Jump to content

brian-rwc

Member
  • Content Count

    74
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by brian-rwc

  1. unfortunately that just converts them back to the individual line segments they were originally composed from.
  2. I've tried Modify>Compose before but the problem with that is it creates a 'Polygon' object not a true merged line object. Polygons that look like lines don't always blend nicely with other line geometry and if that "Polygon Line" occurs at an angle there is no immediate indication what the angle is and then you have 4 or 8 selection handles you need to deal with that seem to get in the way. Furthermore if there is an inadvertent kink in that "Polygon Line" it can be difficult to detect until other line work has been drawn parallel or perpendicular to that crooked line and random errors get perpetuated throughout the drawing. When I need to "merge" two lines I usually end of using the extend tool to extend the line to some other object then delete the overlapping line. Or when merging very long lines (critically important not to be crooked) I do the following archaic process: 1. group the lines together (to isolate them) 2. enter the group 3. draw a temporary extension line at end of the furthest line 4. delete the line meeting the extension line 5. extend the other line to the extension line 6. delete the extension line 7. exit the the group 8. ungroup the group I know it's ridiculously cumbersome but at least I don't have to deal with Polygons. For grid lines and building datum lines the last thing I would want is for those to be Polygons. I think there has got to be a better way! It's the type of issue you would of thought could of been addressed with the earliest versions of MiniCAD.
  3. Vectorworks needs to have a tool long available in Autocad (sometimes called the "glue" tool) where you can select 2 colinear lines and they will get merged or "glued" together as a single line object. This is not at all similar to the current VW polyline tool as the merged lines would become a true line object. Colinear lines merged as polylines are never as easy to work with or manage accurately when you really just want them to be a single line. I remember this as being an immensely useful tool in Autocad and I've always been surprised VW has never offered it. (BTW - please let me know if already a feature and I am just not seeing it) I would think it would be one of the easiest features to program. With 2 colinear lines selected the tool would just need to be programmed to calculate the furthest endpoints between both lines and replace them with a single line sharing the same endpoints. The lines wouldn't even need to share a common endpoint. They could be miles apart as long as they were colinear.
  4. Bruce, I tried re-booting but unfortunately it didn't make a difference. I will try to call tech support next Monday to ask them to clarify whether or not those features are meant to be working on my version. Thanks for the suggestions.
  5. I went to OpenGL render settings and unfortunately the 'Use Shadows' option is grayed out and cannot be selected. The only options I can select are Detail level, 'Use Anti-Aliasing' and 'Use Planar Attributes'. Everything else is grayed out. Would it be correct to assume this means we need to purchase Renderworks to enable those other options? If we don't need to purchase Renderworks please let me know if you know of other options that can enable the display of shadows in VW Architect 2013. Thank you. (If we really do need to purchase Renderworks I would like to add as a 'Wish List' type item that Nemetschek should just roll ALL the capabilities of Renderworks into VW Architect. Not just the shadow function. Make it so that if you purchase Architect you don't need to purchase Renderworks. Give people an incentive to choose VW over Revit and eliminate the unnecessary product line fragmentation that often contributes to misconceptions of Vectorworks being a "dumbed-down" product.)
  6. Bruce, I am using VW Fundamentals / VW Architect 2013 (SP4). system info: MacPro5,1 Quad-Core Intel Xeon 2.4 GHz Mac OS X 10.6.8 I will try what you suggested with the OpenGL render settings. Thank you.
  7. Is it seriously impossible to create shadows in Fundamentals and VW Architect without Renderworks? The help menu is telling me that so far. If that is truly the case it is seriously pathetic and I would like to add it to the Wish List. Beginning with Fundamentals even the cheapest version of Vectorworks should have the same capabilities as a free version of Sketchup at a minimum. I was really surprised to learn it is not even an option for VW Architect. You can insert the Heliodon tool but according to the Help directory there is nothing you can do with it without Renderworks installed. Very nice of Nemetschek to include Potemkin tools in their tool set palettes! It would be ever nicer if we could actually use them! It makes me wonder if Nemetschek is trying to discourage people from using their products. In terms of 3D modeling environments Fundamentals and VW Architect have neither the simplicity of use, presentation and quick conceptual modeling capabilities of a free Sketchup download nor the compatibility and full range of features offered by true BIM applications like Revit. Considering these limitations it really makes you wonder whether it's worth the trouble to try to use VW Architect as a BIM tool or just switch over to Revit ASAP. I wish this wasn't the case but it seems like trying to use VW for 3D modeling is like facing a series of frustrations after frustrations. VW Architect keeps feeling like "BIM-lite". I consider Vectorworks among the very best in terms of 2D drafting but unfortunately the time has passed when that is all that matters.
  8. It would make a big difference in using VW for conceptual modeling if you could actually work and edit geometry in perspective views rather than be confined to just isometric, plan or orthogonal elevations. Creating perspective views in VW is never as easy or free flowing process as in Sketchup. You have to wait for the views to regenerate and it's never instantaneous. It would be nice to be able smoothly navigate through 3D views as with Sketchup. Editing on the fly is obviously easier with Sketchup as well so it's no wonder it's the preferred choice for conceptual modeling. So many design decisions in our office our made by a trial and error process with project managers standing around a workstation telling the designer or "CAD person" how to revise the model while they wait around there watching them make the change. I am sure it can be frustrating for person editing the Sketchup model but I think it would be close to impossible if trying to do the same with VW. Not saying that is the ideal process but I can't see the project managers surrendering their ability to do that. It would be nice if VW could adopt the same capabilities as Sketchup in that regard. I recognize that VW's 3D modeling capabilities may be more advanced overall than Sketchup's but it's the initial ease of conceptual modeling that will always allow Sketchup to get it's "foot in the door" with VW getting no consideration on the 3D side of things. It never matters at that point that there would be long term benefits in creating models in VW in the first place.
  9. well I played around with some display settings and I think I got it to work. Probably something to do with the 'Lower Floor' vs. 'Upper Floor' settings contradicting each other or it got confused and needed to "clear it's cache".
  10. Amen!!! I have spent the last hour or so trying to figure out why the stair tool is not displaying the way it says its supposed to display in the preview pane. I drew a 2D stair and selected the option to hide everything below the cut line. The preview pane shows exactly what I want to see but unfortunately what actually displays is the reverse of that. I thought maybe just a temporary graphic display error. I quit and reopen; still doesn't fix the problem. Anyone know the secret to get the stair tool to work?
  11. How would I create a rectangular landing with the Ramp plug in object? The only option I see is to set the ramp width and if selecting to display a landing it only draws square landings (based on the ramp width entered). As example is it really impossible to draw a 7'-0" wide by 5'-0" deep landing? Maybe I am missing something but I got say my first impression of this plug-in is that it is extremely amateurish. I would think Nemetschek could easily provide something more useful, considering the repetitive nature of ramps, curb ramps and their basic variations.
  12. the more that Nemtschek becomes aware of the issues of importing IFC data into Revit maybe they could offer a "safe mode" overlay option for Vectorworks Architect that will warn you or prevent you from creating geometry in a manner Revit "does not like" or cannot process very well. Even though the compatibility issue may be more the fault of Revit than Vectorworks, Revit is the one creating the de-facto standards so Nemetschek doesn't really have a choice other than to comply. I think many people would welcome this feature as insurance against future file coordination problems. Regardless of how many improvements Nemetschek makes to it's software it will always be seen at fault if Revit cannot import the data correctly and it will continue to lose market share to Autodesk. I know that's not the way it should be in an ideal world but that's just the way it is. For Nemetschek's sake it could actually help safeguard against the migration of users from Vectorworks to Revit. This is something that could simply be a checkbox option under Vectorworks Preferences. It would also be nice to have a "Internal Audit Function" to warn of potential compatibility issues prior to exporting to IFC format. There could be 2 different error checks. One that just checks for IFC compatibility another for IFC/Revit compatibility.
  13. Thank you all. I will try those methods the next time I am working with 3D wall hole components.
  14. I am trying to add a 3D wall hole component to a custom symbol definition and as I make the selection to edit '3D Wall Hole Component' from the Edit Symbol dialog box I enter an editing window that shows nothing at all. If I zoom to extents or navigate around there is still nothing. I have already confirmed my Vectorworks preferences are set to 'show other objects in editing modes' so that should rule that out. I confirmed all classes were visible as well. I have never used the wall hole option before but would of expected to at least be able to see the 3D component already drawn within the symbol. Anyone have any other suggestions? Thank you.
  15. I would like Nemetschek to bring the 'Create Layer Link' option back to Vectorworks Architect. There are quite a few situations where I prefer using Layer Links instead of Design Layer Viewports. Currently I have to switch to the Fundamentals workspace to create Layer Links then switch back to Architect. I think it would be more convenient to have the option to create Layer Links from within Architect.
  16. Starting with Fundamentals and all other versions of Vectorworks Nemetschek should add plug-in objects for light gage framing (metal studs, tracks, furring channels ect.) just as is already provided for structural steel framing members. Just like when pulling in a wide flange member and selecting it's specific size you should be able to pull in a standard 3-5/8" metal stud (or any shape within the Steel Stud Manufacturer's Association's charts). The default setting should draw the stud exactly to scale with custom override options to simplify the appearance for graphic reasons such as when displaying in a smaller scale drawing. There could even be suggested overrides based on common detailing drawing scales. I know the current Architect version has resources for light gage framing shapes that can be copied into a drawing but these are not plug-in objects. They are simply 2D symbols of polylines and are not much more useful than drawing from scratch or creating your own symbols. Considering Nemetschek already has plug-in objects for other framing shapes I don't see why there should be any complication in providing them for light gage framing. With customizable options these would be immensely useful.
  17. Could someone please clarify how we are meant to import a DWG file and reference it's .ctb file? In my case we are using Vectorworks 2012 SP4 running on a Mac OS X v. 10.6.8. Does the import .ctb file option only work when Vectorworks is operated on a Windows based PC? From the Vectorworks help directory it implies that .ctb files can be imported but I can't find where it specifically explains how to do that. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thank you.
  18. thanks Mike. I will review that thread. I was searching for prior discussions but somehow did not find that one previously. -Brian
  19. My ultimate wish list item for Vectorworks at this moment would be if they could undo the workplace nightmare they caused us by introducing the new distinctions of 'Layer vs. Screen Planes / 2D vs. 3D symbols/ Symbol definitions' and so on in the last few releases. I feel it has added an unnecessary amount of complexity to the most simple of operations and cost us a lot in lost productivity. If anyone could clarify how to more simply manage this feature I would greatly appreciate it! Otherwise I wish Nemetscheck would revert back to the simpler function of the earlier releases. Working in a Design Layer we typically only want objects to be in the Layer Plane anyways. If we want strictly 2D annotation we would do that in a Sheet Layer. If not getting rid of the feature I would like Nemetschek to make it easier to manage; particularly by establishing consistent defaults to Layer Plane while working in a Design Layer. I've checked the manuals on this and the information they provide is scanty and practically useless in helping to explain how to make use of this feature and manage it correctly. At the very least my 'wish' would be for Nemetscheck to provide more complete information in their manuals on this.
  20. thank you. I wish they mentioned that in the manual. It would also be nice if VWX had an option to revert back to the default origin position (for when doing an 'undo' of the last step is not an option).
  21. Could someone please clarify how to move the origin of the ceiling grids using the Ceiling Grid tool? I don't see any option for that. I tried the Edit Ceiling Grid option in the Modify menu and that only seems to address the modifications to the perimeter. So far the only way I have been able to establish a specific origin point is by drawing the perimeter which creates a ceiling grid defaulting to the center of the object. Then I move the entire grid to set it on a specific origin point. Then I adjust all of the perimeter edges to re-align them to the perimeter. I was thinking there has got to be a better method than that! Please clarify how this tool is meant to work. Thank you, Brian
  22. I know the basics about finding and moving a print boundary page area but could someone advise me on how I can easily re-center the print boundary on my drawings when it is literally miles, maybe light years away? (I am using VWX 2011). I can either zoom to the extent of objects or zoom to the extent of print area but if the print area is so far away from plan, the plan is practically invisible if I attempt to zoom out to allow me to see both. Drawing simple reference geometry from one to the other is not working either. I am actually in a predicament where I have zoomed out so far, VWX is not allowing me to zoom back in again to re find the plan geometry. I know this sounds ridiculous but it is true. I will need to trash the file and work off a previous backup. Is there any way to simply click on a point or enter the coordinates to reset or re-center the page print boundary location? If not, I really think there should be. I don't think anything so simple should be so cumbersome. There has got to be a better way.
  23. we are having this problem right now on VW 2011. All arrows are shown turned off on the attributes pallete (per class defaults). We have checked and re-checked that over and over again. You draw a line and an arrow is automatically added and the attribute pallete immediately grays out the arrow selection to show it is now selected. Then you have to manually turn it off. I am using VW Architect 2011 and I can fix the problem by immediately pulling down the center arrow for 'make all attributes by class'. That option is not available on the Fundamentals version most of the office is using. This is a serious pain. At least using the architect version to fix the problem in fundamentals is easier than the cut/paste into another file. It seems like a bug to me. Anyone have any other suggestions?

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×
×
  • Create New...