jpccrodrigues

Ok, crazy workaround that gets close to the desired effect: 1 - Copy of the final site model 2 - Put 3d representation with “Cut and Fill” 3 - In 3d view, explode the site model 4 - Explode the resulting mesh 5 - With the 3d polys, create a new site model, removing its skirt in 3D Settings 6 - In 2d, representation with coloured elevation 7 - Explode site model 8 - Extract 2d representation and overlay the original site model Again, crazy workaround and no height control of a feature that seems not that difficult (slopes are contralable…). Any easier way? Any suggestions? Should be included in the VW roadmap 🙂 Thanks!! TEST 1.vwx

Saw this post: But looks like it lost itself over the time. Thanks!!

Hi, good evening, Did anybody developed a site model plan with a gradient representation of the cut and fill areas? Similar with what you achieve in civil 3d: https://globalcad.co.uk/civil-3d-cut-and-fill-how-does-it-work/ Any suggestion to advice a 2d plan with this info? Builder is asking for it, I'm open for suggestions 🙏 Thanks!!

@Vlado thanks to look at the problem instead of just assuming that the problem is at the other end... Thanks and have a nice weekend!!

When vw changes to a subscrition based model, increases the costs and we face this kind of errors... In a new tool, I can understand, but the irrigation workflow doesn't have an upgrade in years. Probabily this comes from the new user interface, really don't understand it. Any way around it?

We're developing an irrigation scheme and faced a potential bug in the 2024 version of the software. To work in old projects we still have the 2022 version installed and, as you can see, there is the possibility of adjust the piping preferences following the typology Main Laterial and Drip: In the 2024 version that Tab disappeared: In the project that we are working the default pipe type only applies to the Main Lines, the Lateral Line don't follow the selected preference. That wouldn't be a problem if the project has almost 3000 pipes and 3km of extension... When we try to change manually, the software crashes... So we need to do manual confirmation on the calculations, a waste of time and money... Anybody faced this problem? Any solution besides a bug report?

Same experience. Phyton script to lay a drop emitter for each plant (a very common request in the forum...). Never worked... Anybody tried to create a Marrionette script? Just curious to see if works or not.

Having Georeferenced files is precisely that: having drawn elements referred to a certain datum, usually large kilometers away. If you move the internal origin, you compromise the position. A common way to verify that is the geoimage tool. You need to determine the datum, import the file and, if everything is correct, you get an accurate image. But if you change the internal origin of the file... The relative position changes and the image is moved as well. Considering this, would you keep georeferenced files or keep the drawn elements close to the 0 0 0?

Ohhh the dwf export problem... Two words: A NIGHTMARE The link is about 3d dwf. I think the topic is about good old normal 2d dwf. But I can name more problems: Classes turned off that appear Classes turned on in the expiry that doesn't appear Worksheets in annotation mode that shirk (if you have the viewport 1:200, you need to scale in autocad the worksheet 200x,or leave it "free" in the sheet) Patterns and images gone Transparencies gone. If concrete examples are necessary, I can upload. It's an old topic, so frustrating to lose hours and hours to correct stupid graphical things when everything is modeled... And then see archicad (not to name revit for obvious reasons) being able to export clean and beautiful drawings...

This has any relation with Georeferenced files? Always had this question...

Hi guys, Effectively, the site model export to revit is a headache... I understand that this relies more on Revit then in in Vectorworks, but you should really look to this. It is a nightmare for everybody... I see that Autodesk uses a procedure to transmit Civil3d toposurface to Revit (using DWG file), I'll try to go through the export settings in Civil 3d to see what is "good enough" for Revit, because, from my understanding, I'm bringing "too many points" to Revit and the triangulation just goes crazy.... Putting the original site modifier and then start putting points based in our site modifiers?!? Anybody tried something like this before? Original Site: With Contours (DWG): With Mesh (DWG): IFC (doesn't even enter as a valid input for terrain):

The secundary pipe connects the drip line, not the other away around. Design the drip lines and the connect them with the secundary pipe.

Hi, good morning Eric, Exporting directly a site model from vectorworks to revit didn't work. The model enters as a "generic model" in revit and it doesn't work as an input for the terrain creation. Craziest thing: you export that same element in DWG and re-import it into revit and then it "reads" to become a terrain. But the mesh / TIN surface isn't really a good base for terrain creation in revit, all the reasoning behind it soles in direct point manipulation. From what I've been reading, two main inputs are admissible: DWG with contours or points or a CSV file. The export RVT from VW always enters in revit as a generic model, it doesn't transform into a native revit object. So, I always need to make that bypass through autocad (or export dwg from vw and just ignore the rvt export). With that said, now we enter in the trial and error stage, where we have to test and see what procedure gets the best results. I think the contours will be the solution, but tomorrow I'll post the results. For the future, it would be very important to get a direct relation between vw site model and revit terrain. Earthworks is the base of our work and if we aren't able to communicate it, then we have a problem. I know that VW works to get that connection done, site model is a fantastic tool comparing to all other bim softwares available, but... Revit is the standard in the industry and if we want to "sell" ourselfs as a BIM software, we should assure that we have procedures, guidelines or software developments to allow that exchange of information. Another two points to think: geolocation vs design close to the user origin. When we use geolocation, it allows a lot of tools but then, being very distant from the internal origin, some errors start appearing. And the site model export into ifc file. It requires a lot of tricks to get it done. Sorry for the long text, hopefully it can transmit some of our experience using the software and communicating with other offices.