Scott Campbell

Looks like we've got a solution here now.

Hello @aage.langedrag and @Eric Gilbey, PLA I don’t believe “Create Grade Limits from Planar Pad” is going to get what you need, Åge (if nothing else, you're limited to the same slope in all directions and from all edges of the planar pad). As a matter of fact, I don’t think Vectorworks currently has the tools to do what you’re trying to do. It’s frustrating to be so near, and yet so far from a precise and simple tool to do what you are asking. The closest I can get uses basically methods that it looks like you have already tried out yourself. But I’ll sum up here what I find to be the best work-around I can find at the moment in Vectorworks 2024. It’s possible to accurately model a solid which gives you any battered slope you want from the edge of a planar pad. In this example I’ve used 4 different slopes on four sides of a rectangular pad. One sees clearly where each battered slope intersects with the site model. It would be lovely if we had a tool to automatically find this 3D shape that corresponds to the exact intersection between the solid and the site model surface. As far as I know, we don’t have this. Please correct me if I’m wrong, @Katarina Ollikainen, @Eric Gilbey, PLA, @Vlado or @Tony Kostreski. But it is possible to quickly draw a 2D polygon in Top view and convert it to a Grade Limits. It drapes itself on the site model surface. The battered slopes look pretty even and good, but Vectorworks doesn’t get the corners quite right — at least not without some helpful proding. Grade objects in each corner of the pad, can be snapped with the lower elevation at the Grade Limits object rather easily. This results in proposed contours which are more or less what we’re looking for, don’t you agree? I’m sorry that this is not the automatic, super-precise solution that it should be. But I hope you find it of some help, nevertheless. I will ask around to find out if there’s something you and I are missing here, and most importantly: Just how we can influence the process to build this sort of automated slope control into Vectorworks of the future.

This is a long-standing wish, here in the Nordics at least. Eh, @Jutta Telivuo @Basem @John S. Hansen @aage.langedrag @Daniel Ewald @Helene Bast? To up vote this wish list item, hit the arrow pointing up at the top left of this post. Thanks!

My tests confirm that there is something funky going on here. On importing the v2023-generated ifc of your ceiling grid (the extruded lines) into BIMcollab ZOOM, I find that the ceiling actually does import, but it's location is wrong. On importing to Solibri Anywhere, it doesn't seem to import at all. In other words: Something funky. I'll register this as a bug. But in terms of ifc best practice, in my opionion, extruded lines as a 3D represenation of a suspended ceiling is somewhat questionable. An extruded line represents a plane, actually a 2D object. Following this line of reasoning, I'm tempted to replace your lines with skinny rectangles. In subsequent tests, I see that these (in your extrude) export correctly to ifc. I understand that you are most concerned about ease of editing/revising, and editing lines is likely easier than editing or recreating rectangles. Nevertheless, my workaround results in a true 3D object, and maybe it's worth the extra care. Of course, all of this focus on cobbling together suspended ceiling objects based on manually constructed lines, rectangles, NURBS surfaces or whatever, again begs the question: Where is the true BIM tool for ceilings in Vectorworks? The Ceiling Grid tool is an antiquated tool which obviously doesn't meet expectations. Many of us have lobbied for years for a modern ceiling grid tool, and here is yet another example of the trouble not having one is causing. UP-VOTE ON THE WISH LIST! Again I suggest that users who agree that the Ceiling Tool needs a proper modern BIM overhaul can up-vote this thread in the wishlist section of the forum. The more votes this wish gets, the quicker the Ceiling Tool moves up on the list.

In my tests, when importing a Survey File, Vectorworks will present you with the Stake Object Preferences dialog if it's the first time you create a Stake object in the file. After that, it will -- as you say, @kwik -- use the last chosen mode. Perhaps a checkbox in the Import Survey File dialog with an option to "Edit Stake Object Preferences" would give you the chance to access the prefs each time, or as needs be.

@aage.langedrag Looks nice! What you're saying is have 2 site models, one for above and one for below sea level, eh?

On a Mac laptop? If so, close the lid, then open it again…

Thanks, @Gunther, for the lid close/open temporary solution. Remarkably, it worked for a customer of ours just now. ------- And now, Feb. 14 for customer #2 with the same problem/temporary solution.

This has been reported to Vectorworks, Inc. as a bug and we're hoping for a fix in the next Service Pack.

Hello @alangedrag -- I believe that the Elevation Benchmark tool does what you need. I've used it in all my sections (made with the Create Section Elevation command) and elevations (made with the Create Viewport command) for quite some time. I usually place the benchmarks in the Annotations space of the viewport. NOTE: When using in a viewport, set "Elevation Display" to “Y value relative to reference elevation” to read correct Design Layer Z-heights relative to the ground plane (leaving the benchmark's Reference Elevation at 0). Elevation Benchmarks can also placed directly in the Design Layer model, and viewed in both sections, elevations and in perspectives, if you wish. Any point in 3D space can be snapped to, but it can be challenging to orient the benchmark on the 3D plane you want. Still, once you've got one on the plane you want (usually a verticle plane) using the Move by Points tool in a 3D view, snapping to various heights established in the model can be very effective and quick. NOTE: When using Elevation Benchmarks to dimension heights in the model, on a Design Layer, set the benchmark's "Elevation Display" to “Z value relative to ground plane” to read correct Design Layer Z-heights relative to the ground plane. Alternatively, you can use “Z value relative to reference elevation," adding a Reference Elevation value as needed (this you might want to do if the benchmark is placed on a Design Layer which does not itself have a Z value equal to that of the ground plane). Lots of words for a tool that really is rather simple to use!

When I look at the problem area in Top view, Orthangonal, I see that your site model does not actually extend out beyond the path of the landscape area. Even though your site model crop extends beyond the landscape area path, you don't have enough site model source data. I believe that if you extend the source data beyond the landscape area path, the landscape area will work as expected.

Mixing pro and edu files is a no-no, afaik.

Thanks, Juan! Good info!! (and even better functionality!)

@ida I have submitted a request to Vectorworks, Inc. for returning this functionality to the OI-palette.

@JuanP Is the "free downloadable 30-day trial" for Vision the same as running Vision in demo mode? Thanks! Scott