Jump to content

Pedro P. Palazzo

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1 Neutral

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Architect and Planner
  • Homepage
  • Hobbies
    Architecture, urbanism, rendering
  • Location
  1. Thanks, that is exactly the workaround I have been using, with the unfortunate result of having to forego auto-classing.
  2. When I dimension an object in a 3D view in VW 2012 (such as an isometric) in its Design layer, I get a correct dimension value. However, when I try to do the same in the Viewport annotation, the dimension line displays the wrong number (namely, the 2D flattened distance instead of the actual object's dimension). Any way of fixing this? I prefer dimensioning in the Viewport annotation to dimensioning in the design layer.
  3. Robert, I will gladly submit a bug report, however this brings up another issue I am facing. The bug submit page tells me to make sure I have all software updates applied. My local (Brazil) tech support representatives claim the SP2 update is already available, yet my version of Vectorworks (which is SP1) does not find it when I tell it to check for updates. I have already filed a ticket with them on this issue but they have not been very responsive; all they do is tell me they have e-mailed me the updater, which I never received. They also tell me I have to remove SP1 before installing SP2, which is impossible for me since my DVD already came with SP1 bundled.
  4. I am having an annoying situation with the Space tool. Whenever I create a space object it defaults to the Space-Main class, with its label in Space-Spec, irrespective of what I have set up in Standard Naming. Moreover I am unable to change them to my own space class (the one that should have been used by VW according to ClassNameStds) as long as auto-classing is turned on. My only workaround is to delete the Space-Main and Space-Spec classes and reassign all space objects to the desired class.
  5. OK, I think I figured it out. So I have these 20-odd square map sectors that are located side by side, each with its boundary and contour lines. I *could* just have extracted all the contour lines to a single layer and made a big 10x10km site model, but I'd rather keep them separate for ease of rendering whenever I won't need the whole thing at a glance. I need the boundaries so that each square model will sit exactly next to the other, without overlap and without blanks in between. Anyway the problem I was facing had to do with trying to build each site model in isolation from the other. I hadn't realized VW doesn't like a boundary to be flush with the end of the contour lines. As soon as I had the contour lines extend outwards from the site boundary everything started working smoothly. I did that by eventually extracting all the contours to a single layer, and then applying each site boundary over *all* the contour lines. Not sure what I'll do once I reach the edge squares, though......
  6. Is it a symbol? If so, check whether the class of the lines *within* the symbol is on as well.
  7. VW used to drive me mad ever since version 12 because of the precision issue. The only way to ensure perfect drawing precision is to, well, max out the precision setting in File > Document settings > Units. I used to think of precision as a kind of distance snap where your drawing would be constrained, but in fact it is not so?you can measure a line, say, 1.25m in a .01 precision level but later find out you drew it at 1.2510045m, for example. So ALWAYS keep your precision set to the highest number of decimals. In VW 2012 the drawing precision can be different from the dimensions' precision.
  8. For exporting back to AutoCAD you have to set "map line weights to colors". At any rate, with recent versions of AutoCAD supporting the whole RGB spectrum, I don't see much of a point to the DWG-compatible palette. You can just specify the RGB values in either program to match the other. The best practice for making VW and AC talk nicely is to have your .ctb in the same folder as your .dwg file for importing into VW, and keeping a VW class Standards (using the Standard Naming command) that relates to your AC layer standard. Afaik you have to set that one up manually.
  9. In trying to better frame the issue, it seems that the boundary is at fault here. If I try to create the contours without a bounding polygon it will render fine in every case, but if I use a polygon to set a boundary it will crash with some elevation sources.
  10. Thanks, I rephrased my difficulty?there seems to be no issue with the major interval setting. It is the minor interval that is causing a problem. I am processing some 20 topographic maps with mixed 3D polygons and point data. Some of the models render just fine with a contour interval of 1m (the interval of the 3D polys). Others absolutely want larger intervals and will crash if I reduce that interval. Again, I am always validating the data and VW says it's fine.
  11. I am having trouble generating some site models. In some cases the plugin defaults to a minor contour interval that is absolutely too large. If I accept this setting the model renders fine, but if I want to change the minor interval the application hangs. If I render it as a mesh, however, I don't seem to get any problems, but I really need contours in plan. 3D data validation returned no problems with my data.
  12. Depends on what you need (plan, rendered 3D?) really. Unless you want a realistic 3D-rendered water, an opaque 3D polygon intersecting with the site model should be fine. In the section viewport you might want to have "merged cross sections" so this polygon doesn't show up under land.
  13. Yes? My current results are: -Exporting shapefile from Mess #2 (which was in WGS84) back into GIS: coordinates are right again. Reimporting this shapefile back into VW will only line up with the previous import if I manually set the layer to WGS84. Using the shapefile's .prj (even if it was set to WGS84 to begin with) will not line up. -georeferencing my CAD layer from Mess #1 will not line it up with the shapefile's coordinates, whether I transform the geometry or not. I can see some consistency in the shapefile import/export behavior, but I can't seem to understand why Vectorworks will not use the UTM metric coordinates when positioning the shapefiles. That is, if I have a shapefile projected in UTM/WGS84, GIS will correctly give me *both* the metric coordinates for my current zone/hemisphere *and* the latitude/longitude. On the other hand, Vectorworks' coordinate system, which is only metric as far as I can see, does not match the actual UTM metric coordinates at all. A concrete example: I have a point with UTM coordinates 211,800 x 8,274,000 in the 23S zone. In the CAD file I imported first, this point has proper coordinates x=211,800, y=8,274,000, and so it is imported into VW with the same coordinates. When I import the same point from a shapefile (which was displaing the correct coordinates in GIS), however, VW shows this point as being near x=(-5,909,088) and y=(-1,725,144). I suppose this is relative to a "world origin" at latitude=0 and longitude=0, however it is very counterintuitive.
  14. If anyone can give me a hint on what I am doing wrong? I have a DWG file which I want to georeference in UTM. The CAD file's metric coordinates, as imported into VW, match VW's metric coordinates (considering the particular UTM zone and hemisphere I'm using). I then georeference this layer without transforming geometry, and export it as a shapefile. I open QGIS, set the coordinate system to the same I was using in VW, and import the shapefile. Mess #1: the coordinates in QGIS turn out completely different from those in the VW file, and a site in the southern hemisphere ends up in the North Sea! Now I get a shapefile generated in ArcMap, which opens with the correct coordinates in QGIS. I set VW's coordinate system to match that of the GIS, and import the shapefile. Mess #2: the coordinates again turn out all wrong. Is this behavior somehow supposed to make sense?
  15. On a somewhat related note? I'm trying to create a Report returning space names and areas, but only of those space objects that match a certain occupancy type (to make separate worksheets for each department). Now, for a regular report, Vectorworks does a fine job of creating a database header ='Space'.'Name' and another ='Space'.'Area' What I need is to merge this with the conditional statement (('Space'.'Occupancy Type'='XXXX')). I tried several combinations of the above formulas to no avail and the manual is of little help in this case. What is the proper way to do it?
  • Create New...