly The lack of drawing co-ordination means that I end up with five sheets named B1, but they actually show B2, B3 but with the title B1. When it's late and everyone is tired, I end up with a workshop full of different B1's and no B2's and so on.... which causes a big headache, and sometimes steel is thrown away, and I get called rude names... all becuase the sheet numbers didn't update, and I was in a rush. If anyone is interested in that workflow, I'll post a couple of example files to show how I do it. There's bound to be people out there that say, use Tekla/Solidworks/Inventor, but I don't just do steel detailing... I work with fit out crews, electricians, window fitters, landscapers and all sorts, so the steel detailing is only one of the disciplines and it's nice to have it in VW. The drawing co-ordination, or lack thereof is very annoying, and on occasion, costly.... Also... with sections, when you duplicate a sheet with sections on, the new section is bound to the previous sheet... and you have to activate it onto the new sheet by hand. I'll post some files for people to give me feedback on the workflow listed above... might be over complicated, but thoughts and opinions very very welcome Thanks Russ

Makes total sense... It's a dark art this coding thing. Just a quickie though, when SP3 came out, and we had an issue with sheet borders and sheet names not updating (particularly when a sheet is duplicated) you mentioned that a fix was available but not yet implemented. Why wouldn't it be implemented in this release? more to it I guess...

Hi @JimW With regards to the "fix list"... is it possible that they've implemented other fixes that don't appear in the list? It seems like the rounded rectangle crop on a detail view is fixed, but the sheet titles on duplicated sheets are not.

On that note, is there a beta program that can be volunteered for? Or a list of patch progression that's accesible?

Go to as many exhibitions as possible. Take a camera, take a sketch pad. Also, if you can, get into the workshop and talk with the guys who build things, have a look at how the CNC machines work, you won't regret it.

@Andy BroomellI can say that I've crashed here and there, so it is possible. ill keep an eye on it and report back. interesting thought.

Where in the world are you? US, UK? They're a friendly bunch here, so ask away. No question too daft.