Cable not interacting v2024

[Blind_Optimism]

I know it's something simple I'm missing, but I've gone through the videos and university tutorials and can't seem to find an answer. When I'm running a cable or cable path I can't seem to get the truss to highlight and attach. It just sticks to the layer plane. Suggestions?

 

 

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/4xwdclimj0sxn3l89971p/Cable-Issues.vwx?rlkey=oyzlqzuwdsbxyz0bkfbexs0ao&dl=0

 

[Blind_Optimism]

Looks like I answered my own question. The truss wasn't drafted as a Hanging Position, once I converted the the truss from the object info palette it worked like a dream!

 

Edited January 20 by Blind_Optimism

[Stefan B.]

A truss don't need to be a hanging position for a cable to snap. Maybe the truss was on a different layer and you created a hanging position in the "correct" layer.

 

In my opinion, a truss should never be a hanging position!

[Blind_Optimism]

Is that because it effects how riggers can interact with it?

[Sam Jones]

11 hours ago, Stefan B. said:

In my opinion, a truss should never be a hanging position!

 

Why?  It seems to work very well, especially when used for hang lighting fixtures.

[Stefan B.]

But it is very possible to hang a fixture in a truss that is not in a hanging position.

 

And, as a rigger who does plan the trusses, and does care what parts go where and what type of truss it is, that is a horrible procedure to begin with, makes it twice as troublesome when you also have to do one truss at a time since you have to double click/open the hanging position to edit the truss itself.

[Sam Jones]

9 hours ago, Stefan B. said:

And, as a rigger who does plan the trusses

But you  are not the only one who uses the trusses

 

9 hours ago, Stefan B. said:

But it is very possible to hang a fixture in a truss that is not in a hanging position.

But it is possible to make every truss assembly that has fixtures hanging from it a hanging position.  There are advantages to hanging positions.  Either as a lighting designer or production electrician, I would convert any truss assemblies I found, and use, to hanging positions.  When you are laying out the truss assemblies, they don't need to be hanging positions, but once you pass them off to the LD and/or PE, boom, lighting positions.  (Not true for all LDs and PEs, but for many of us.)  What kind of global changes do you make after the layout that makes double clicking on a hanging position so onerous?

Edited January 22 by Sam Jones
spelling

[Stefan B.]

What benefits are there to a hanging position that does not work on a pure truss object?

 

Very often the LD has drawn trusses in the initial design. Very often the trusses are of the wrong make, or size, or not available in our rental stock. This requires me to alter most of/ all trusses to the correct type and configuration. During the development of a project, this alteration takes place numerous times as the loads change and solutions change.

 

Very often I can select several truss runs at the same time and do a replace truss type on them all at once. If they are hanging positions I have to take them one at a time.

 

Internally I have no problem with all trusses being in a hanging position if this saves the light guys plenty of time. Then it is beneficial that I spend a bit more time adjusting my trusses. But, up until now, no one internally or on this forum has made it clear why light guys always prefer a hanging position, they just use it because some Vectorworks tutorial said that they say to go. So there is in my opinion only more workload on the rigger and the same workload for a light guy. Please enlighten me if I'm wrong, I'm more than happy using hanging positions.

 

And don't get me wrong, I use hanging positions all the time, in their intended function. I have an object that fixtures and hoists cannot connect to(not a truss or a pipe), and then I make it into a hanging position to be able to use it for fixtures and rigging.

[Sam Jones]

8 hours ago, Stefan B. said:

What benefits are there to a hanging position that does not work on a pure truss object?

Sharing position changes, automatic numbering, total hung weight in the OIP, and automatic position acquisition; although without care and experience, this can bite you in the ass.

[ratherfishing]

10 hours ago, Stefan B. said:

What benefits are there to a hanging position that does not work on a pure truss object?

 

I think both ways have some good and some bad to them. In my view the biggest advantage is that HP is somewhat usable, yet not perfect, container. It gives coordinates about the position, and moving the whole truss is a little bit easier compared to moving the system. Also, very often trusses, even without clear subhangs or dropdowns, contain additional outriggers, calmps and pipes. With HP you can bake everything in and treat it as one. When using truss system, you have to use HPs anyway for some cases (as you said), so you have two kinds of positions, you might need several data tags to report on same thing and so on. I think a lot of people use HP for everything so they can have only one workflow instead of mixing two workflows. Even though, to be fair, it is true that even if you use HPs, you still sort of use systems as well. Handy...

I agree with you about changing truss types, and indeed many times working with just truss objects seems like the way to go. I do not know what is the way everything is "meant" to be done. I think both ways are pretty far from perfect.

[Stefan B.]

17 hours ago, Sam Jones said:

Sharing position changes, automatic numbering, total hung weight in the OIP, and automatic position acquisition

 

Could you please elaborate on these benefits? I don't think they are used where I work, and I do not know why.

 

Sharing position changes; Is this when you have similar hanging position symbols and you make changes to one you make changes to them all?

 

Automatic numbering; What number and what is this number used for? 

 

Total hung weight; This is from my point the only real benefit of a hanging position or the weakest point of a truss system. But I don't think it is a strong enough argument since it does not help you in the real world. There is no validation as to if the truss can handle the load, and there is no info on how the weight is distributed. And you cannot use the information to validate via load table from the manufacturer. You can use it to estimate, yes!

 

automatic position acquisition; Please elaborate, on what is this function.

 

 

14 hours ago, ratherfishing said:

It gives coordinates about the position, and moving the whole truss is a little bit easier compared to moving the system.

 

Coordinates; To the center of the hanging position. I don't see how this is beneficial over a single truss that shows the same data.

 

Moving the truss, yes, you can click and drag instead of using the select system then click and drag. But you cannot, since the hoist does not follow in either case so in both the hanging position and the truss system you must use the select system before moving if you want the hoists to follow.

 

I see the benefit when making an advanced sub hang with pipes, clamps, etc. But I have not missed it, but I see the benefit here.

 

How are the workflows different, other than it is possible to move a truss, and the data tags are different? But I have made two different data tags that look the same but one snaps to a truss and the other to a hanging position.

 

 

 

I think I read somewhere that the intended use for hanging positions is when you have fixtures that need to hang from a non-rigging object. Then the hanging position can make this possible. But what is stupid from Vectorwork's side is to not make a truss system and a hanging position behave the same throughout the system. The "insert Connection" function does not work at all on a hanging position.

 

 

My suggestion to Vectorworks is to remove both systems and make them one system. Every truss is a "hanging position" but does not behave like a symbol. So you can use all the truss functions right off the bat without opening or converting. It should be a check box for "Fixtures fixed to truss" and "Hoists fixed to truss" so it is possible to move a truss with and without the hoists and fixtures. It should be possible to show the weight of a truss with attached objects without it being converted to something new. There could even be a check box for "Behave as system" If this is checked everything connected is "grouped" and if you deselect every object's behavior as a single object and not a group. Then the true hanging position is only when you have a non-rigging object that needs to be connectable with hoists, fixtures, and other objects. But it should be named something like "Convert to rigging object"

[ratherfishing]

I often find coordinates pretty useful, even if it only for the center. With working plane it is easy to get any coordinates. But if I align or distribute multiple positions or want to just check their places in space, I find the coordinates handy. If you have only one truss then it it all the same. The biggest thing still, I think, is the ability to bake all the necessary stuff into same position. If I have a truss position, and I have other objects that are in real life rigging objects, but in VWX symbols, and I want to change height of the whole thing in one go, the only way I know is to have everything as HP and then change the z-height. With truss system I need to have the system, for example LX1, as one thing and then the extra pipes/rig acc + fixtures as other thing. It is in some ways better, since it keeps the hoists attached, but it breaks the position. I also have two LX1s, one is the truss and the other is everything else.
 

How it is different, or does it even matter, depends on the use case I think. I have data mapped to custom records and all the gear data is synced to Excel via few worksheets. I also have users (and not users) of all possible softwares, in many different companies, who all use the files I create. For those reasons, and for me personally, It feels useful to have everything done the same way, even if the way is not perfect or even optimal. When these things are not a factor, I mix different ways of doing things gladly. Many truss-systems are very well done just as you describe.

As to how it should be, I agree with you on many things. As for the HP, I would like to change trim with z-coordinate without disconnecting hoists. As I like to keep things "simple", whatever it means in this subject, grouping truss objects goes pretty far as well. For me it basically only lacks the ablity to take fixtures not directly in the truss with it if the group gets moved.