mgries

Member
  • Content count

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Good

About mgries

  • Rank
    Apprentice

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Architect
  • Location
    Santa Barbara, California, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

512 profile views
  1. I'm just realizing that my VW Architect doesn't contain some of the basic Site Planning Tools I would expect to find, even for primarily Architectural uses. Is there really no Landscape Area Tool for me to use? Does Vectorworks offer any way for Architects to designate general Site Plan areas (such as pervious and impervious surfaces) using a BIM feature? We need this too. Thanks, Matt
  2. @Tom Klaber, I see this is a bit of an old post, but I really appreciate the thought you put into this! There would need to be a bridge between finishes assigned to walls and those assigned to spaces, so the information could be linked or transferred, rather than only belonged to one or the other. Also, there's the issue of tracking rated assemblies, as you mention, so a bit more thought is needed here, but I think what you propose offers a lot of flexibility to deal with all assemblies, whether rated or not. The tagging of a rated assembly would need to belong to the combined wall assembly (structural + finish). So if you changed the finish assembly, you would cancel out the rating data. Rated assemblies, irregardless of software capabilities, is always going to be a complex issue in terms of documentation. It conflicts with documenting walls the way you show above (finish assemblies and structural assemblies kept separate). When rating isn't an issue, this method works great though! Regarding wall ratings: Another wishlist item, and I know this has been talked about on the forum already, would be a simple way to control the graphical representation of rated walls, floors, and roofs, unrelated to any assembly graphics. Has VW2018 addressed this at all? If not, we need this feature! This should be a simple check box ("show wall rating"). It's essential from schematic design through to construction documents to be able to see a (class dependent) annotative graphic attribute running down the center of (or maybe sandwiching) any rated assembly. Even before specific wall assemblies are dialed in, and well before that amount explodes to 30 different types, we still know the general TYPE of wall assembly - as far as required rating is concerned - and need to track this information and represent it in our drawings. Building this into the wall tool as an annotative component would greatly help improve the efficiency of documentation, as well as overall quality control. Matt
  3. This tool was so close to being VERY useful! But the fact it only relates to wall components is rather self defeating. We have viewports for simplified presentations where we like to turn off the wall components (i.e.- for schematic design). Partial height walls below the cut plane all of a sudden display like they're being cut (per main wall class assignment). I would expect the main wall class to follow the same override algorithm as the component wall classes. This seems like an odd oversight. I hope we don't have to wait to long for this to be fixed! CORRECTION! I must have been doing something wrong. I can now get the class display override to work when components are turned off. I'm not sure what was going on the first time around... I guess the only issue is when the wall is above the cut plane. CORRECTION TO CORRECTION...IS THIS A BUG?? This tool definitely is not working correctly. Can someone please tell me if this is a bug? Aside from unstyled walls not obeying cut plane algorithm (which seems to be per design), my styled walls are getting tripped up as well. Here's the set up: My partition walls are set to A-WALL-PRTN class, which is set to 18mil with a grey fill. When the wall goes below the cut plane, I set the display to my partial height wall class A-WALL-PRHT, which is 10mil with a white fill. I should probably just name it A-WALL-BELW so that the names aren't so similar. Anyway, I've included screenshots of these settings. Here's the glitch: When I have my wall detail components turned on, both the line and fill display correctly below cut plane. But, when I turn off wall components, the line displays per the partial height class, but the fill reverts to the full height partition wall class! What's going on here?! Please help if you can... mcg
  4. @JimW, I thought new marker types got written to some file hidden on my hard drive. When I add a new marker type, and then open up a new file from scratch, the new marker type is still there on the marker list, so it doesn't seems to be independent of the document that was open when it got created. What is the best way to share a custom marker list with a whole office besides going around to each machine a re-editing the list? Thanks, Matt
  5. I noticed that VW2018 has included incandescent fixture as one of the new and exciting "style" based plug-ins. I'm not running 18 yet. Can anyone report on what added benefits the style based version brings to the table?
  6. I agree that a complete overhaul of the callout and notes legend tool should be a priority for the next release. It's one of the more limited and least user-friendly aspects of the software. Considering how essentially notes are for documentation, this is really an enormous oversight. If a complete overhaul is not in the works, improving the current tool in the following ways would definitely help a lot: allow categorical tags to be applied to notes. For example, I would tag many notes with their appropriate CSI category. provide search bar in the notes manager, allowing notes to be filtered by text or tag allow a single keynote legend to be placed on multiple sheets allow a single note to be applied to multiple legends. allow worksheets to be created from notes database. Thanks, mg
  7. Related to this, I have a wall opening display question I would love answered: I have used the door tool to create vent openings in the stem wall below (vent openings to crawl space). In plan, I would like to show my wall break lines to be dashed, but I can't get this to work. I am displaying opening set to "no break", which gets me half way there. For the life of me, I can't figure out how to control the display of the perpendicular break lines. See screenshots... I hope someone can help me...this is driving me crazy!
  8. I suggest a generic "Wall Opening" tool, separate from Door or Window tool, to control all of these issues. It could contain all the necessary options for capping, without having to integrate it with the display settings for actual AEC objects. A cool feature to add on top of this would be to designate the opening for the purposes of ventilation, potentially allowing application of vent coverings to be built into the tool.
  9. Hi mk, I'm in need of this exact script! I use a space label and calculate the occupant load using the formula field, but I'm stuck displaying the result using the decimal precision set for the entire document. Please share if you can find this! Thanks, Matt
  10. A way to do this without the script is to use the Formula Field under "Additional Data". I fill this out to read "=#Gross Area#/#Additional Info 01#", then the space label can call up Occupant Load directly from the Formula field. There's a rounding issue of course. Does anyone know how I'd write this formula to take care of rounding? Thanks, Matt
  11. I'm coming in late to this thread, but.... What about "advanced" project info. related to code analysis (Occupancies, Construction Type, Exiting components, etc.)? It would be helpful to store these types of code related parameters in order to greater leverage space tabulation worksheets. Currently, we use worksheets in spreadsheet mode, and add lots of nested formulas to help with tracking code analysis. But it would be nice to tie this sort of worksheet into project info. from a database. Has anyone given thought about storing and utilizing this level of project info? The only thing I can think of to use at this point would be a custom record. But I can imagine more of a pre-formatted questionnaire type tool instead, ideally with pull-down options, and yes/no check boxes. Thanks, Matt
  12. @Andy Broomell, beautiful! This is a good work-around, but I still vote for the added feature of being able to save drawing label styles, and then being able to select style on the fly while creating a new viewport (or while simply adding a drawing label into an existing viewport). thanks!
  13. Does anyone know how to create different graphical presets for different types of drawing labels in the same file? As far as I know, you only get one drawing label default setting per file (aka: the last one used before the file was saved). But we have a few different ways of graphically representing our drawing labels. For example, our Detail drawing label is formatted to fit snug in a grid box, whereas our Plan drawing labels are longer and have a few other tweaks to the graphical display. I'm finding it a bit tedious to have to reformat my drawing labels continually throughout a project. I'm hoping there's a way to store a preset for a few basic types. Any suggestions? Thanks, Matt
  14. I have a general question regarding use of Wacom Intuos (Pro or other) Tablets: I'm interested in incorporating a tablet into my workflow, but I'm not sure how it's being leveraged with VW. Is it just used as a fancy mouse that provides pen control and touch-pad gestures (as well as handy preset shortcut buttons)? Or does VW also allow integration of the pen tool to create quick hand sketches directly on screen? In other words, are people literally drawing on their screen with this, say for example to add mark-up redlines? Thanks, Matt
  15. Tom, there's one major benefit as I see it: Multiple boundaries would allow adjacent columns in a single worksheet to allow a side-by-side comparison of related area tabulations (each related to a different boundary). For example, you would be able to show Gross and Net side-by-side in the same worksheet. The tool is supposed to be able to provide for this, but as I previously explained, the algorithm is far too simplistic to be used in practice. So now, we have to make 2 space labels, on 2 different classes. This, in turn, can only be used to create 2 separate worksheets. IMHO, tracking 1 plug-in object and 1 worksheet is far better than tracking 2 plug-in objects and 2 worksheets. Matt