CS1

Yeah I second that

Yeah the problem occurs when the menu command "fit walls to roof" is used. Deleting the vertex works or trimming the effected end and re-stetching the wall to a datum. The only problem is every time the "fit walls to roof" command is used the problem happens again. I could understand this problem would occur if say even 0.0000001mm of the lower wall extnded past he face of the higher wall. But I have drawn a line at the face of the wall using the "object" popup so I know its not over the face. Having the wall say 1mm off the face has stopped this from happening for the meantime but I dont like to build my models or plans like this it doesnt seem accurate.

With the wall tool we can add "components" so in section etc we can control how it looks without having to draw lines over the top. I would like it if this was possible with the roof tool. From memory this was possible in ArchiCAD 9?

With the wall tool we can add "components" so in section etc we can control how it looks with out having to draw lines over the top. Is this possible with the roof tool? From memory this was possible in ArchiCAD 9?

Just to clarify, this isnt how I have joined the walls. At the top of this post I have described how I have got the lower wall to terminate at the face, not the centre of the higher wall as is the case when you use the "T" join tool. I have attached an image of the two walls, I hope the "selection indication" is visible so you can see how the walls join/dont join.

Yeah this is when I get problem to.

Yeah I have tried to keep the walls seperate, I have unticked the "auto-join walls" option in the prefs. And I have tried to get the lower wall to terminate in the same location as the face of the higher wall. I haven't used the "join wall" tool, I originally tried just dragging the lower wall so it touched the higher wall's face but got the attached result. I then recognized that with the wall touching the other it was making the top extend up, That is why I grouped the wall and used a line as a datum so I could get the wall to terminate in the correct location without snapping to the higher wall. How are people setting up their walls in models with different top heights without having the odd problem as shown in the image?

Is this a bug? I have dragged the wall to touch the line using the "object" pop-up to confirm this, I havent just dragged the wall using my eyecrometer. If this is how it is supposed to be how are people expected to achieve the correct wall join?

I have just had a play with the RenderWorks Backgrounds Options with SLVPs and I notice you can create your own using .hdr and .exr images, does anybody know where I can aquire some of these files to experiment with?

Im curious as to how other people create their roof faces. Currently I create my roof setting the "thickeness" as the total roof thickeness (include rafter depth, purlin depth and roofing depth) For exmaple with 290mm rafters, 45mm purlins and 20mm roofing I would set my roof to 355mm thick. This works OK for my Cross Sections but looks wrong in the model and elevations since the rafters are cut down to 90mm at the soffits giving a much smaller facia depth. This means for the elevations I need to do a lot of tracing over with solid white line to hide the areas I dont want to see. I started wondering how tricky it would be to set the roof thickeness to suit the total depth of the roof at the soffits and adjust the "axis Z" accordingly, I think this would work for the elevations and model but wouldnt work for the cross sections. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Haha straight to the point

I have been going through and removing the problamatic areas, but Im the process of creating a concept model and need to continuely move walls and refit to roof. Why is it doing this in the first case?

Can someone have a look at the attached image and tell me why all my walls are doing this. I have unticked => Tools > VW Prefs > Edit > Auto-Join walls. I would expect them to do this if I had used the "T" junction with the "join" tool. I have even tried the following: -Group the "odd" wall by itself -Remove the effected end -Draw a line inside the group where the face of the higher wall is located -Extend the lower wall to meet that line -Delete the line -Exit the group -Ungroup -Fit wall to roof I get the same result. Why does the very end face of that wall extend to the upper roof and not the lower face? The upper roof, although not visible in the image, has an over hang of 1200mm, so I dont understand why its only that small amount of wall that is extending up.

If you have a polygon with say 50% opacity and you offset it, the new polygon has most of the same attributes (eg colour, fill, dash etc) however the opacity reverts to 100%. Is this a feature that can be toggled on/off or is it a bug? PS: I have experienced this in the annotation space of a SLVP

Yeah but there are limits to the architectural objects provided with VW, obviously it would be impossible to create architectural objects that will cater for everyones needs which is why we are able to build customized objects using extrusions and solid subtractions etc, what good are these thou if we cant show them the same as other architectural objects (dashed), what good are they if their final output is no good for plans with out copying them to 2D so we can change their appearance. Try creating a 3D "I" beam at a 30? angle to horizontal that can be stretched and shown in plan as dashed without copying it and converting to lines.

Can someone shed some light on why we cant dash 3D objects? I can appreciate that being able to dash extrusions isnt going to fix everyones problems but from what I can see from the last 6 months of previous posts it would fix a hell of a lot of problems. Hybrid symbols work if you know exactly what you want from the beginning but the y are extremely cumbersome if you are trying to develop a plan. you could use extrusions for roofs, floors, beams, pillars, joists.. the list could go on, if only they could be dashed in plan. This program is used to generate plans basically and the only tool we can use to create customized 3D shapes cant be dashed so no good for plans. Im sure I cant be alone on this.

In plan view we can show selected layers and classes as grey. In 3D we can show selected layers as grey. Why cant we show classes grey in 3D???

Hello NNA?

Here is two examples

I had this occur the other day, I had a viewport showing a custom view, when I rendered as openGL half of some objects appeared as hiddenline, in final quality renderworks appeared normal, would be a cool effect if I could have controlled and altered it. After I closed and restarted my machine the occurance stopped, only had it pop up a couple of times since then , have no idea why.

OK I didnt realize that with a hybrid symbol the 3D object disapears in top/plan view, thats handy. The two problems I have with hybrid symbols is my initial understanding was that you needed to have two classes for one object (so you could turn the 3D object off to see the dashed rectangle using classes), so this doesnt seem to be a problem anymore. There is still the problem that to change the length or width of a hybrid symbol it requires makin the change to two objects (or copying and pasting the 2D object into the embedded area of the 3D object).

Am I alone in saying that drawing dashed lines is an important part of working drawings (plans)?

Haha !

Yeah but you cant dash an extrusion not very handy for plans.

When I right click that option is not present, I have been in to my workspace and searched "all menu items" and cant find anything that resembles "recalculate" that I can add to my list of right click options.