Jump to content

blimey

Member
  • Posts

    247
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by blimey

  1. Sorry : replying to myself. It was the combination of bracket en semicolons that worked for me; this is the right sintax in my case : =IF(((B6-B5)<0); B5; B6)
  2. I also tried replacing commas by semicolon... didn't work. In the meantime I just replace the IF/THEN/ELSE with the max formula : =max(B4;C4). It works with semicolons... ... but I would still like to understand how to use correctly the IF/THEN/ELSE if someone sees my mistake. Thank you
  3. Hello everyone, I'm still struggling with worksheet and improving my way to use them. I'm making a worksheet to list a bunch of rectangle in 3D (they are drawn in 3D in different working plane) to get their width and height. Since they are drawn in 3D, their shortest dimension is not necessarily their width and their longest dimension not necessarily the height (althout that's what I want to get). > So I thought that I could list all the rectangles in a worksheet in a database and ask their width and Height nevertheless, than I would compare the length with a IF...THEN... ELSE formula and get the actual "width" and "height" ... but it doesn't work. Actually I also tried the formula outside the database and didn't make it work. I've checked my syntax and can't see what is wrong? I eventually tried different option with space before and after commas, without space, with less or more brackets... could anyone give me a clue on where is my mistake? Many thanks for your help.
  4. Same here. Curtain walls slow down the files and ultimately make them crash... We are using a kind of work around by make a very short curtain wall of one module, turning it into a symbol and duplicating them... a bit silly but haven't found yet any safer way.
  5. @JMR T this works as well in VW2017. Thank you ! I actually tried that at first but it didn't work because I was not bracketting the header row but the database row... and I didn't realized @ Taavilooke : Yes I was reading your thread, It's a very nice schedule and it made me want to put some effort in learning how to script. For the moment I'm trying to do some kind of house keeping worksheet of my walls to list all the component and their classes and be able to control the wall library : check if all the walls, all the walls components have the right name, are in the right classes etc... I was hoping that those information could be bidirectional (2 ways) as for the door schedule for exemple where it is possible to correct the dimensions and parameters directly in the worksheet. Alas the information are grayed and cannot be updated from the worksheet. What I also would like to be able to list is all the bounding (top and bottom) of the wall and the wall omponents : so to be able to check if walls in 3D are correctly binding to the adequate story levels. Ultimately I want to see what I should actually mesure from the 3D model and try to build a worksheet. Thak you for your help.
  6. Hello everyone, I'm trying to do a worksheet that would list all my wall component, give their name, and class. I'm attaching the image of what it looks like. I manage well to get the component name and area. Then I'm trying to get the class of each component but I do not know what syntax to use. I'm using this formula = COMPCLASSBYNAME('MR42_AT2-XVD4') but it doesn't work. Also I would like not to enter manually the name of the component, but get it from the previous cell which formula is =COMPONENTNAME(1).... so I tried =COMPCLASSBYNAME('COMPONENTNAME(1)')... an =COMPCLASSBYNAME(COMPONENTNAME(1)) But it did not worked. Does any body knows what formula I should use?
  7. It would be nice to be able to have different presentation of a same worksheet. For exemple I have a very big worksheet with lot of information. I need different presentation to show to different persons (like hiding some columns in one presentation and not in the other). Currently we are doing that with viewports that crops the part we do not want to show.... but is it a bit annoying the way we do that. It would be much better if we could simply have many instance of the worksheet and "hide" the columns (what we can currently do by giving the colums a width of zero) so the the "hidding" occurs only in that instance of the worksheet instead of reflecting into all of them...
  8. It would be really nice to be able to use the eyedropper tool within a worksheet so to be able to reapply similar formats from on cell to another quickly
  9. I will vote for that as well. In addition it would be really nice to have a way to reapply quickly one the format of one cell to another (like using the eyedropper tool within the worksheet)
  10. To solve the problem, we are trying to create narrow window style -narrower then the width we think we will need - (so to diminish the odd that we should reduce the width at some point), we're betting on the fact that the augmentation of the width does not seem to cause problem.
  11. Here is a video of the "gap phenomenon" Best regards. window_wall_detail_problem.mp4
  12. Thank you Alan for your comments. In fact, after 3 days of research, I've come to the conclusion that this is indeed a bug linked to the window style not functioning properly (pretty dissapointing hum!). You have indeed nodes that one can adjust. the thing is that once you adjust them, any modification to the style after that (event just changing the sill for exemple) makes the program forget the adjustment you've just made. So if you have 200 windows, you will have to correct them each manually. but even once you've done that, any change to the style will make you lose those settings... and you'll have to redo them... pretty discouraging... no? Of course this happens only with the wall detail. If you don't use them, the window's width adjust fine... but what's the point of a tool you can't use? Further more, I've discovered that the minimal width the window's wall detail can accept (before creating these gap) is linked with the initial width of the window at the creation of the style: one can not modify the width to a value inferior to the width at the creation of the window"s style. ... So if you want to use window's style and wall details... always create your style narrower narrower narrower... apparently you can always increase the width.... So that could be a hint for a workaround.... I'll upload a video for you to see the bug tomorrow, riht now I don't have a stable connection. Best regards
  13. Hi everyone, I have a very strange behaviour when setting up my windows, has anyone experience something like that? Is there a logical reason, something we've done wrong or is this a bug? Here are the "symptoms" : 1) I've set up a windows stylein my library, it looked all fine. It uses "Exterior Wall detail" setting to return the wall external component. 2) Then I started to put all my windows in my actual file. When I wanted to edit the window style I realised that I could change the setting of the window AS LONG AS the width of that window remains > 140cm. Below that the wall detail does not adjust and creates a gap between the wall and the window... the gap increases as the window becomes more narrow, as if the wall detail should be locked at 140cm 3) Not understanding the problem, I manually updated some 20 windows to readjust the gap... Yet as soon as I do ANY editing to the said windows (adjusting the sill for exemple) ... VW "forgets" my manul setting and goes back the the gap situation... Did anyone experienced this? What is the problem? thank you for your feed back
  14. Hi, Thank you for your reply. Would you apply the same logic for walls? A structural wall (for example casted concrete wall going through different rooms) with different finishes ? would you draw sections of different wall styles or would you superimpose 2 walls ?
  15. Thank you Wes, I have read those already thank you. They are very nice, but I'm actually looking for much more practical material. I also have read your Model Set up Tutorial, which was amazingly useful ! Thank you. We are actually following your advices to put them in practice. It works fine for all the predominant conditions. We then of course have a lot of particular conditions that we wonder how we should solve : For exemple what would you advice in a situation where you have a slab (structuraly the same slab) with part of the slab inside the building and part of the slab outside the building (so that outside, it needs to be insulated). >>> Do you think it is better to : 1) split the slab in 2 slabs style : one for the composition the slab inside the building, one for the composition of the same slab outside the building : this lead us to a model that does not match the structural reality... 2) draw one slab respecting the real structure and superpose other slab at a different level for the finishes (inside finishes or outside insulation).... this is closer to the construction reality, but also a bit complex What I liked with Robert Anderson's BIM Best Practice was that it was very pragmatic as well and very close to the way we have indeed structured our files (regarding the granularity of the files and the referencing). I realise that the multi-user environment is interesting but for many reason (some hardware) it is not yet so easy for us to implement and we currently feel more confident with the workgroup system we've been using up till now.... I would like to have you opinion about the proposed project structuring. Will we have problem if we work VW2018 using workgroup referenced file following Robert Anderson 2013 proposed structure? It would of course be transitionnal (2 years?)
  16. Hello, I'm trying to set up some BIM methodology in our office (we've been drawing in 3D since VW12.5 but haven't updated the workflow since). I found Robert Anderson white paper :"Best Practices" from 2013. It's close to what I am thinking and what we've been doing. We have been using VW2013 all this time (altghouh vw2017 is installed) but we have decided to move on to VW2017 (without using the shared file system yet) or it'll be 2018 by the time I'm ready. Has someone been using VW2017 in a BIM philosophy? Are there any big changes so that the 2013 Best Practices should be updated? Thank you for your help
  17. I will add my vote as well. It is not only for the sake of the section viewport (as masking and 2D cosmetics in the annotation viewport can be a (timeconsuming) work around. But if we want to use or model in a BIM way or even just for 3D rendering. This is essential. Also the wrapping works only on the side wall. I want to be able to wrap the top wall. As an illustration : I managed more or less to get the window I want in plan view : But here is what if looks like in 3D : top jam is not hidden (no wrapping of the wall) and the insulation is visible (no 3D wrapping) >>> So I tried to add external trim as a work around... but the top gap remains...
  18. i've tried it again with sp4. ... I think this is still very beta... doesn't work for "real" : poor import, time consuming, very few vw native format, poor conversion... crash of the computer...
  19. There is a video explaining the tool here (alas in french) : http://www.cesyam.fr/index.php/galerie-videos => check the middle bottom one (exploitation)
  20. Hello, Or is there any dimensioning tool (2D) that would automatically put all the dimension along a line such as in the french version ?
  21. By the way : I've just redone that test : "ALL the project files on a single machine and try opening the "slow" files" Here is the result : 1) All files locals (for a 17MB file referencing 5 files of 11MB, 11MB, 13MB and 15MB - our files are often at least twice this size) = 80 seconds per update (1minutes 20seconds) 2) Referenced files on server = 90 seconds (1minutes 30seconds) = +12,5% 3) All files on server = 95 seconds (1minutes 33seconds) = +18% ...
  22. Yes I've test that in the past. We have a 1G hub and all the network cards are 1G too... it does go quicker on a single machine but not so significantly... and anyway... we do need the server. We have other programs running through the server without trouble... so it seems that the problem is particular to vw and probably due to the fact that the full referencing is quite heavy...
  23. I quite agree with the BIM approach, yet your approach is indeed very theoretical. And could need a bit more practical insight to get more usefull. As a matter of fact, BIM is far from perfect yet. So currently one can only use it but partially (at least in the VW we have now) To strenghten the point that we are practising BIM as much as we feel it can be I'd say that : - We use VW's BIM for the site terrain and for the general volumetry of the project (we complement the rest manually) and it works pretty well. we use it for genereting sections, and volumes in the early phase of the project. and for that purpose we're happy about it. - we conceive all our projet in 3d FIRST, even if most of the 3d is not done in VW, so we're quite far from the rigid old fashion set of drawing - we have structured our work so to use as much as we can the parametric qualities of VW And to get to my point in this post, i'd say that we all agree that but this does not change the fact that many people need to get a lot of work done at the same time. We can't wait for one of us to enter all the 3d data while the others wait. So we need to work together and at the same time to get as much as the 3d model done as quick as possible. This is what we try to do with the structure of our files. and we need to set up a structure that works for the various kind of job we do : be it competition, sketches. call for tender... large scale or detailing... So the point is not about how we slice the work, but the fact the the work need to be sliced and reput together. it is true that several element of VW are not well design for that purpose. i'd give an quick example : i like the way vw can draw parametric stairs form one floor to another... however this only works when the different floors are on different layers in a single file... if you separate floors in several files (as we need to do it since in a big project without repetitive unit, you cannot have one single person working on the floors => so you need to separate them in different files...) this does not work anymore... well i might still work with the old style referenced layer I should give it a try... but it definitively do not work with DLVP... My point is : no matter it is BIM or not, if you need to do the 3D model of anything in team... someone need to d one part while the other is doing the other... and each part would be a file...
  24. Yes, But may be due to the amount of referenced element (???) the update time of the reference is too long... so we often have them cached into the file anyway to allow manual control of the updating... if we do it else way it can take up to 10min to open just one file... and I've got the worst computer since it is a laptop...
  25. Hi Stan, For me it is the "heaviness" of the DLVP that is mainly responsible of the troubles, not the logic of the referencing itself. That's why having balanced the "pro" and "cons" of the DLVP, we had the feeling that they were a real plus for us only for the manual drawing of sections and elevations (for some projects we use sectionVP and then convert them to group to copy paste in the section file in order to do additional drawing and annotation on them... Actually we would have found it much better to have the sectionVP on DL rather than SL, so manual copy pasting is our workaround) Hi Jeffrey, I shall send you the PDF of our file structure : the rectangles represent vwx files. the rounded rectangles represent layers contained within the files. The continuous lines mean "layer belonging to the file". The dot lines mean "layers referenced into the file". We intend to replace all the DLVP referencing with old fashionned referenced layers (what we where allready doing for 3D anyway). Except for the section and elevation as said. => beware this is only the structure of the "working files". As said before, for daily use and print we're going to add local sheet layers. for final presentation we have a file that gather all the needed layers from all the other files and than generate many sheets.
×
×
  • Create New...