David Bertrand
-
Posts
260 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Marionette
Store
Posts posted by David Bertrand
-
-
Skot says:
I still have yet to see how viewports can be a useful tool for what we do.
Viewports can be used to create a sheet of details, 2D only if you want.
The details can be drawn at different scales in separate layers, and then brought into a sheet layer via viewports.
Another approach is to make the details separate drawings, created by different people, "workgroup reference" them into the detail sheet, and place them into viewports.
Using this latter method, an entire detail sheet can be assembled before a line is drawn. Then as the details are drawn, they'll automatically show up on the detail sheet. Neat.
-
Jan15 says,
I've been collecting demos for other CAD programs, hoping to find time to try them out.
Please keep us informed of what you learn.
Have you tried the viewports and work group refs in VW rel. 11 & 12? Those are some of my favorite features of Vectorworks. They give a feeling of power, like a programmer.
I've not completely learned 3D in VW because I really don't like the looks of 3D CAD. It looks too impersonal. It is of course a useful tool nevertheless.
-
As it is, I've stopped buying the upgrades and I'm looking around for other options.
What do you mean by options? Do you mean dropping VW, or going to separate software to do specific tasks such as 2D or 3D?
-
Jan15 said:
Before release 11 there were no xref's and no paperspace,
Ya know, you're right. I didn't remember when xrefs and viewports came in. We went from release 10 straight to 13.
and so the only way to have multiple scales on the same page was to draw something the wrong size.
What? Didn't you "insert" blocks? I drew details as separate drawings and then inserted them at a relative scale into the target drawing.
About scale.
All CAD programs draw at full size. Scale has to do with plotting only. The objects are drawn at 1:1. The notations and dimensions have to be enlarged (x96 for 1/8" scale, for example) so that they will plot properly when the drawing is reduced to plot scale.
In AutoCAD, notes and dimensions have to be enlarged manually.
In VW, these things will be enlarged automatically once you enter the scale at setup (Page > layer scale) and page size (Page > set print area). The whole drawing will be automatically reduced to the proper size when plotting.
The advantage in VW is that, should you change the drawing scale midstream, it automatically changes the sizes of the notes and dimensions. In AutoCAD, you're screwed, because it doesn't change anything, or at least it didn't up to release 2000i. You have to go in and manually change the size of these items.
valerie leal-bennett
I think mechanix and alanmac have good responses to your topic. You should try to use PDFs. Using .dwg will only lead to unreliable results and wasted hours.
My Mac outputs perfect PDFs and I can even import them into "Pages," the new Apple word processor.
-
Autocad's recently aquired ability to have several paperspace drawing sheets in a single file, or of the ability to draw plans of different floors in register by using Layer States and by freezing layers in viewports.
My head is still reeling from AutoCAD. But the newer features revealed by Jan15 would have me unable to cope.
But the practice of drawing details 4 times their real size so they can be printed at 1" scale on the same sheet with a 1/4" scale plan is an obsolete practice
In this case I would have used XREFs rather than drawing a detail at the wrong scale on the same sheet.
AutoCAD has a steeper learning curve than VW, and it's easy to forget after a weekend of partying. So what you have to do is work out "procedures" for everything that you do, and then document them so that you'll remember them on Monday morning.
The same applies to VW. I can never remember all the settings I have to change in order to establish a new layer with a different scale. So I plan to create a check list so that I can get it right the first time.
Sorry, that had nothing to do with the original post.
Regarding the print shop, I would go for the PDFs. They are a wonderful development.
-
I worked in a small engineering office (using AutoCAD). We didn't have the redline tools that you talk about. Most of the associate and lower ranking engineers did some form of CAD. The Principals did not.
To be honest, I got nervous when the engineers worked on the drawings. They could mess things up pretty badly because they weren't always up on our (the Drafters') latest techniques and procedures. I felt that engineers had more important things to do than try to draw.
Mostly we got red marks for changes and I was fine with that. Engineering is pretty simple and straightforward. We didn't have to coordinate the drawings from other disciplines.
We banged the changes out pretty quickly, replotted, and returned the revised plots along with the redmarks to the engineers. They took care of disposing of old plots.
With that system, I felt that I had control over the production, and that there would be no unpleasant surprises.
-
Ah, the topic that refuses to die.
I must have misunderstood vw_vectorworker's question. I thought that he was referring to technical drafting: by hand vs by computer.
In that case, I don't believe that experience with hand drafting leads to better CAD drafting. In fact, it's a disadvantage because the hand drafter still has to learn CAD eventually. Otherwise he won't be able to compete.
To be a drafter in any medium, one has to be able to visualize in 3D and to know how finished drawings should look. The medium, by hand or by machine, doesn't matter.
The medium, pencil or CAD, relates to other aptitudes such as being able to pick up a pencil or triangle with dexterity, or being able to hold a pencil without shaking, or understanding how computers think, or how files are organized. Some people are good at one and poor at the other. Or they may be great at them all.
If vw_vectorworker was talking about free-hand drawing, then there might be an argument for sketching because the computer really doesn't sketch well. And, it would be difficult to sit at a conference table with a client while sketching on a computer. Also making field sketches can only be done by hand (unless there are wonder pocket computers I don't know about).
Even so, I don't believe that skill at free-hand drawing helps one to do CAD drafting. Like most children, I tried free-hand drawing. In high school, I took a class in mechanical drawing; it was a whole different world. One did not relate to the other very much.
-
I've got an early (2003) 15" G4 Powerbook. It came with factory defect "white spots" on the display which Apple replaced under warranty. It's been very dependable otherwise.
I miss the simple efficiency of the Amiga hardware and OS. I have a 4000 tower. I liked that it was basically a CLI computer and everything, including the GUI, ran from the command line. Gave me the feeling of control that I don't have with the Mac.
Unfortunately, Amiga software and hardware fell way behind in the early '90s.
-
In my experience, knowing how to pencil draw is to no advantage whatsoever when in a CAD environment. I've spent years doing both pencil (also ink) and CAD.
It's just a tool. What is important for the drafter is that he can visualize in 3D and knows how the drawings are supposed to look.
The rest of it is just learning how to use the tools. Twenty-five years ago, one had to be able to use drafting tools. Now one has to be familiar with CAD systems.
Some people are better at one than the other, which indicates their aptitudes. Maybe the good professor loves to draw by hand, but has never been able to get comfortable with computers.
I was a mediocre hand drafter, but really took off with CAD. Others never were able to make the switch.
-
Oops. Make that 800 kb.
It appears that ram does make the difference. There's a pause while the file loads into memory, and then it's thrown onto the screen.
Prior to the upgrade my Powerbook was only slightly faster graphically than my old Amiga, which was powered by a 68060.
-
I'm sorry. I neglected to mention that I upgraded from OS 10.2 to OS 10.4. That may have been significant since OS-X didn't get into its stride until OS 10.3.
My original ram was 512 meg.
-
I recently upgraded my G4 Powerbook. I added nearly a gig of memory -- now up to 1.25 gig; and I had the new Tiger OS 10.4.4 installed.
The results are a vast improvement in performance -- maybe 3-4 times faster in processing speed. I have no way of measuring accurately. A typical 2D drawing (about 800 mb) loads in a little more than a blink.
I would urge anyone using this computer model to upgrade. I makes for a much more pleasant experience.
-
Paolo,
I second Jan15's suggestion to import into a separate file. You never know what kind of junk you're getting.
Sometimes there are lines drawn on top of lines which make it difficult to tell which is solid and which is dashed. I think this is due mostly to sloppy drawing habits.
Also, I would suggest that you ask your AutoCad collaborators to purge their drawings before sending them along. They shouldn't mind.
-
Fortunately, it's no more expensive to draw in color than b/w. The added cost is in printing. So we can make color drawings and then print them in gray-scale or color depending on the budget.
Since I started drawing in color, I've realized that I have to do everything in "shapes" rather than lines, because lines don't have color fill. I hadn't thought of this before. I'm still learning how to manipulate shapes.
It's good because VW is strong in shape drawing, but weak in line drawing (at least for me, a former AutoCad user). Another advantage is that it's only a small step from shapes to 3D modeling.
-
Travis said: Our lines are nearly always a darker shade?but the same color tone?as the fill.
Exactly what I was thinking.
I suppose that color would only be economical if it clarifies the drawing; otherwise, it would be a waste of money.
-
Wow. Ask the right question.... excellent responses.
I see that a lot of people are drawing in color.
I think I'll work up a system using color. Instead of drawing by line-type in b/w, I'll try drawing by function in color.
Perhaps the lines can be in black or a dark color and the fills can be in a light shade of color. This will allow me to print either in color or gray scale, both with good results.
-
When a drawing is workgroup referenced, is the source file locked.
It doesn't seem to be on mine; I can open the referenced drawing even while the target drawing is open. I can even change the referenced drawing and then update it in the target file. Everything is on my computer, not a server.
-
Very interesting ideas. I'm definitely going to experiment with it.
Another drawback I can think of is that some of the detail will be obscured by the color fill. One would have to watch that carefully.
You could use gray for footings, tan for wood framing and reddish brown for brick, etc., with black outlines of differing thicknesses.
-
Is anyone making construction drawings in color? I've not seen any examples of that yet. Even the VW literature shows black and white only, except in 3D renderings.
It seems that only the high cost of color printing and copying would limit color to presentations or 3D.
If an architectural firm is large enough to own a large size color laser printer, it might not be prohibitively expensive.
VW is very capable in the color areas, yet I find myself focusing on B/W in my self-training. Should I be experimenting with color floor plans and details?
-
I've had some problems with added spaces on rotated text. The spaces tend to be exaggerated. Watch out for that.
-
Another way is to create a new layer, like a sheet layer.
Then make the workgroup reference's objects visible in a viewport.
The viewport can be then moved around in the sheet layer, and the reference doesn't have to be unlocked.
-
jan15 says:
quote:Plotting in VW is visually oriented.... The main problem with learning this system after Autocad is that you just can't accept that it's so simple and straight-forward.Huh?
quote:You can change the size of that printable area by changing the printer, paper size, orientation, and print scaling factor, all in the Print Setup window (File > Print Setup), and also by changing the Printable Area in the Set Print Area window (pull-down Page > Set Print Area).Hello! That is not simple.
The whole thing is much easier in AutoCad (here we go again). But since I no longer have AutoCad, it's all moot.
What I've been doing in VW is to create a special sheet layer in which I can play around with different paper sizes, orientations, and print scaling factors (as jan15 suggests). That way I don't mess up my normal sheet layer.
Note that it is better to change the scale in the "page setup" menu than to change the scale (of the viewport) in the "object info" palette. That's so that the leader arrows and the dimension tick marks are scaled properly in the printout.
Of course, then you have to change the size of the sheet to account for the change in scale. See, it gets complicated.
quote:As far as terminology, here's a list I made years ago comparing AC and VW terms...Actually, in AutoCad, the terminology is whatever you want it to be. You can usually assign any keys to do any task by editing the "acad.pgp" file (remember that AutoCad is at its best when used from the command line). My favorite commands were usually shortened to 1-3 letters.
Or you can create an AutoLisp routine to do a series of tasks and then assign any keyboard terminology you like, as with macros.
AutoCad and Vectorworks are so different from each other that it may be better just to forget AutoCad altogether and immerse yourself in Vectorworks alone. That seems to work for me. Also, Vectorworks has features not present in AutoCad, so if you're constantly comparing them, you may not appreciate the difference.
-
Gary C,
I don't have VW Architect. So what I do is open the drawing with the existing classes, copy all objects, paste them into the new drawing, and then erase the objects.
Of course, this only works when all the classes have an object associated with them.
Another way is to open the existing drawing, save as the new name, erase all objects, and start your new drawing from there. You may have to change scales and paper sizes.
-
Conrad said:
quote:then to make the best use of the tools one has to think about objects rather the linesThis is so true with VW. The tools all seem to be oriented toward objects. It is difficult to work with just lines. Clearly an evil plot by Nemetshek against former AutoCad users.
VW12: How do Users Manage Details in Drawings?
in General Discussion
Posted
My approach would be to "workgroup reference" them from the master library directory into the detail sheet. Then use viewports in a "sheet layer." This allows you to use various scales.
No need to use symbols. Each detail would need its own unique "layer names" so that they wouldn't conflict with other details.
Another approach would be to draw all the details within the sheet itself, on separate layers at various scales, and then viewport them into a "sheet layer."