quigley

This is not necessarily the case. It depends on the agreements that have been set up. Australia has a very active distributor in OzCad PTY, who actually write a lot of the new plug ins for NNA, and sell a localised version. CU is not that kind of business, and, to be frank, the UK and Australian markets are totally different anyway in terms of volume and scope. If you are going to the conference this week, speak directly to NNA and CU to get the full picture.

Did you reassign the class when you ungrouped? Go through the layers and classes with active only on (Control key, up and down arrows, or, side to side arrows)to isolate geometry. What is likely to have happened us you inadvertantly reassigned the objects to a different class or layer and this class or layer is switched off in your viewport.

Scale is not always the solution though. It would be better to be able to define wall components in specific classes. Outer lines in one class, each component in other (user defined) class or classes.

Robert, no it is not the same. It only works on one extend at a time. What users want is a tool where they can select a line or curve or object and select multiple lines and say "extend these all to this object". The VW extend tool requires you click from object to the boundary for each line - very time consuming. Every Autocad user I meet asks for this!

Try converting the roof to a group and editing the roof face to trim out the bit under the dormer.

Works OK here Michael. Try downloading the zip file to disk then unzipping and running from the html file that links to the flash object. Or, right click on the file, and say open with, then choose Internet Explorer.

The big problem with hard coded classes is that if a company uses a class standard setup dropping plugins can inadvertantly add classes to the file. This is OK for experienced users but for most big installations (by which I mean 15-20+) most users come from a range of backgrounds and abilities and it causes confusion. Personally I would like to see a new command called plug-in class map, where ANY VW plugin class can be mapped to a user class as an application (or template document) preference. This would be a set once and forget task and would allow the developers to design and create new PIOs with a restricted class list that users KNOW will map correctly. I don't think this would be that hard to do soon?

More UK specific wall styles More appropriate Model setup/document setup for UK users Option to remove all USA specific objects and settings with one preference selection More UK appropriate object libraries

sounds like something you would buy in Anne Summers.....(UK users will understand that!). Seriously though, I curious as to what extra functionality you would need in a floor slab tool? Cutouts, localised slopes, steps? Of course what NNA could do is simply duplicate the roof face tool and call it Floor slope tool....wouldn't be the first time thats happened eh!

What format do you need them supplied in?

Take heart Alanmac! What you describe is in fact reality now for most mechanical designers using so called mid range 3D solid modelling packages like SolidWorks, SolidEdge or Inventor. Using these it is not uncommon to have assemblies with tens of thousands of parts and still be usable. There are various techniques and methods used such as lightweight assemblies and drawings where only the relevant parts are edited as needed. Sectioning and hidden line in these apps is pretty much instantaneous. VectorWorks, for all its merits, lags way way behind these kinds of apps in this respect. I see no technical reason why this can't be done with architectural design software. As for "how much detail do you need" well that is indeed the crux of the issue. Personally, I see no good reason why, for example, in defining a wall, you cannot assign section view characteristics for hatching and insulation and line styles, or even notation as part of the model definition.

In much the same way that for engineering and product designers we may generate a 3D master model assembly of a product that we give to toolmakers and analysts to generate tooling models and drawings, or analysis reports.... I don't see architects ever having to produce shop drawings...in the same way that product designers (either in house or consultancy based) ever have to produce tooling drawings (except in very small companies!). The BIM ideal just provides a communication device to the contractor from the designer, and it is then open to negotiation to see what can and cannot be achieved in reality! Who then changes the BIM to reflect the "as built condition" is the real question! Again, taking parallels with engineering and product design, the manufacturer of the product will usually be asked to make these changes to the model and to return these changes as data to the designer/specifier for archive. How much actual intelligence remains in the model at this stage depends entirely on the level of integration between the team members. if they all use the same system, it is easy. If they are all on different systems, the final master model may well be a dumb solid or surface model. For construction BIM I think to have any relevance the same system has to be used.

Speaking as an Ashlar-Vellum user (best not to go there with regards to Concepts :-)) I can relate to what you describe. Here we use Ashlar-Vellum Cobalt (pretty much the same as CU) with Ashlar's Graphite for drafting, and VectorWorks Industry Series and VX Designer. I have trialed Alibre but as product designers it doesn't handle surfaces well enough for us (hence the reason we also use VX). What you can do is get the free Alibre Design Xpress to try it out. For machine design I would choose Alibre every time over the mid range big boys. As a CU user though there is one BIG advantage in going Alibre in that both CU and Alibre use the ACIS modelling kernel, so 3D models from CU will sail into Alibre perfectly, and vice versa (same also applies to Ashlar as well). So what you can do is create all the tricky stuff in CU and import as a component into Alibre for assembly and drafting and BOM. As for the Mac vs PC thing, wait until next year and you can buy a new G5 with an Intel processor inside and run Windows and OSX natively on the same machine!

It doesn't take a genius to work out that in the longer term Nemetschek might/will build a bridge between the two applications in its camp - VectorWorks and Allplan. I'm not familiar with Allplan but from what I have seen it is like a souped up Archicad. If the bridge can be effectively implemented there is a route to growth through VW. VW being used for the design phase, moving onto Allplan for the construction and beyond. Having said all that I think that scenario only applies in certain sectors. There are plenty of sub 100 employee architects out there working on profitable jobs using "just" VW, producing all the construction drawings, schedules and details in that one package. I think until the exact definition of BIM is agreed in the industry - and its actual benefits are seen - this is all academic talk to some extent. Whatever happens the ability of the architect/technician/engineer/contractor to use the software and understand it will dictate how far these ideals are implemented in practise. Even now how many who have architect actually use it the way it is intended? The challenge for VW/Allplan and the rest is to make the software easy to use for the average deadline pressed user - not the CAD savvy experimenters. Faced with the task of getting drawings out for a meeting are you going to tell your boss "sorry, I didn't get it done because I was trying out the new 3d modelling options to get a few sections"?

Sean, This is a great step forward for both users and VARs! Here we use both Mac and Windows. The ability to switch is ideal and what I am used to with Ashlar and FormZ. It should also make life easier when the new Intel Macs come out and we can run Windows and OSX (natively) on the same machine! Well done! If only Adobe had the same policy!!

quote: Originally posted by lmt: kq, I read somewhere earlier in the post that the section could easily be converted into 2d. so I guess the 2d can then be brought in the design layer for detailing. Or do you mean you'd like it automatized as a reference that would update by itself? Ideally automised but for the moment select the viewport (section/elevation/whatever), go Tool Menu>>convert to lines or convert copy to lines (to overlay the viewport with a copy). Then copy the new group back into the design layers and scale up by the scale of the viewport, for example, if the viewport scale was 1:50, scale the group x50. Obviously this totally buggers up any curves (making them segments) but it does provide a quick and easy way to use the automatically set views without having to go to the trouble of setting up layer links and so on. What I would like to see though, in the sections (maybe 12.5, maybe 13) is the ability to pick up hatching in walls and plug in objects automatically. Being able to add drafting detailing in the section viewport might work OK. I've not tried it yet, but until VW can associate lines and dimensions of viewport annotations to the geometry (as it can in design layers) I think most will stick to design layer editing.

I have heard various stories about VW12 dongles being dual platform. What does this mean though in reality? I use Ashlar-Vellum and FormZ software as well as VW. Their licenses let you install software onto both Mac and Windows and move the dongle to whichever machine you need (Ashlar doesn't use dongles but FormZ uses a usb dongle like VW). Currently with VW you buy a Mac or Windows version and a Mac or Windows dongle. I prefer the FormZ approach! Perhaps someone can clarify the situation. If it is truly dual platform now, will the v11 usb dongles work cross platfrom or will we need new ones?

That would be good as well...like .dwg you mean :-) Taking my experience in the MCAD sector, no, I don't think this will happen unless companies are legally forced to provide it. How long will it be until we get law cases where the developer sues the contractor who sues the design team who sues the software developer for not providing an open communication network? Dassault are developing an "open" 3D XML based format but I suspect this will work very well with CATIA and SolidWorks and not much else.

Having just seen the demo I'll make the comments that I think this is a very good implementation of sectioning - far better than many of the MCAD applications available now. I also liked the interface changes in general. As for the sectioning I see no problem with this from a production point of view. Create the model, create your desired sections, copy and p[ast the section viewports into new sheets, convert the viewports to lines, copy and paste back into design layers, scale up to the correct size, draw any additional production sectional details, create a viewport of this and overlay onto the live section in the same location, then hide the live one. Or you could add the detailing in the viewport as an annotaton I suppose. This is what I do to get quick elevations and existing sections - using the 3D side without the overhead of modelling every single detail. If you keep the live section viewports on a different sheet layer you still retain the link to the model, so if you change the model you can see any sectional changes immediately and modify the lines accordingly. The only missing feature I think is the ability to paste a viewport into a design layer as a reference and create "overlay detailing" as described above whilst maintaining the links. No doubt that will come soon...

The biggest hurdle (I think) to BIM is that for it to be effective all participants in the project must use the same system. In the MCAD sector (which I am most familiar with) the idea of a single "master model" driving all functionality has been around for a long time. Most aircraft and cars are designed using this model these days from the large manufacturers. The enterprise MCAD systems like CATIA dominate this sector, and suppliers working with such companies must suppliy and recieve data in this native format (in fact Airbus have a CATIA purchase deal with Dassault for suppliers giving hugely discounted purchase prices). Its a great idea but I think for construction that is all it will remain - a great idea, except perhaps on the largest of projects where there are budgets and good reasons for having this functionality in place. VectorWorks is no where near the BIM ideal at the present time - there are still a lot of manual non parametric steps to be taken to get production drawings out to satisfy everybody. Its a question of balancing efficiency for profit and efficiency for being state of the art. Personally I'd opt for the profit. Whats the sense in spending 2 days modelling up a building when you could have combined modelling with 2D drafting to get results in 1 day?

Anybody know of a VectorWorks add on or plug in that can handle nesting profiles for sending to laser cutters or routers that works within the software? Failing that any advice on good choices for nesting software? I've used AlphaCam Laser Nesting which is good if a bit expensive. We're looking for a "value" product to bolt onto VW.

MIchael, I do agree that Vectorworks Architect etc are more USA centric, in fact this is the main reason why many UK architects do not use the full Architect package. As far as I am aware, having spoken to Computers Unlimited, in v12 there are many new UK specific plug ins for the Architect product covering windows, doors and walls (there may be more). The v12 product is not released until October 24th. No UK VARs have the product or pricing yet so I can't comment on the contents and /or value, and that's why there are no UK specific information available as yet. I would doubt VARs will get the NFR software until well into November anyway, so if you want any real information from your VAR you will have to wait at least another month or so. I think it is fair to say though from the pdf that there are several enhancements in v12 that should enhance workflows at any level.

Getting back on topic..... Lets get Katie or someone to post a video link showing us the live sections in action? Also with regards to the rotated views, yes I agree this needs to be in the application - sooner rather than later. It can be faked in 3D by rotating the workplane but to me thats no solution (given that fact that most users never use 3D). Every Autocad user I have trained has asked for this and it IS a genuine requirement. Rotating the geometry is not a solution, especially when using datum points that are relative to the sheet origin and specified orthogonally. As for accuracy, VectorWorks is as accurate as any other drafting system out there - computationally speaking. What leads to errors are poorly thought out interfaces to tools. Every CAD app has these. When users are under pressure to meet deadlines these cracks start to show. I did notice that the workgroup referencing has been changed to allow "live" updating over a network and (more importantly) file independent origins so that the referenced file is not placed into the file relative to its origin (thats my take on the pdf anyway). On all the architects I train this is their biggest issue using WGR especially when referencing site surveys.

Alternatively just upgrade to VectorWorks 12...... According to the pdf "Whats New Guide" it supports SHP files...