Jump to content

Chad McNeely

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Chad McNeely

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Location
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi All, It's been a while since I was on these forums, and I've done a couple of searches to see if this is a common problem, so please forgive me if it's been discussed recently and just eluded me! For the last few versions of VW, since the Attribute palette took on the form it now has, the line type previews are not at all helpful. Here's a screen shot of what I mean: Screen Shot 2017-11-14 at 1.15.27 PM.pdf There are three versions of the line shown here, and the two "previews" in the palette are nothing like what is shown on the drawing. Basically, the palette is of no help in selecting a line type -I need to just pick one, exit, see what it looks like on the drawing, and repeat until by luck I find the one I need. (Yes, most lines are drawn by class so this is only done occasionally, but it still feels like a big potentially useful palette and its preview windows are completely wasted when I do need to choose a line type.) Thanks for any help! -Chad
  2. Piling on to the "bring back the custom stair tool" bandwagon. I lost a bunch of nicely working custom stairs with the 2016 upgrade, and now have no real way to build them. Frustrated.
  3. Another easy way to do standing seams is to duplicate your roof faces (ungroup your "roof" if you used that tool successfully), change the roof thickness to something like 2", raise the roof surface so it sits on top, then edit the roof surface. With the source polygon in front of you, draw the space between two ribs, say 15 1/2" wide for a 1/2" rib spaced 16"o.c., draw it much longer than the roof, duplicate array at your rib spacing, arrange the array over the source polygon, select all, and subtract surface. Delete (or better, cut, for future roof surfaces), and your roof source polygon should just be a bunch of 1/2" stripes that start/stop at the roof edge. Exit the roof edit, and assign the roof top texture to the roof sides, and it should look just about perfect.
  4. Yes then no: use the end points of the smaller roof hidden line render as snaps to create the subtracting polygons. So, 1st ungroup the roof object(s?) to get roof faces. Do the convert copy to lines / hidden line render. Draw a polygon that will be subtracted from the continuous roof faces, using the end points of the HL render as snap points. Subtract this poly from the continuous roof face. Draw a polygon using the same same points that represents the shape to be subtracted from the smaller roof faces, and subtract from those faces.
  5. The work-around for the OP without Windoor is to make a symbol of the door and sidelites and add a bit of 3d geometry (simple extrude, class = same as door or sashes) at the bottom of the sidelite. I have to do this regularly just make the bottom rail match the door's bottom rail height...
  6. Yes, I just like the ability to choose where and how to reduce the vertex count. I don't delegate well, apparently!
  7. I'll say that I generally disagree with this method, since polyline to polygon conversion creates huge vertex counts, and I've never had any luck with the 2d polys to 3d polys (contours) saving me any time. I'd further avoid any conversion attempt of dwg imported geometry for the same "control my vertex count" reason, as well as the likelihood that there are overlaps and other faults that could be tough to troubleshoot. Instead, I trace my survey info with 2d polygons so that I can control my vertex count. Only I know where I need tight spacing, or not. Vertex reduction has always been very important for DTM/Site Models. I generally throw in some 3d loci as well where I have point elevations that I need. Next, select all the 2d polygons and convert to 3d polygons, ungroup to get individuals, set fill to none, and then select and enter each z-height in the OIP. Check the look of the 3d poly and loci 'cloud' from an isometric view or two, rotate the view with the flyover tool to make sure nothing is missed or whacky (zero, or 100" high instead of 100', etc.), then run the create Site Model command. Next, check the look of the Site Model in the format you need. It will likely look great in 2d (w/ 2009), but if you use any 3d format beside extruded contours, you'll likely have some dirt spilling over (or have some dirt washed out from under) your contours. After copying this into a fresh file and sending it to NNA as a bugsubmit, a few tricks to try to massage the result that sometimes work are to add additional (or trace existing) contours and convert them to site modifier "pads" (with a fence), adding some 3d loci, adding some 3d polygons, moving the existing 3d polygons just a smidge (check them in a iso view to make sure they didn't get moved to z=0), etc. Note site modifier "pads" do not need to be enclosed shapes- a line can be used even. The DTM/Site Model tool has always been an almost great tool- they keep chipping away at the edges, but can't seem to get it to "just work".
  8. Yes, this old chestnut helps (me) in a few percent of cases. Except when the initial geometry chokes the command. And, if you figure out how to adjust your initial geometry to suit the command such that "create roof" succeeds, the only useful bit left from ungrouping this roof object is (usually) the roof faces. The fascia and soffits are a mess of (#+*^&$) nurbs surfaces that defy rational stretching. So in the end I delete the fascia and soffits and redraw my own with editable shapes (walls or extrude along paths), after readjusting the roof faces to undo the changes I made to get the create roof command to "succeed" in the first place. Around the block to get next door? My point in posting the examples was to show the OP that the create roof command isn't just technically deficient or buggy, but that it is also conceptually very weak. It's too easy to believe that NNA would only provide a tool if it was in fact useful, and thus spend lots of time pounding it to fit. NNA doesn't (for obvious marketing reasons) go out of their way to disclose weaknesses. Several years ago, one of the program's paradigms (it was in a Flaherty interview, I seem to recall) was to be "self-discoverable" by a reasonable user with a manual. Now the mantra is "get training". I think a big part of this change is the roll out of ever more complex features that have very narrow applications, with serious, undisclosed, and unknowable pitfalls outside of their target range. I'd say the create roof command currently falls squarely in this category.
  9. Using either bcd or Peter's methods, it's best to start with a white siding texture and then use the filtered image setting. With white as a background, the filter color will be very close to the final color.
  10. The create roof command is fine when it works but that is all too rare, still. It often hiccups on co-linear bearing lines. The "middle bits" can't be adjusted except through their relationship to the bearing lines. For example, there's no way to set up a roof to have parallel ridges with a cricket between. Or, after subtracting out a hole in the roof for a smaller upper story, there's no way to adjust the upper roof lines to reflect the rational adjustments to the roof that "keeping water out" would require. (see example "Hip2Wall") There's often odd and irrational no-go areas for bearing lines. (see example "NoGo") The good news is you can still draw any (planar) roof shape you want with the roof face command.
  11. Any chance you are importing dxf/dwg's into the referenced file? I recall that that may move the referenced file's origin, and thus it's location in the target file. If so, find a bombproof way of repeatedly and accurately re-establishing the referenced file's origin.
  12. Basic level answer: You know you can cut holes in polygons, right? Indeed, often times the easiest way to draw a complex polygon is to draw a series of say rectangles, and the use the Modify>Add Surface command. Similarly, shapes can be removed from edges and from within the poly using the Subtract Surface command. Fills or hatches applied to the poly will "flow around" the holes. Rendered model answer: If you are using rendered viewports for your elevations, a simple renderworks texture and sparing use of DPI, lighting, HDRI backgrounds, and other render time increasing factors *should* make your model update with reasonable quickness. Using the "Save viewort cache" setting means the view only needs to be updated when you want to see the update. OpenGL renders on many models are almost instantaneous, but with occasional texture mapping wonkiness. It won't provide the same look as a line-drawn elevation, but you may find it useful.
  13. Double click one of the constraint pallete boxes, which opens the constraints dialogue window. Under the "object" category, make sure "nearest point on edge" is checked. The vw2009 default setting is to have this unchecked just to mess with your head, or to make sure you spend some time getting aquainted with these settings.
  14. 1) What VW calls "Edit group" might more accurately be called "Edit selected object" since it works on a selected group, viewport, or symbol. 2) Dunno, I've always just used the default cmd-4 for fit to page. Maybe cmd-(1-4) are reserved? Edit: and apparently Jim types faster.


7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114


© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

  • Create New...