Jump to content

shorter

Member
  • Posts

    2,070
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

591 Spectacular

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Architect specialising in Vectorworks Production Management, Sales, Customisation, and Training
  • Homepage
    www.stevenshorter.com www.modelity.co.uk https://www.linkedin.com/in/stevenshorter
  • Location
    United Kingdom

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Ah... The wonders of LOD. It has not clarified anything, has it? Our thresholds are usually 1:100 and 1:20. 1:50, where we would show the lines of glazing and sash lines beyond, is 'Medium' LOD. 'High' is too high for 1:50. There does not appear to be any way to change the objects included in 'Medium' as there is a Door. Can these elements be user-configurable please so that we can include them on 'Medium' LOD only?
  2. ps You can right click on the window style in the resource manager, or an unstyled window directly, and 'edit 2D component'. An alarming alert comes up but you can add your own 2D linework to the window, although it is not linked to the window, so if the window size changes, the linework has to be amended accordingly. Adding 2d data stops the window from being modified. The 2d data has to be deleted before you can modify the window size, for example. This is a shame, but if your window styles are size specific, it's no big deal.
  3. Glass thickness in the Window > Jamb and Sash settings will increase the thickness of the glass in 3D but does nothing in 2D it seems. It would be nice if we could see the sash drawn in plan beyond the cut plane too then you would get three lines. this setting really need to allow the specification of glazing unit, I.e. single, double or triple glazed and allow the definition of individual sheets of glass or the overall unit thickness eg 6:4:6 = 16mm all of course related to the LOD settings
  4. Are the objects a long way from the internal origin?
  5. Apologies Amy just seen your post. I will upload them again later today. regards steven
  6. If you use a window inside a symbol you can add 2d geometry to indicate in plan and elevation the extent of the wall to be demolished including ‘making good’ the opening. you can add data to the model to denote phasing or use a parameter within the window to denote phasing and use that in data visualisation.
  7. Is the model supposed to have a lowest z of negative -39’?
  8. create a symbol of a benchmark tool correctly set up and store the symbol in your office workgroup folder Favorites. set the symbol to place as plugin object.
  9. Who wouldn't find this useful? Create a saved view, and make the saved view as the source of the viewport layer and class visibilities, etc, and link it so that if the saved view changes, so does the viewport, or indeed, vice-versa.
  10. From Revit? We have standard settings for exporting IFC from Revit that have taken a while to perfect, and at quite a cost. The issuer should be capable of issuing IFC IF they understand BIM. As @elepp states, IFC will only import as 'ifc entities' which will be 3d solids, rather than 'parametric' objects. Unlike ArchiCAD and Revit that attempt to convert IFC objects to native objects, Vectorworks doesn't. I tend to subscribe to that thinking, although I know others don't. The idea of IFC is not for round-tripping models. It's for 3D coordination and data-extraction. The only way I could ever see round-tripping work effectively is if each software vendor agreed to an 'ifc work mode' to work natively in an IFC file format, similar to how Bentley and Autodesk developed a 'DWG work mode' for Bentley in order for Microstation to work 'natively' wth DWG. It works but severely limits the functionality of Microstation. The currently situation is far from reliable in Revit particularly where Revit's rules do not allow some of the modelling techniques in Vectorworks and as a consequence we often find walls unjoin, and spaces connect to the wrong walls after conversion. The only way you can ensure a reliable facsimile of your work in revit is to convert the ifc to revit and then validate the revit model.
  11. I agree. Rather than Convert to Group, the option should be 'Convert to Group' or 'Explode' on placement. Interestingly, a symbol containing only symbols, I am pretty sure used to 'ungroup' to just the enclosed symbols on placement. It doesn't anymore. Perhaps it never did.
  12. An example image would help understand the issue. most problems we encounter are due to how things are modelled.
  13. I really hate Groups. I know this is likely to cause a great deal of angst and indigation, and possibly abuse from some readers but really, what do they do that a Symbol or Layer can't? Groups, inside groups, inside Groups...!!!! Argh!!! Still, they exist and we have to deal with them. So, to make them more palatable, can we please have an option click within the 'visibility', 'custom selection', and 'eyedropper' tool that 'sees' inside the group at the elements within in order to be able to affect visibililty of, or select the element within, rather than the group itself, which frankly, is utterly useless. Current behaviour... Click on Group using Visibility Tool and it turns off the Group's class, not the element within the Group. Required behaviour... Option Click on Group using Visibiity Tool and it turns off the class of the obect within the Group. It would be like using the 'B' key to see objects in 'xray'.
×
×
  • Create New...