Itchy

Surely it has to be in the works. I still use the custom stair as the new stair tool can be so limiting. As it turns out the last project I ended up putting the stair on its own layer, modelling all the railings/cappings etc separate to the stair object then using fills and classes to hide certain aspects so it would appear correctly on the upper and lower levels - rails and all.

What about a weekly tool focus? You pick a tool of the week, ie Stairs, and have a stickied thread where everyone can discuss how they need to use the tool and how it can be improved to meet their needs. At the end of the week, @JimW would compile the discussion and ship it off to the relevant engineer working on it. Even better if the engineers got involved in the discussion about how the tool is used etc. While discussing the current tool focus there could be a poll about what to discuss next. If Jim didn't have time maybe it could be a community lead initiative? *Spotlight and landscape have their own version of the weekly (or monthly focus) as they wouldn't care about some of the architectural stuff and vice versa.

@JimWOff the top of my head here is a few examples of how you can from 37 to 4 Framing tool: 4 to 1; Structural Member, Framing Member, Rafter, Joist. 2D steel Tool: 20 to 1; (there is a tool for metric and one for imperial) Take the interface of the framing member in regards to selecting steel shape and size and make that into a tool for 2D steel shapes, and then get rid of Angle, Bulb flat, Channel, I beam, Rectangular Tubing, Round tubing, Square tubing, Tee, Wide Flange, Z section Fixing tool 13 to 2; (one for 2D & one for 3D maybe?). Combine bolt and nut (Imp. + Met.), wood screw, sheet screw, lag screw, carriage bolt, hole, screw thread. That's just tools that I can see on the "Detailing" tab I have open. Happy to consult to VW and I can keep going, ha

You used to be able to move just the text portion of the callout, with the arrow end staying by using the reshape tool & drawing a marquee around just the text and then moving to suit, with the arrow end staying put. It worked in 2016, removed in 2017 for some reason and still missing in 2018.

Looks like this has made it's way into 2018

Ok, I set the file up in 2017 with a saved view as the start point. Exported to webview and the saved view was ignored so you will need to use the orbit to navigate to get yourself onto a surface to be able to enable the first person setting, once there you can adjust the height to walk under the low floor framing, and walk correctly up the stairs into the roof space. The file is then saved and opened in 2018, same saved view and exported as a white model. Webview opens at the correct view but when you change to first person, and then move forward you will notice the viewing height jump up. You seem to get knocked by each of the floor members and then cannot seem to pass the last one (they are all at the same height). Even if you use the walk through walls to get past the last floor members and then deselect you still don't walk up the stairs... VW 2017 Webview VW 2018 Webview both saved on the temp cloud so if you need them 2 weeks after this post let me know.

So I set my height in VW before exporting to webview, I know have some nice option to choose from when I export which is an improvement. No problem with the process so far but when I open the link and swap from orbit to first-person mode and move, the height changes to a predefined number - not helpful in my situation as I have low headroom so I keep getting stuck, there is the walk through walls option but that doesn't help with getting me up the stairs... In 2017 you have the option to adjust the height of the view (albeit broken for metric users) and the viewer (as far as I'm aware) would use you the height that you set in VW. 1 step forward, 2 steps back... My problems with lighting solved but now the model is not able to be navigated easily. I'll see if I can get some time to create two sample files showing the difference so others can test.

What about sloping ceilings, can the points have different heights?

Hello All I have ArchiCAD knocking on my door and I am looking to try to find some feedback from others who have looked into ArchiCAD - those that have changed and those that looked into it but didn't think it worthwhile. I have had a look at the ArchiCAD website but most of that is just glitter and sparkles edited to look good. According to the sales guy, the main reasons that people switch from VW to AC is productivity improvements and workforce. The first point I guess is open to debate and dependent on use and experience, but the second is a valid point. In New Zealand AC claim to have 45% (give or take) market share, Autodesk about 43% and then VW must take up the remaining 12%, when doing a search on an online job site I got the following which backs up what he was saying, more in favour of Revit though; 94 in Revit 54% 70 in Archicad 40% 9 in Vectorworks 06% It also doesn't help VW cause that I think most Universities here teach people in AC or Revit. I'm not looking at changing my job position at the moment, but in the near future, I may be looking to expand my work contacts and looking for more firms to do work for. Any thoughts good or bad on the matter are appreciated. Also interested in what the market share situation is like in Australia and Europe as the wife keeps on talking about us moving overseas. Thanks.

Someone doesn't seem to understand that metric and imperial are slightly different... When setting the height of the first person view the second box is for cm but it only gives me the options 1-11cm - which I guess is because of it being designed with inches in mind and someone not taking into account the future (metric). So my options for setting the viewing height stop at 1.11m and then start again at 2m. 1.11m is way too low, and 2m is too high as you hit your head on the doors and can't go through them. Exporting from Vw2017 so not sure if it is any different for 2018 but I'd imagine webview is the same platform? Ideally, the options for cm should be multiples of 10.

When changing component class settings it would be nice to have a button to select to change them all to be by class. For example, when changing the roof component, there is 5 pull downs and one button to set to class - It would be nice to have an option to select the class options as defaults.

Can do it in Windoor. They really need to hire the OzCad guy to combine windoor for everyone. Just like they did with PanzarCad and cameramatch.

Not sure what the split is for the mac/windows users@JimW, but what about the teaser for those of us on windows? I get excited when loading into this forum on Wednesday mornings, but then I saw "Mac' in the title and got disappointed, not sure how I can continue on with my work for the day...

Make a template file that has your default sheet layers already set up. Then when you go to create a new sheet, go down to import sheet layer and select what one you want.

This looks like Mac, can we have this on Windows as well?

@JimWis this going to be every Tuesday leading up to the announcement of VW2018?

@Tom Klaberhow do you find working on a screen of this size?

Hopefully, support for multiple cores. I have 8 cores but VW only uses one of them...

@michaelkI manage to get it to work. User 2 is one of the custom fields that you can specify to create custom things like door height or width x height. Since I was just after a standard one I changed the schedule to be 'Overall Width' and with your rounding formula, the numbers went to the nearest 10. Thanks for the help.

Thanks@michaelkbut that returns #NAME? in all the fields?

Trying to get a schedule to show the width of my glazing just for pricing purposes, so I want to round things off to the nearest 10mm. Currently, the schedule (set as a database) is pulling from the windoor objects and I have set 'user2' to the 'overall width'. I can add 'ROUND' or 'INT' but that just makes the numbers all appear as 50mm which is not even in the same ball park - do the functions not work with numbers pulled from objects. =('WinDoor 6.0'.'__User2') =ROUND('WinDoor 6.0'.'__User2') Thanks.

I think the problem with the Custom stair tool is that is very buggy. If you do something that it doesn't like sometimes it just keeps giving you errors even though you have corrected the parameters. Not to mention sometimes it just disappears if you try to duplicate or copy... If you can try to move your workflow to the new stair tool, it does take a bit to get used to and does require more input to get started, but I have found fewer problems with it than the Custom Stair, which is in the Legacy tools so is no longer supported.

I am using the clip cube to focus on one section of roofing that needs to be discussed and I want to export it to 3D. However, if I try to export to 3D pdf or to web view the whole model gets exported which makes them useless. I tried the trick of creating a Section VP of the clip cube and putting it on a separate design layer and then exported but still, the same thing happens, the whole model gets exported. The only other option I can think off is to copy the file and delete all the extra information around the point of interest. Is it too much to ask that the clip cube view can be used by the export 3D pdf and export web view?

Another thing you need to fudge. If you edit the notes that aren't correctly left aligned and add a bunch of spaces in at the end of the text, this will push the text to the left, and shouldn't create an extra line. If they all have the same offset point and max text width they should line through nicely.

This is disappointing but unfortunately expected... Expect to see a fix in VW 2018 with the introduction of Multicore processing across the board. (one can dream right?)