Jump to content

Frederic_Vbc

Member
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Frederic_Vbc

  1. Thank you Andy, you resolved my issue ! Selecting the All or Any criteria before adding a new one was the key to nest properly.
  2. Could we have to possibility to mix All criteria in this set and Any criteria in this set ? I was trying to make a simple line legend of a particular viewport and wanted to show Any objects that is a line, polyline or polygon but I want to ignore the one on the class none. But is doesn't seems possible. I know I can manualy delete them via Cell visibility and sorting but it seems that it should be possible to parameter. Is my logic incorrect or is it a tool limitation ?
  3. Similar kind of issues are happening with landscape area component and site model component. I experienced this too with hardscape component but that has been solved with SP1.
  4. I guess that it is suppose to display the same way hardscape component does. But for some reason it does not display anything. Can others confirm ?
  5. Yep I confirmed, problem is back ! Weird Looks like a speacial gift from SP1 @administrator Could someone look at it please, the problem exist since 2020 !
  6. The improvements introduced to the Site Modifier are great but there is one detail that makes part of the new feature 'Grade limit / Define by contours' a bit useless : The inability to use a simplification tolerance on the modified contour, making the vertices count going through the roof as soon as a curve is used. Could we plase have a simplification tolerance added to the Contour Edit ? Cheers
  7. Thanks a lot Letti, I will let you know if I make any progress !
  8. Well I can't say that I have experienced (this) issue so far. They have made some critical improvement with the site model and the modifiers ! And the ability to realign contours under Grade limits should fix that.
  9. Wow that's great and impressive Letti ! The result looks to be very close to what I was looking for. Your code is far beyond my scripting level but I will study it and try to learn from it. Thank you for your time !
  10. Thanks Pat, Unfortunately I am not yet familiar with Vectorscript or Python. I have been trying to create a node to decompose a polyline into segment based on the node "Compose" but I am getting an error : NameError ("name 'hPoly' is not defined" I am a bit out of my depth here... @Marionette.NodeDefinition class Params(metaclass = Marionette.OrderedClass): #APPEARANCE #Name this = Marionette.Node( 'Decompose' ) this.SetDescription('Decompose similar to how the Decompose menu command would.') #Input Ports hPoly = Marionette.PortInLists( [],'Poly') hPoly.SetDescription('A poly') #OIP Controls #Output Ports out = Marionette.PortOut('Vertices') out.SetDescription('The resulting vertices') #BEHAVIOR this.SetLinksObjects() def RunNode(self): #functions def Add_Handle(obj): out_list.append(obj) #inputs Poly = self.Params.hPoly.value #script out_list = [] vs.DSelectAll() for h in hPoly: vs.SetSelect(( vs.CreateDuplicateObject(h, vs.Handle(0)) )) vs.Marionette_DisposeObj(h) vs.DoMenuTextByName('Decompose', 0) vs.ForEachObject(Add_Handle,'(VSEL=TRUE)') #outputs self.Params.out.value = out_list
  11. Hi, I would like to create a network that create new polygons based on an existing one and a condition. The idea is to 'highlight' (create a new poly) the portion of the polygon where the area width is less than a given distance (here 1500mm). I can think of two avenues to approach this : One might be to run a polyline offset around the boundary and use the intersecting point as delimitation for the new poly. (which is kind of what I do manually) But then I am stuck with translating the use of the 'bucket' 2D polygon Tool : Inner boundary Mode in marionette ? Another approach I was thinking was to use the proximity test (using part of Sbarrett's wrapper) of a series of 2D points on the poly and filter them with a condition, (and ignore a certain amount of consecutive ones I guess to avoid false positive) Would someone have a better idea or have done something similar ? Thanks Fred
  12. Right now the stake tool required you to click in the elevation box, enter your elevation then place the stake. I know it does not seems like much but going back and forth to the elevation box then the drawing can be strenuous when entering hundreds of points manually. Having the possibility of a pop up box allowing to enter the next elevation after each stake being placed would be a nice and simple addition. Or Just being able to hit the Tab key to enter the elevation box maybe. Just something that give the possibility to skip going to click in that tiny elevation box would be nice. Thank you kind developing team
  13. @jeff prince Yes I think it is a reasonable call. There are two things that I do to minimize the issue : I keep an original and clean copy of the site model to use once I am done with my modifications (refer to my workaround just above) I try to avoid setting up a modifier on a a contour line (e.g. top of retaining wall site modifier on 16200 when my contours are every 200mm) unless it is from the Tool Set 'Site Modifier Tools' I hope it helps
  14. No matter what setting I change in the publishing option, it doesn't affect the output file. I would like to not have 11MB file for 1 A3 but apparently it is too much asking. I remember having the same issue with first version of VW2020. Like how is it possible to have bugs again and again every year for the same things ?
  15. Well from my personal experience I know that converting an old project to a newer VW version is a terrible idea ! And if the old project had referenced file, oh boy you better be good at meditation and managing your anger. I had issues with display, georeference, visibility tool, and probably more...(at least until SP3 but that's like in 9 months) In short, my rule of thumb : Work on project with the associated VW version.
  16. I cannot get the visibility tool to work with a Viewport - Referenced. Someone else is experiencing this issue ? Edit : It doesn't work if one of the two files (or both) have been converted from 2021 to 2022. Now I remember I had the same issue last year. If both file are created in VW 2022 it work fine.
  17. Typical case scenario : I am working with a survey referenced and I need to import the boundaries of my site. Instead of going back and forth to the Xref file or manually tracing over it I wish we could have something Select Similar Tool extended to the content of the Xref file. And the possibility to activate the content of referenced file so it interact with current geometry (like the ability to use Inner/outer Boundary Mode on Xref).
  18. Hi Pat, Nope, Viewport Class are normal as per default. Just changing the Pen style & Color to 'By Class' is actually changing the Fill in the section Viewport which doesn't make sense... See example in the file attached Landscape area Test.vwx
  19. I've experienced issues with the Section Viewport and Landscape Area : Case scenario Vectoworks 2021 OZ SP1 Win 10 Landscape area applied to a site model (3D poly or Texture bed) and section Viewport is created. Issue Landscape Area Components (Fill/Texture/Hatches or Material) are not showing as they should in Section Viewport. Fix Select Landscape Area and Disable 'By Class' in the Attributes Info Palette as it is overwriting other set up options.
  20. @Dylan No worries 😉 Yes, Everything that needs to be scheduled. Note that you can also attach a record format to a group. And you can copy/past record format with Eyedropper. So if you've got a nice class structure you can easily select apply/modify an entire bunch of object. (e.g. bring a symbol with the vapour barrier record format attached and copy/past the record format to the group of line). Plus you can also select from your worksheet (e.g. every element having ID number 1.1) and modify the record format of those elements from your worksheet. So it's a pretty flexible solution. Takes a bit of time to implement at the beginning but you get your money back with the annotations and schedule process.
  21. @Dylan Hi Dylan, I'm implementing that workflow on a project for the moment. I've done it like this : Create a record format with all kind of information you would need in your future report ( I have : ID number, Description, Sheet detail, related Sheet details, Specifications, Manufacturer, Product Name, Size, Thickness, Color, Finish, etc) Attach the record to every object that you will need to be scheduled Create your worksheet and link all the data from your record format. Create different report depending on what you want to show. E.g. I have a report showing just : ID number, Sheet detail, Related sheet detail. ( this is on my general material plan) Another one for the size, color, finish, manufacturer, specifications etc. ( this is for my material schedule) Create a custom data Tag to show your ID number. I have for example : 1. Masonry (category) 1.1 Retaining wall (Element) 1.1.1 Blockwork (Parts) 1.1.2 Render( Parts) etc. Note : You can create a report with just 2 column to create your legend. The good thing with that workflow is that you can modify you ID number directly from your worksheet and all the same number at once. Here is a chart of my workflow
  22. @Elin Did you put your data tag on the viewport ? I Could not find a data tag just for elevation so I quickly made one. Have a look at the file attached. Is that what you want to achieve ? On your design layer : Set your 3D stakes on the site model Create a section Set your section viewport on a new sheet layer On the sheet layer : Enter annotation mode in your viewport Use the data tag on your stakes. (As mentionned, I made a custom one. It takes 2 min and you can save it in your library. See picture below) Elevation data tag.vwx
  23. @Elin Maybe try using 3D Stakes and Data Tag to get the elevation in your viewport
  24. What I meant is when you have a perspective viewport and you open the edit panel, there is that option 'Camera' that you can use to modify your point of view (even when you didn't set up a camera.. I know it's a bit confusing). But as for your case it does look really painful ! Are you working in Open GL to move around ? Textures are the next suspect to check. I tend to move around in Wireframe if I ever use a camera. Very rare thing.. I usually don't even touch the camera or use the rendering tool of VW. The gap with Lumion or Twinmotion is just too big. VW is great for lots of things but rendering...Haha. I think they already gave up actually. No one can be good at everything I guess !
×
×
  • Create New...