Structural Member tool - Lock parameters

[Mark Aceto]

@Matt Panzer is there a way to lock height, span or length? In this case, I don't care about the pitch but it seems to override the others in an infinite loop of wac-a-mole.

 

[Gualterino]

The only i found to do it, is to lock the entire object. Then, unlock it if you need to make changes. Hope this helps.

[Matt Panzer]

14 hours ago, Mark Aceto said:

@Matt Panzer is there a way to lock height, span or length? In this case, I don't care about the pitch but it seems to override the others in an infinite loop of wac-a-mole.

 

 

If you're using a styled object and you set the elevations by style, that should keep the heights from changing.  But that may be more restrictive than you want.  If you're dragging an endpoint of a Structural Member, you can also tab over to the desired field, enter a value and have it constrained to that value while dragging.  

 

Would having a way to lock these parameters directly on the Object Info palette be ideal?

 

 

[line-weight]

The ability to lock parameters was asked for here some time ago:

 

 

Might be worth adding your voice to that thread.

 

As for the wac-a-mole, I think I know what you mean but I just about manage to use structural members in spite of it. You have to be very careful about what you change and how.

 

What specifically are you trying to do, that is proving impossible?

[Mark Aceto]

I'm gonna respond to all of these questions when I get caught up...

 

In the meantime, @Matt Panzer did this bug get fixed in 2024? Are ya'll still fixing bugs in 2023? When mirroring structural members, the start and end offsets flip (just one more reason to never trust the mirror tool):

 

[BG]

On 10/13/2023 at 1:49 AM, Matt Panzer said:

 

If you're using a styled object and you set the elevations by style, that should keep the heights from changing.  But that may be more restrictive than you want.  If you're dragging an endpoint of a Structural Member, you can also tab over to the desired field, enter a value and have it constrained to that value while dragging.  

 

Would having a way to lock these parameters directly on the Object Info palette be ideal?

 

 

When dragging a structural member that is pitched, the pitch changes. Being able to lock the pitch (or other values too) would be much more user friendly.  I will try the tab suggestion, as this sounds good.  We gave up using the structural member and went back to the framing member as it is easier to manipulate.

Having a 'direction' indicator would also be helpful.

Thanks

[line-weight]

49 minutes ago, BG said:

When dragging a structural member that is pitched, the pitch changes

Assume you mean in a top/plan view.

 

In a 3d view, you can hold shift and drag the start & end points and they will be constrained to the existing pitch.

[Mark Aceto]

8 hours ago, line-weight said:

In a 3d view, you can hold shift and drag the start & end points and they will be constrained to the existing pitch.

 

Obviously 🤣🤣🤣

 

If only there was gum other way to ball this... 

[line-weight]

3 hours ago, Mark Aceto said:

 

Obviously 🤣🤣🤣

 

If only there was gum other way to ball this... 

 

The VW2024 marketing blurb says this...

 

 

Hooray consistency between tools! It'll "always appear in front of the selected objects", so that must include the structural member tool, right? Right....?

[Matt Panzer]

On 10/16/2023 at 11:55 AM, Mark Aceto said:

I'm gonna respond to all of these questions when I get caught up...

 

In the meantime, @Matt Panzer did this bug get fixed in 2024? Are ya'll still fixing bugs in 2023? When mirroring structural members, the start and end offsets flip (just one more reason to never trust the mirror tool):

 

 

This is technically working as designed.  The reason for this behavior is to effectively mirror the profile when the Structural Member is mirrored.  Of course, this is only noticeable when using an asymmetric profile.  I do feel this is not the correct way to handle this because it creates confusion for users by changing parameter values around (which also makes it difficult to get the correct data you might want to show on reports).  We have some ideas on how to better deal with in the future.

[Mark Aceto]

5 hours ago, Matt Panzer said:

 

This is technically working as designed.  The reason for this behavior is to effectively mirror the profile when the Structural Member is mirrored.  Of course, this is only noticeable when using an asymmetric profile.  I do feel this is not the correct way to handle this because it creates confusion for users by changing parameter values around (which also makes it difficult to get the correct data you might want to show on reports).  We have some ideas on how to better deal with in the future.

 

I've never thought of the mirror tool flipping anything vertically along Z. It should only mirror objects along XY. I can't imagine a user in Plan view intending to flip objects upside down. For clarification, I'm talking about planes (XYZ). Technically, along XY is rotating around Z. Worded terribly all of this did I.

 

Is there a VB to submit or will this totally unexpected behavior be fixed in a future update?

 

Edited October 17, 2023 by Mark Aceto

[Matt Panzer]

1 hour ago, Mark Aceto said:

5 hours ago, Matt Panzer said:

 

This is technically working as designed.  The reason for this behavior is to effectively mirror the profile when the Structural Member is mirrored.  Of course, this is only noticeable when using an asymmetric profile.  I do feel this is not the correct way to handle this because it creates confusion for users by changing parameter values around (which also makes it difficult to get the correct data you might want to show on reports).  We have some ideas on how to better deal with in the future.

 

I've never thought of the mirror tool flipping anything vertically along Z. It should only mirror objects along XY. I can't imagine a user in Plan view intending to flip objects upside down.

 

Right.  This is why I stated that I feel this is the wrong approach.  The problem is, if we simply change the behavior, the member profile will no longer effectively flip when the object is mirrored.   If we want to correct it and keep the current profile behavior, something more will need to be added.  Maybe a simple "Flip profile" checkbox would be all that's needed but we'd need to investigate to make sure there are no other consequences in making such a change and we'd need adequate testing to make sure there are no other side effects.

 

1 hour ago, Mark Aceto said:

Is there a VB to submit or will this totally unexpected behavior be fixed in a future update?

 

While I did get this issue more on the radar please do submit a VB to help keep it on the radar.  It will also allow us to discuss the issue with you if needed.

[Mark Aceto]

19 minutes ago, Matt Panzer said:

Right.  This is why I stated that I feel this is the wrong approach.  The problem is, if we simply change the behavior, the member profile will no longer effectively flip when the object is mirrored.   If we want to correct it and keep the current profile behavior, something more will need to be added.  Maybe a simple "Flip profile" checkbox would be all that's needed but we'd need to investigate to make sure there are no other consequences in making such a change and we'd need adequate testing to make sure there are no other side effects.

 

I'll include this in the VB but the distinction is that the user is probably mirroring multiple objects around a center point to speed up the workflow vs simply flipping a single object in place (like a door in a wall). This is especially true if selecting objects stacked on top of other objects (posts, girts, purlins, braces, beams, joists). Categorically, objects should never flip vertically without that intention. The proposed checkbox would make sense as the exception to the rule (check to flip upside down).

 

Matt, I nominate you to fix Mirror Tool once and for all. It's such an unpredictable mess, and always has been.

[line-weight]

@Mark Aceto I don't quite get why you describe it as flipping vertically or flipping upside down.

 

As far as I can see, mirroring a structural member does create a mirrored object just as you'd expect - all that has happened is that the start and end points have swapped.

 

This is basically the same as what happens with a wall object if you mirror it.

 

 

So I don't really agree it's totally unexpected behaviour, although I do see that it could cause issues in certain scenarios.

 

 

Edited October 18, 2023 by line-weight

[Mark Aceto]

In my mind, and more importantly, my workflow of selecting and editing multiple objects with the same start and end points:

• Start is the low end
• End is the high end

Even if another user works the opposite of that way for some reason, I can't imagine a scenario where a user selects multiple objects that look the same but then the OIP is blank for those fields because they're different. And then it becomes a game of "which ones are which?" I wasted 10 minutes yesterday changing views, selecting, rotating in 3D... 

 

If I'm designing an office space, and I mirror half the room, I don't expect the other half to be upside down. My reflection in a mirror is not upside down (assuming my feet are the start point, and my head is the end point). Mirroring is mirroring.

 

This is just one more reason the Mirror tool can't be trusted. I'll start submitting VB's for all the Mirror tool fail points.

[line-weight]

Yup I can see how it would be a problem for many workflows.

 

When you said that mirrored structural objects ended up upside down, I pictured them literally upside down, but that's not what they are; the geometry is perfectly mirrored it's just that their "direction" has not been reversed.

 

The way it currently works would make sense to someone who was using asymmetrical structural profiles (like a steel channel C-section, say) and their workflow was that looking at the "start" of the profile end on, the vertical part of the channel was on the left. Although, in that case, it might also make sense that it was mirrored so that the start is still at the bottom, and the profile would still look the same viewed end-on, but the elements would not be literally mirrored.

 

I'd say that in an architectural context, if you mirror a plan, then you don't necessarily expect everything to be literally mirrored. For example, if you mirror a basin with a mixer tap, across to an opposite wall, then you wouldn't want the hot and cold handles to be swapped from left to right.

 

In any case ... either way, less confusion would arise if structural member objects could have a start arrow indicator like walls do. Something that's been requested for a while.

 

 

 

[Mark Aceto]

Just thought of something: the current WAD makes sense for diags. Yes, I want those start and end parameters to mirror or flip.

 

The issue I'm having is with vertical members. No, I don't want those start and end parameters to flip.

[Mark Aceto]

The more I think about this, the Mirror tool needs its own settings, ideally in the tool mode. Great. So now it's a VE that'll never happen.

[Matt Panzer]

Right.  Walls reverse their start and end points when mirrored which makes sense in a number of cases but not all.  But fixing those cases is usually not that difficult.  However, Structural Members reverse their start and end points and a number of settings for the start condition get swapped with the settings for the end condition.  This makes it very difficult to correct.  Also, think of things like mirroring a bunch sloping rafters with an offset at the eave, the mirrored ones might look right but their offset (and other end condition settings) will now have to be edited on the opposite side.  So, selecting all rafters to edit this will not be possible and setting any start or end conditions by style will be problematic.

 

20 hours ago, Mark Aceto said:

The proposed checkbox would make sense as the exception to the rule (check to flip upside down).

 

The option I was thinking about would not be for flipping the start and end points but for flipping the 2D profile shape used for the member.  If there needed to be a way to flip the start and end, I think that would need to be a button similar to the "Reverse Sides" button for a wall.

[line-weight]

14 hours ago, Mark Aceto said:

Just thought of something: the current WAD makes sense for diags. Yes, I want those start and end parameters to mirror or flip.

 

The issue I'm having is with vertical members. No, I don't want those start and end parameters to flip.

 

Ah! I was only looking at horizontal/diagonal members.

 

I see now, it'll also flip vertical members. Now I see why you are saying "upside down". Yes with a vertical member it's definitely odd behaviour that no-one would expect.

 

I think it also explains why I sometimes seem to have vertical members with strange negative heights and so on.

[Mark Aceto]

On 10/18/2023 at 11:25 AM, Matt Panzer said:

The option I was thinking about would not be for flipping the start and end points but for flipping the 2D profile shape used for the member.  If there needed to be a way to flip the start and end, I think that would need to be a button similar to the "Reverse Sides" button for a wall.

 

Or:

1. Mirror Tool settings (in the tool modes)
2. Modifier like Option-- dammit! OK see number 1 above

[Peter Neufeld.]

Hello,

One of the new features in v2024 is that Structural Members have been added to the list of objects that can be drawn using the 'Create Objects from Shapes' command. I just mention this in case it helps in certain situations. You can get some funky results!

 

Cheers,

Peter