Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by shorter

  1. Hello We need additional search criteria in worksheets. For example, I would like VW to automatically add any areas to an area schedule where the Layer Name contain '-A-', where 'A' is the Building/Zone code. Current search offers us simply Layer > is/is not > Layer Name... I cannot see how we can automatically select layers for inclusion in a schedule and exclude others by using a keyword based on the layer name, or part thereof, storey, tag, or description. On a larger building (circa 30 storeys) I really do not want to be forever adding all the layers that I want to include, when I could simply search 'Layer > contains > -A-'.
  2. Yes please! However, is this a Rhino limitation, or Vectorworks?
  3. It would be very useful to be able to double click on a sheet layer viewport and be able to edit 'data visualisation'.
  4. @zoomer Once referenced data is copied into your file (and by the way, simply duplicating the referenced layer 'binds' the referenced data into your live file wholesale), it is then no longer connected to the source, unless the source contained symbols and you then use those symbols in your live file. If you update the reference, the copied data will not update, but the symbols and other resources will if you are not careful. Another reason why third party data should be prepared prior to being referenced.
  5. ps I never reference a DWG. We always import the dwg and then prepare the imported data, before referencing the VW file. Ditto IFC. Maybe it's because I manage so many CAD systems I do this, but we find it is a better way to use the data and the software.
  6. Layer Import Referencing imports layers, classes and all resources found in the layers you choose when you reference. It is an very reliable method of referencing (rah!), and offers the advantages of DLVP, plus also, you can copy the referenced data into your active layer, since it is effectively an automated 'copy and paste'. The referenced data behaves like normal data albeit locked so you cannot edit it until it is copied in to your live file, but you can edit symbols, and any other resources you use from that referenced data 'in place' which is utterly fantastic when used correctly and a disaster waiting to happen if not (boo!) It does rely, as does all referencing, on a consistent data and naming structure. Cf links in InDesign... change a name, or the location of a linked file and you will lose that link. But this is just common-sense, not a bug with referencing. Origins are important. VERY IMPORTANT!!! But that's also why there is a button that says 'Ignore Source User Origin' aka 'Link Origin to Origin' in Revit parlance, which is INCREDIBLY useful (resounding rah!), but only if you have an origin strategy. If your origins are not in the same place* in each file, then that button isn't going to help. * Exacerbated by the 'recommneded' dwg import setting (big boo!). But, the downside, if you consider it a downside is that classes, and resources infect your file (meh...) This is no big deal really. You should be taking steps to manage the use of third party data, which of course many don't and then complain about layer referencing. If you have classes that start with the initials of your company, or you use 'A-...' etc, and you prefix the classes of the incoming data, then you can use class filters (big rah!!!) to hide classes that aren't yours, and now with 'Batch Rename' (huge rah!) you can also prefix any alien resources, to be able to again filter what you see in the resourcer manager. Good, efficient CAD and BIM is all about using the management tools to remove these obstacles.
  7. Can this dialog be changed please to avoid the confiusion that occurs about which referencing solution to use? There is nothing 'advanced' or better about design layer viewports when compared to layer import referenicng and this obfuscates the fact that you can create a viewport from a referenced layer, with arguably better functionality and control of the graphical qualities of the referenced data. There are two types of referencing, and each has it's merits, and the referencing methodology and workflow should be agreed and selected based on the benefits it brings, not just because the software has introduced a new function and therefore it must be used. Edit: Sorry. There are three types of referencing. Dialogs like this over the years have lead to a lot of confusion, some huge problems with users using the wrong type of referencing, because they think they have to use DLVP, when they don't.
  8. Of course... However, Layer Colours is far easier to set up for most cases of simple coordination between two floor plans and also not dependant on any version or flavour of the software.
  9. Great for comparing your data with your consultants, but I really wish the layer colour would stick when referencing. Current behaviour means I reference SE data to my data, and set layer colour to see mine in blue, theirs in red. Update reference and I have to set layer colour all over again, and again. Preferred behaviour would be for layer colour to work like class override, and be independent of the source data, and to have a 'update layer colour' option like 'update class definitions'.
  10. When at really early stages, when doors and windows are mere openings, it would be so useful if we could just stretch a door or a window, rather than have to enter a dimension. We are always 'lining things up' and really have no concept of size of doors and windows. It's just what feels right. In plan, we place a window as an 'opening' and then position it, then set it's size, or vice versa. Would speed things up and make the process far more pleasurable if we could just stretch the window and align it to another element in the model, and I would also like to be able to lock the ends of the opening to walls, so that if the walls move the opening changes size automatically. Fluid BIM.
  11. When batch converting, it would be useful if we could have an option to 'skip' or 'ignore' any files of the same name in the destination folder, for example, when we re-run a conversion due to an error or crash. Currently we have 'No' or 'Yes' options when asked if we want to proceed with the conversion and there are VW files in the destination folder.
  12. Undercut would be good, as would min. clear width, which would be based on a user editable calculation.
  13. Transferring IFC data from one symbol to the next (using the eyedropper tool) works for that instance but not for all instances thereafter. What would be useful would be to have an option to transfer IFC data from one symbol to another and have it behave in the same way as though I had selected the symbol in the resource manager and set it's IFC data via the right-click menu.
  14. It would be very useful if when we create our own components as symbols, to be able to select all symbols and set IFC category to all symbols selected, rather than one by one.
  15. I have long since thought that the abiloty to run the mechanisms to remove autoclassing are too deeply embedded or convoluted to be used reliably by mere mortals. A pulldown menu with the 'preferred' CAD standard selected from a list would be so useful, in a similar way that a saved view can be selected from it's menu. We sort of have that in the DWG export, but we also need the option to work in BS1192, or not; ISO13657, or not, etc, and be able to flip between the two. Obviously it would mean setting up an xml or mapping table somewhere and that's usually the problem, because that's quite a lot of effort, and way most need someone to manage it and do it for them, i.e. mugs like me!
  16. Can we please separate these settings more distinctly, or have an alert if anyone clicks on 'Choose' rather than 'Add' when they want to add a workgroup folder? I have lost count how many times I have asked a user to click 'Add' and they click 'Choose' instead and end up dumping all their settings and certificates etc onto the workgroup folder.
  17. Do you not use class filters, Kevin? We always prefix or tag classes, and then set up filters to display only our classes and hide the rest.
  18. Separate Class and Layer Mapping and let Class Mapping use the same XML as DWG export, and give option to use mapping table in IFC export too Title says it all. Why do we need to maintain two mapping tables; one for the 'Class and Layer Mapping' and one for 'DWG Export'. And we rarely have to map layers, so please separate the two, or a button the the Class and Layer Mapping command to 'Ignore Layers'. If xml is the way most dialogs are going, the Class and Layer Mapping command should use the same mapping table. Also think it is time to deprecate 'Standard Naming' and 'Auto-Classing' using 'VWArch' classes. And then, add an option to use the same mapping table when exporting IFC. Thanks.
  19. When deleting classes, a search field or filter selection option would be useful. Deleting a class at the moment presents the full list of classes making selection of destination class time-consuming.
  20. I will add to this by saying IF we were able to map the class description or tag to the IFC layer, via data mapping, that would do nicely.
  21. Hello We have a class mapping function now in DWG export, which is great, and long overdue, but we really need one for IFC export too. EIther that or some way to map another field or concatenate other fields in the Data Mapping tool to the 'Layer' field in the IFC. Currently this seems to be automated, and class = IFC layer. We have had to resort to a script to perform the class mapping prior to IFC export, but think it would be useful for the software to do it for you. The 'other' software uses the mapping table for DWG export for IFC export too. These would seem to be the most sensible solution.
  22. In answer to my question... no, layer and class descriptions are not available as filters. question is ‘why not?’ This would be hugely beneficial. also tag filters definitely need to be additive or capable of being defined by keyword
  23. Ps I don’t recall if it’s possible but if you are able to add a description to the layer would that help in this particular instance or not?
  24. Additive filters would be very useful, similar to how the custom selection tool works. specify one tag and then show more options and add a second. Class filters would also benefit from this.
  • Create New...