Hanging position or not too hanging position

[Stig Runar]

In recent posts I`ve seen that the hanging position is a dying feature. 

Why is this? Pros and cons of using it?

[C. Andrew Dunning]

Pros:

- HP is one element.  Click once and drag (no Right-Click + "Select System Objects") and all attached elements follow along.

- Click HP and general weight info is displayed in the OIP.  (Helpful for getting basic "order-of-magnitude" estimates.)

- One name for the entire HP and one embedded label - not different names for individual truss sections or need for Data Tags.

 

 

[Mark Aceto]

HP’s are also great for floor packages (draw a rectangle, convert to hanging position). They’re also an “advanced container” for when you need a little more control (for example, editing within its own discreet plane / edit mode). Or when converting to a symbol, just edit the symbol to update all instances for a streamlined workflow. It’s a powerful tool for when you need it

[Scott C. Parker]

Hello @Stig Runar, perhaps you could add some links to posts about the HP dying? I've searched and most posts I've found about the hanging position are questions dealing with:

1. how objects inside the HP container are dealt with.
2. how to get cables and other items to properly attach.
3. how to garner info about the HP and attached items in worksheets, data tags, etc.
4. how HPs deal with runs of truss and how to change heights.

Personally, the HP is central to my keeping items organized, numbered, and reported upon.

Thanks, Scott

[Stig Runar]

Hi @Scott C. Parker!

 

Please see this post and the answer from @jcogdell : 

"The hanging position is a very old part of Spotlight and many of the original reasons for using it no longer exist, such as associating lighting fixtures and other plug in objects with trusses and pipes (this is know automatic and controlled using the auto positioning settings in the Spotlight preferences)"

 

"

you can't easily add more trusses to the position with editing it or running an extra command

if the hanging position is created as a symbol it can cause problems when using the new MVR file format

It makes it difficult to display the trim heights for trusses and pipes that are inside as the hanging position 'Z' coordinate is not easily accessible in worksheets or with data tags (to the best of my knowledge)

and a lot of the functions that are part of the hanging position can be done just as easily using other tools like spotlight numbering or the instrument summary tool"

 

 

 

My impression was that this was now a dying feature and that there were newer workarounds.

 

[TomWhiteLight]

I don't think its dying, All of Jesse's points are correct and depict a workflow using rigging objects such as truss, pipe, etc.

The Hanging Position command still has many uses, as mentioned above... Floor packages and particularly any custom geometry that you want to attach lights too.

Its another tool/command in your arsenal to allow greater flexibility, Whether its applicable to your particular workflow is up to you.

You give us an example of the kind of position you want to use it for? 

[TomWhiteLight]

Also I don't believe this is true 


"Currently if you create a hanging position from trusses it is no longer possible to reference them in a worksheet."

If you check 'Use plug in objects' It will still count all the truss objects.

[spettitt]

When I started looking at VW for our office, my primary concern was that all relationships between objects (loads, structures, hoists, whatever) were done in such a way that would be accurate for hoist load calculations - especially for things like fixture ladders hung from trusses, outrigged pipes with fixtures etc. My initial impression of hanging positions were that a newer user might just position those other rigging accessories near a truss, wrap up as a HP and assume that the weight of everything would be reflected in the hoists. We weren't using calculation software at the time, but I knew we would be. So I ignored them for our work pretty early on and haven't really looked back at them since, and instead have gotten everyone in to the habit of using point loads with a symbol to reflect such things.

 

I've never really seen the value in the total weight of a truss/hanging position, unless it is known to run parallel to a given beam or directly under a single arch of a festival roof.  Even then, it's of limited use. The individual top hook loads are the thing we need, and they only come from having the correct connections between structures and loads correctly assigned.

 

I should probably take another look at them and see if they are compatible with the way we name trusses (Position Name) and the calculation side of things. It would be handy to be able to move a truss, an attached ladder and all attached fixtures in one move, I'll see.

Edited August 21, 2023 by spettitt

[Scott C. Parker]

Thanks @Stig Runar for these. Jesse makes good points for those who have workflows that fit what he describes. Except for MVR (I haven't played with the issues he has), I find ways to make the HP work with the various items he mentions. When considering the advantages both @C. Andrew Dunning and @Mark Aceto mention above, and wanting to keep a consistent workflow, I use hanging positions for all of my items upon which gear hangs.

 

 

[Mark Aceto]

2 hours ago, spettitt said:

When I started looking at VW for our office, my primary concern was that all relationships between objects (loads, structures, hoists, whatever) were done in such a way that would be accurate for hoist load calculations - especially for things like fixture ladders hung from trusses, outrigged pipes with fixtures etc. My initial impression of hanging positions were that a newer user might just position those other rigging accessories near a truss, wrap up as a HP and assume that the weight of everything would be reflected in the hoists. We weren't using calculation software at the time, but I knew we would be. So I ignored them for our work pretty early on and haven't really looked back at them since, and instead have gotten everyone in to the habit of using point loads with a symbol to reflect such things.

 

I've never really seen the value in the total weight of a truss/hanging position, unless it is known to run parallel to a given beam or directly under a single arch of a festival roof.  Even then, it's of limited use. The individual top hook loads are the thing we need, and they only come from having the correct connections between structures and loads correctly assigned.

 

I should probably take another look at them and see if they are compatible with the way we name trusses (Position Name) and the calculation side of things. It would be handy to be able to move a truss, an attached ladder and all attached fixtures in one move, I'll see.

Agree with all of this. Are you using Braceworks or Production Assist yet? You can also use hanging positions along with those rigging workflows. To me, HP’s are a distant cousin of Stories (basically, a container to organize my drawing / documentation). Btw it’s nuts to me that Braceworks load calcs aren’t built into $potlight.

[spettitt]

6 hours ago, Mark Aceto said:

Agree with all of this. Are you using Braceworks or Production Assist yet? You can also use hanging positions along with those rigging workflows. To me, HP’s are a distant cousin of Stories (basically, a container to organize my drawing / documentation). Btw it’s nuts to me that Braceworks load calcs aren’t built into $potlight.

Yes, we're on Production Assist. I'll take a look at HPs again. Will be looking to see whether the benefit of them is worth it for more complication in our (quite settled) workflow, especially as our Position names map through to PA.