• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

23 Great

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

535 profile views
  1. I think we've discovered the 'stair tool' of the pitched roof. Seriously - this seems to be another VW tool that's a Jack of all.....Master of..... - well you fill in your own description here. As I said earlier in this thread, This isn't a very user-friendly way of creating and supporting software. Although I can see it keeps VW 'experts' in pocket change. Trying to avoid a major rant..lets move on to the problem in hand...... --------------------------------- Thanks for your test file Christiaan (send via PM.) You're right, this isn't 'behaving' (as we expected from some considerable time 'invested' earlier) Looking at the simple roof surface you've provided, the first thing I see different from our earlier examples is you've chosen to have Eave Cut as Double. If you change to Vertical, the top component is 'fixed' (well, its now as you expected to see - both gable and edge condition). Conclusion: This is a BUG or WAD. Frankly, if a VW boffin wants to stick their head above the parapet and declare WAD then I'm a (***************), as its not WA (my) D. This is the challenge then VW - what's the (corporate) response?. And please don't come back with "yes, theres bugs (we thought you'd not notice if we kept silent)"
  2. Agree - seems no logic - but weird. Yes - z fighting - VW can't make its mind up whether glass or muntin wins. But only (I think it seems clear?) in perspective. Well - a stab in the dark (side) really. Sorry I can't offer a solution.
  3. Thanks for the file @Taproot. This is an odd one. The saved views are consistent - in that they 'work' on my Mac - so the problem persists. But I can't seem to find a trigger action that always produces the effect. But, I have found (weirdly) that the groundscape you have modelled seems to have some effect. I've edited your model (deleted parts, not just switched off classes) so you can see to the other side which has similar muntin problems on the three windows. I've also pulled a copy window out from the main wall we're viewing and I've positioned it far back beyond your groundscape. (just as a test really) Now look at the three saved views again. 'Muntins OK' - All show OK 'Muntins - Vanish' - Yes I think that is conclusive - 'Muntins - Back' - Well, yes and no. You can't see from this angle, but all three windows in wall are the same and the extra window I placed far beyond all still have problems. Nearest is fine though (?) Now the weird bit.... Take the middle saved view where all muntins are missing and delete some your groundscape. You have five parts on plan. There are three 'roof faces' and two 'floors'. Ive highlighted the far roof face and the nearest. (The middle one doesn't seem to action anything.) . Deleting the far one...brings back the muntins in the nearest window. Deleting the nearest.... brings them all back Yes - rubbish information I know - sorry for that. I can't find the underlying problem atm. Because - although this is straightforward it would seem - just rotating the viewing angle loses the muntins again. (**********) Maybe you could let me know if other files you say display the same problems also have similar groundscape that can be deleted to resolve. If thats the case then maybe something to do with that? However, I think that is an unlikely 'fix'. I think its zoom levels (as you said) Conclusion: I think this is a bug or maybe a resolution problem with perspective turned on. Maybe the VW boffins could jump in and confirm? I couldn't get this to fall over when I viewed in Orthogonal (even when I gave it some quick view changes zoom in and out to think about), so I think that possibly underlines the perspective problems. Additionally, I couldn't make any connection on classes/layers/visibilities etc. so I think they are robust and don't have any bearing on this. Perhaps someone else could have a' fresh' look.
  4. Happy to look at it if you load a test file
  5. @Ola Have you seen this? May not have any bearing on your problem, but thought you should be aware of this post.
  6. Heres your chance to have @digitalcarbongive your system a really good test run. Give him the keys and see what he breaks.
  7. Nailed it. Now have energy drink and move on
  8. Mesmerising. More please! I can then have two channels I like watching @digitalcarbonand yours.
  9. Oops - Yes. You're on the ball.
  10. Yes, I think it would be good if you could have handles for the roof process. WYSIWYG is and always has been my preferred option if available. Too much of VW seems to end up with changing something in an OIP and seeing what change/outcome that gave you. (OK - Perhaps I should read the manual) Unfortunately (and not wanting to be too discourteous) there sometimes seems a disconnect between the boffins and the end users as to what we really want, day to day, in our own 'commercial bubbles'. Some of that is reflected in the way VW has developed into a 'tool for everyone'. Jack of all trades.............? Still beats ACAD though!!
  11. I believe its because VW uses the position as the 'origin' of the slope (usually sitting it on top of a wall) At a wall you just have the thickness of all components. Having moved away from this point you have the (incremental) additional height of the pitch. Or Rise over (the new) Distance explains better?
  12. Maybe you can Wishlist a comprehensive WW Inc video on this. I think it would be a good reference to the roof tool's complexity.
  13. Stop - you're just showing off now. Reading the manual? Thats not us.
  14. I think its some sort of OCD. I just have to find out either whats wrong or a suitable work-around. Think we may have the latter in this case. Onwards to the next one..
  15. No probs Christiaan - I'm learning as well. Why didn't I think of that (is there an emoticon with a face slap) Worth noting the conclusion... There have been several bugs associated with the new Roof Styles. I'm waiting until they are fixed before using it and that was.........oh, only Nov 2015. We'll wait then shall we?