HP Sauce Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 If a wall is comprised as follows (as an example):- Split face block up to 3ft elevation cmu/veneer from 3ft to 9ft elevation ...How would one create this using the wall tool - is it a case of having to make two separate walls or can i merge both of these types in to one for easy manipulation? Cheers Quote Link to comment
brudgers Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 (edited) There is no object intellignece in Vectorworks walls. They are basically a hybrid object consisting of a 2d double line and a solid (or something like it). You have to create two separate walls. And if you want a window with a sill in one and a head in the other you have to hand model both walls. It's another case where implimenting a common architectural design motif requires tedious workarounds only to result in a brittle model. In general, Vectorworks walls are using the same software technology that companies like Softdesk used in 1990 to add architectural features to vanilla AutoCad. Not surprisingly, Vectorworks suffers from many of the same limitations. Edited September 8, 2008 by brudgers Quote Link to comment
HP Sauce Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 I assumed as much... Shame. I suppose it's still much quicker than drawing it 2D but it's hiccups like this that make our "Move to BIM" proposition seem less appealing. Thanks for the help though. Quote Link to comment
Ariel Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 There is no object intellignece in Vectorworks walls. They are basically a hybrid object consisting of a 2d double line and a solid (or something like it). You have to create two separate walls. And if you want a window with a sill in one and a head in the other you have to hand model both walls. It's another case where implimenting a common architectural design motif requires tedious workarounds only to result in a brittle model. In general, Vectorworks walls are using the same software technology that companies like Softdesk used in 1990 to add architectural features to vanilla AutoCad. Not surprisingly, Vectorworks suffers from many of the same limitations. Ok, let me get you straight: - wall styles and wall components - create walls from spaces - create walls from polygon - door and window insertions - auto-join - enable connected walls - fit walls to roof - link wall height to layer +/- Z - visible thickness - flat or round caps - reverse sides - component join tool Wow, I never thought Autodesk was so advanced in the 90's. Sorry, budgers, but I believe you're already trolling here. Quote Link to comment
brudgers Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 (edited) The technology underlying vectorworks is bascially the same. Vectorworks uses stand alone scripts to manipulate basic collections of cad primatives. In the case of walls the two primatives are a double line and a solid. What is needed to model walls is a sophisticated data object not a mashup of two primatives managed by a script. Walls need to contain intelligence for handling windows and doors. Instead, vectorworks trys to handle this in the window and door objects and leaves the walls dumb. Softdesk had door and window insertion. It was a hybrid object approach like vectorworks. Because hybrid objects were not part of the underlying architecture of autocad the implimentation was not nearly as smooth as vectorworks...there was also a lot less computational horsepower available which may account for part of it. The fact that wall components require manual joining just indicates a lack of sophistication in vectorworks walls. That wall breaks have to be removed manually just proves how dumb they are. Someone suggested to me that architects need to communicate clearly the needs of vectorworks to the programmers at NNA. While parts of Vectorworks are great, there's an inexcusable amount of crap. I'm not going to pull my punches. You call me a troll, but I have accurately appraised the situation confronting the OP and the limiations of Vectorworks for handling it. Even your beloved round endcaps are crap. They don't show up in 3D. It took me 30 seconds to discover this. Apparently that's half a minute longer than NNA spent testing the feature. And typical of the disappointment I have come to expect with Vectorworks walls. Edited September 8, 2008 by brudgers Quote Link to comment
Chad McNeely Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 If the walls are the same thickness top and bottom (you didn't mention if they were), you can achieve a reasonable exterior render through use of a texture that has images of both and tiles horizontally only. Quote Link to comment
brudgers Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 A reasonable solution for a "set" approach to a rendering. Not really great for architectural building modeling in my opinion. Quote Link to comment
HP Sauce Posted September 8, 2008 Author Share Posted September 8, 2008 Thanks Chad. The intent is to produce BIM construction drawings as opposed to a rendering, and so using a texture as a workaround isn't very feasible. Otherwise sound idea. Quote Link to comment
Ariel Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 "Vectorworks uses stand alone scripts to manipulate basic collections of cad primatives. In the case of walls the two primatives are a double line and a solid." You're probably talking about an un-styled wall. I just ungrouped an exterior brick wall and I came out with 10 lines, 3 polygons and one polyline. How do you explain that? "That wall breaks have to be removed manually just proves how dumb they are." I don't know about you, but walls seem to (gasp) magically heal on their own in my copy of VW. I think I only get to use the wall heal tool whenever I need to break up some wall joins or when VW is too dumb to know that I want to delete several windows and doors. "Someone suggested to me that architects need to communicate clearly the needs of vectorworks to the programmers at NNA. While parts of Vectorworks are great, there's an inexcusable amount of crap. I'm not going to pull my punches. You call me a troll, but I have accurately appraised the situation confronting the OP and the limiations of Vectorworks for handling it." Please don't change the subject. Although I would agree that NNA needs to work on a load of bugs, we're only talking about "dumb" walls here. You're only making yourself look more like a troll. "Even your beloved round endcaps are crap. They don't show up in 3D. It took me 30 seconds to discover this. Apparently that's half a minute longer than NNA spent testing the feature." Well at least it's there. Revit, AFAIK, doesn't even have that feature. Quote Link to comment
brudgers Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Round endcaps are a great idea. Unfortunately, like so many aspects of Vectorworks, it looks great in marketing, works for some users, and leads to frustration in three dimensions for anyone trying to model their building. BTW, Softdesk walls were a collection of lines and 3d polygons. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.