The Anorak

I've been using their IFC model to generate all of my sections and then use their DWGs (set up level by level) to show column positions etc in plan. It's a bit more work but negates the need to have the structure in my own file, or to convert their model to an auto hybrid.

Hi All, I have a question to weigh into the stories debate. Do you use separate plot files or have all of your sheets/documentation coming out of the model file? I've come up with issues a few times where the stories change throughout the design process and the individual plot files start to have errors because the stories are no longer identical. Even if we then manually fix the changes sometimes these errors still persist. Has anyone had experience with this? For me, it seems super counter-intuitive that you shouldn't be able to have the stories referenced into a plot file and updated with the model every time they change.

On a separate but related note, I want to control the orientation of my north point on my titleblock using the heliodon. However, the plan viewport is rotated 90deg relative to the design layer (in order to fit onto the sheet nicely) is there any way to make the titleblock "read" the rotation of the heliodon within the viewport rather than showing it relative to the design layer?

Hi All, Not sure if anyone else had had this problem, but I have a model file with stories and wall tags, floor types etc embedded in it. Whenever I update this model file which is referenced into a plot file the stories disassociate from each layer. This causes my stair cases to just appear as red error text. I then manually re-attach the stories to their correct layer (this fixes the stairs). After doing this a number of (not all) my data tags revert back to some default value which I don't even recall setting. Any thoughts on how to resolve this?

Thanks Klvanov, I gave that a try, however when the reference is updated the link between the data tag and the object is broken. It also wouldn't work in interior elevations as the tags would need to be put in the annotations layer. I think this really needs to be resolved and VW needs to put forward a workflow as this is something that's so fundamental.

Has this/will this be resolved? I am in VW2020 and the issue still appears to be here.

Hi All, One of my colleagues has been having issues with their files - when a section viewport is placed on a design layer (to be drawn over the top of) and then subsequently sent to a sheet layer the "profile line" glitches and moves relative to the section. I might add that the model is being referenced into a plot file - the problem does not seem to occur for sections cut within the same model file. The rest of the drawing is fine it is just the profile line that moves - sometime the shift occurs when we send it to print, other times the shift is visible in the file. Has anyone had any similar issues? Any help would be appreciated! 04 0500-Proposed Section A-A.pdf

It seems strange that this is not possible. As if you make the changes and place it it the workgroup folder would it not change the appearance of the labels on all your door/window objects? Surely different files will require different user field entries. In the Australian version (oh how I miss it) each data entry simply had a "label" function as part of it, so it was still "user field 1" with a label of whatever you wanted on an individual door basis, and on top of that you could either manually enter the text or select from a drop down set of parameters linked to the door object.

I know this is an oldie, but I wanted to revisit the masonry module settings in the window/door tool. Is there a way to give different values to the height and width of the module? It seems odd that they would both be determined by the one value. Or am I missing something here?

Window and Door insertion class default Can I add/ask whether this is possible: Ability to change insertion options to assign every new window/door to a particular class. In the same way that a symbol or wall can have a default class assignment this needs to be created for windows and doors. Strangely my colleague seems to have a glitch whereby all her windows automatically assign to the "sanitaryware" class - though this has never been set and I can't seem to find a way to change this setting, and her doors similarly automatically go onto another class.

Hey all this is half a question and half a wishlist (as who knows the functionality might exist and I may not have found it). This is primarily for generating fixture and fitting, and furniture schedules: Is there a way to assign an image to a symbol i.e in the record format include an image function (photo from the product website) that can then be called up in the worksheet? Of course you can include a plan/elevation view of the object but this really doesn't satisfy what I'm looking for. Thanks - any help would be appreciated.

I agree, having them visible in the Design Layer is essential for being able to check/update as you are working. Having used Vectorworks in Australia before moving to the UK, I never had any issues with the custom tag tools in Windoor, surely we should be able to implement some of the functionality of this? I think ID tag as separate to the door/window is a little clunky. Even if autogenerated there is still the possibility of the ID tag being deleted/disassociated from the object without people realising Having the symbol controlled by the door or window style is also essential - e.g different tags for existing, fire-rated etc. If the window/door tag had a "level of detail" type control where you could set the scale and offset depending on the VP scale I could see that working.

Great, can't wait to see it! Thanks Wes.

It seems like there should be an integrated way to manage this. Perhaps a future feature could include a "site orientation tool" which would retain all of the information of the survey coordinates etc. without the need for an overlaid DLVP. Then when placing coordinates on the drawing you could select "site coordinates" or "building coordinates".

Do you still set up your models this way in 2019, or is there a more streamlined method?