.png.682a1dde7889dd17fdb4e18ba0421cf6.png)
Scott C. Parker
-
Posts
669 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Marionette
Store
Posts posted by Scott C. Parker
-
-
Here's the file.Forum post on stage deck and legs count.vwx
-
1
-
-
On 10/22/2024 at 6:19 AM, Regie said:
In my Leg Total, it counts only for 1 deck only.
Inventory can count the legs. I created a worksheet via the Equipment and Inventory dialog and then grabbed the worksheet code for the legs column.
You'll need to change the data to work in the legend by adding WS_ and the # signs.
#WS_OBJECTDATA('INVENTORY PART QUANTITY', 'Legs', 1)#
This works for data tags as well.
-
1
-
3
-
-
USITT is gathering feedback about their Lighting Documentation Recommended Practices
The public review period ends Dec. 6, 2024
This is not a Vectorworks project. If VW users have feedback, please use the link on the USITT page to offer feedback to the USITT committee. Replies posted here will not reach them.
https://www.usitt.org/public-review-lighting-documentation-recommended-practices
-
2
-
-
15 hours ago, Mike Rock said:
Maybe a better way to phrase the question would be " does vector works take into account the center of gravity when determining loads" which based on the response is no.
Agreed. The various calculations offered do not fully deal with the inherent changes that occur when dealing with factors that shift the weight. An easily observed example is the shift in the perceived attachment points when using slings. VW and Braceworks use an attachment point based on the centerline of the truss and misses the shift caused by the rotation or tilting of the truss.
In the photo above, the shift from the tilt causes extra mass to shift to the left, beyond the pickup point, and the amount of mass appears substantial.
In the posted file, the amount of shifted mass is much less.
In retesting the posted file, I found that the tilted systems offer about eight pounds of different results compared to a flat version of the system. I shifted the hoists to attach over the third light from the end for each. The issue, though, is that the pickup points are not accurate as they are from the centerline of the truss. At the end of the day, it'll be up to the engineers to whom the Braceworks reports are sent to make the final reports.
In my first reply, I used an example of people holding the truss from the ends of the truss. In that case, there would not be a shift in mass beyond the implied pickup points.
I could see a future Braceworks improvement that adjusts the calculation pickup point to be offset from the centerline of the truss. This would require users to always choose a desired pickup symbol that tells BW what the offset is. It would also require info from the pickup point object manufacturers as to the side load bending resistance strength of their solid pick point objects. A wide and deep rabbit hole to get stuck in.
Great conversation. Thanks, Scott
-
1
-
-
This is an often misunderstood concept. Several factors support the weight loads of each hoist being the same regardless of the system tile.
- The truss you have is set to use a rigid cross section.
-
The two hoists are placed acurately to maintain a vertical chain, which removes any sideways pull on either.
- If the high hooks were attached to a stationary pic point and then you change the tilt of the truss, the chains would start to pull in/outward which would cause dinamic shifts in load and lead to pulling the system in one direction. If this were the case, the balance could then differ.
-
The truss sections are solid and transfer the weight evenly between the two pic points.
- In the real world, and when using spansets, they would shift slightly and the difference would be present.
Think about is this way.
You have a vertical truss that weighs 100lbs. One person is holding up the top and another person is holding up the bottom. If both share the load equally, each exerts 50lbs of effort. Now, change the same truss to horizontal. Each person is still holding up 100lbs between them, 50lbs each.PS: so others know, the file had only two hoists. The image above shows three and the weight would be distributed differently, but the calculations still hold true.
-
9 hours ago, Pfundty said:
When changing the truss system trim height
How are you changing the trim height?
With the number of ways to change an objects' height in VW, it's possible you're bypassing an anticipated workflow that leaves the hoists behind. -
I'll be talking about this during the Nov. 7 Coffee Break.
-
3
-
-
If you use the Bridle tool with two or more legs, the legs would be the guy wires. You can set the Apex height to zero to remove the down leg.
-
The bridle tool doesn't support diagonal single bridles.
However, the symbols for the bridle legs are in the resource manager, and you can use them independently. You would then use the attached BridleItemRecord for your reports.
The folder is under Defaults in the RM
-
Leo,
At the moment, when speakers are inside the Speaker Array "wrapper," the Summary key can not see them directly. This is being worked on.
A bit of a workaround... Ff you look in the list of Unused Symbols in the Summary Key dialog, you should see the symbols you want to show. While this will show the symbols, they won't show a count. For the counts, you can create a worksheet for just those array speakers via the Equipment List dialog and overlay the worksheet upon the summary key, keeping it in front to remain visible. A hassle, I know.
If you need help with this, send me a sample file with just the array you're using and I'll mock it up for you.
Thanks, Scott
-
1
-
-
Obviously, this shouldn't happen. We'll likely need a copy of the file to test at HQ. If you share it here, we can take a look. If you need to keep it more private, please email
tech@vectorworks.net so they can set up a ticket and retrieve a copy from you directly.
One of the first things we do when testing is to see if it crashes on our machines. If it does, the next step is often to import the items from your file into a clean file and try again.
What happens if you import the layer from your file into a new blank file?
How old is the original file? Was it created before 2024? -
AH! I figured out a workaround for now. You can subtract slack from the cable. In the cable configuration and/or the cable worksheet slack column, you can add a negative number, which will change the cable. In a worksheet, you can select all the cables attached to two-fers or breakouts and place a negative number in the slack data field. You'll need to update and then/reload the cables via the manage cable parts dialog to force a cable refresh.
-
1 hour ago, trevorgooch said:
where is the breakout output length set? IE - 6ft breakout, or staggered?
The breakout length function has yet to be implemented, so there is no data field for the lengths yet.
1 hour ago, trevorgooch said:virtual twofer to track power loads thru pass thru.
Power loads need to use a distributor device to track power. When you use the included or duplicated and customized versions of two-fers, you can both track power and show them in reports as distributors.
What this means for
1 hour ago, trevorgooch said:correctly accounting for cable needed.
is that the current tool doesn't subtract the lengths of the tails from the needed jumpers yet. It's being worked on.
-
1
-
-
On 10/7/2024 at 11:01 AM, MMiller Lighting said:
In order to get seating "pods" that include both tables and chairs in a specific layout I created nested symbols.
Can you share a sample VW file with the seating sections to play with?
-
Braceworks is fussy on connections, especially for items it considers side loads. If you could share a sample file to play with, I and others might be able to offer suggestions.
-
Hmmm. I think I've always needed to reassign the V to the Visibility tool in my workspaces. Which I always do when building a new workspace.
-
21 hours ago, David Meagher said:
The file was started in VW 2023, but now in 2024.
If you can post or send the file to tech support, we can take a look.
-
On 9/28/2024 at 1:34 AM, Cristiano Alves said:
However, last night I ran into a strange problem.
If you could post a sample file and the steps needed for us to do the same thing you are doing, it will be helpful to figure out what the problem is.
-
PS, the fastest way to show focus for plots with a lot of lights is to use Focus Points. The lights all point to there assign focus point and you can also rotate the 2D version if you check this box.
-
I have questions... But first, to answer yours. You also need to edit the 2D version of the same symbol and rotate the 2D geometry to point in the same direction to match what you did in the 3D version.
When I place the fixture from the library, the OIP offers both Pan and Tilt controls that do what I think you're trying to do. Using these in conjunction with the Z rotation field gives you control over all unit focus and rotation and works for both 2D and 3D.
If you don't see these fields, please open the Spotlight preferences dialog and look at the Parameters list. When I'm doing a lot of focusing work, I move the Pan and Tilt parameters to the very top of the list and they show in the OIP right under the Z rotation field.
This picture is from 2025 where we've added sliders.
One more thing. Be sure to use the Lighting Device insertion tool to add the light so the OIP shows all the controls. The sample file you shared had the simple in the design layer as a static symbol vs. an actual lighting device.
If I misunderstand your needed workflow, please explain a bit more.
-
3 hours ago, Cristiano Alves said:
it’s not flexible enough for us to customize it with other information
Can you create a sample layout of what you're trying to do? It would be helpful for future planning.
Thanks, Scott
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, michaelk said:
Do you think that the Lighting Pipe Object thinks it's still a Lighting Position Object?
No idea really. But if the position object was deprecated and the internal ID was reused for something else, that would make sense.
-
This should be helpful for data viz and color coding.
-
1
-
-
Do you know when the base file was first made? This file looks like it originated six years ago. It's possible some sort of object type code has been corrupted or changed during one of the translations from one year to the next.
I've seen this before. I had an object think it was a wall cabinet when it was an entertainment device. Doing a symbol/item replacement fixed the file for me.
Stage Deck - Graphic Legend
in Entertainment
Posted
You've found a system limitation for the rails. The rails report in parameter order as used vs. parameter order when & where used. That is, the #1 will report the rail in the order placed vs. in the rail position. Thus, it doesn't easily report which rail is which when using long and short rails.
The legs work as there is only one parameter for legs vs. the four for rails.