Inclined Walls

[Nathan_B]

A house I'm designing has a wall inclined at 108.4 degrees from the horizontal (18.4 from the vertical). I don't have an image to show at this moment, but the wall forms an obtuse angle on the interior at it's juncture with the floor (the wall inclines to the exterior). I can draw it easily enough as a 3D object, but not as a "wall" as Vectorworks would define it. I'd like to be able to take full advantage of Vectorwork's BIM capabilities, so will drawing the inclined wall as a 3D object take away from this? Or is there some way to draw inclined walls that I don't know about?

[Robert Anderson]

At least as far as interoperability is concerned, there are two (theoretical) approaches to inclined walls:

1. Provide an "inclined wall tool" that will draw an inclined wall more or less, but have to make guesses on the detailing (and usually guess wrong); or

2. Provide 3D tools that let you model and detail the wall any way you like, and then provide the ability to attach BIM data to the wall to identify it as such to the world;

Vectorworks takes the second approach. Model the wall however you wish, then use the "IFC Data..." command to attach Wall data to the 3D objects you've created.

[Christiaan]

I believe ArchiCAD follows the first approach?not in theory but in practice?and I?m not aware of any ?detailing? problems.

It's all good and fine to be able to market VW as ?flexible? (a.k.a. ?cumbersome?) and it solves natelox?s immediate problem but I?d hate for this argument to win out as a general principle at NNA. Freeform modelling should be viewed as a last resort.

I mean why provide dynamic tools at all? Why not just freeform model everything and attach the appropriate BIM data. Because it?s slower to create and edit. We'd cease being competitive.

If GS ever get round to implementing decent freeform modelling in ArchiCAD they?re going to be a huge advantage because their dynamic tools will be so far ahead of VW.

[islandmon]

A combination of approaches may work for you :

PIO WallTool for the Bot&Top Plates ( Base & Head alignments ),

Hybrid Symbol for the Inclined Wall.

Associate Doors with the BasePlate wall ( height as required ).

Not perfect but usually good enough for government work ; )

[Guest benrudgers]

It probably makes sense to create your inclined walls as hybrid symbols.

This will allow you to control the graphical representation in plan however you see fit.

You can attach a standard wall style record to such a symbol and incorporate it into your schedules if so desired.

[Nathan_B]

Thank you for your replies. I am still very new at VectorWorks, so please walk me through your suggestions step by step. I tried to learn a bit about the IFC idea, but either it isn't right for this project or I can't get it to work. I essentially want the inclined wall to act as a "wall," that is, with the ability to insert openings and windows, render properly in 3D and present properly in 2D. I want it to interact correctly with adjacent walls, roofs and floors.

Wall selected w/ object Info. I "Fit walls to roof" which worked well for the roof, but getting the bottom of the wall to adjust its geometry to the inclined wall (which is essentially beneath it) didn't work so well.

Inclined wall selected w/ object info. I tried attaching IFC data to it to make it act like a wall, but I can't change the wall style, I can't insert windows or openings, and adjacent walls and floors don't interact with it well.

SketchUp model. This is essentially what I want it to look like.

(How do I make the images larger? In the mean time, I guess you can right click to get the image link and see a larger version that way)

Edited February 16, 2010 by Nathan_B

[VincentCuclair]

What if you make the wall a roof face in the same layer as the roof?

Cool little house by the way .....

Edited February 16, 2010 by Vincent C

[Christiaan]

I essentially want the inclined wall to act as a "wall," that is, with the ability to insert openings and windows, render properly in 3D and present properly in 2D. I want it to interact correctly with adjacent walls, roofs and floors.

You can't because, as Robert Anderson points out, Vectorworks unfortunately takes the 2nd approach in his post (at least for now). This is what NNA means when they talk about the 'flexibility' of Vectorworks. It's true that it is flexible but it's also true that it's cumbersome to have to manually model a wall when there could instead be a dynamic tool that does it for you.

There's nothing stopping NNA from implementing an inclined wall tool (others have done it). Hopefully it's just a matter of time. For now, though, you need to model it with the freeform modelling tools.

[William P Huchting]

Christiaan,

You're right about "flexibility." It means 2 programs because Sketchup is way faster and Rhino way more powerful.

After teaching a Revit class, I can see that Autodesk is pouring millions into it and a huge network of smart objects and users is being created. That's what I need to tap into to be competitive today.

I have a colleague who designed a large lab building for the US DOE. He accomplished this through DD by himself in Archicad. The firm that did the cds used Autocad. He told me that keeping it in Archicad wasn't a fight worth having.

Revit has raced to the head of the class. That's where the energy and resources are going.

Nemetschek is going to have to decide how they can keep up.

Like I said, as a 2-d program, I love Vectorworks. As a 3-d program, it is more powerful than 10 years ago but it doesn't have the features or the flexibility to do many tasks.

[Guest FlowMaster]

There is another that ties into this discussion: energy modeling! There will be a time where energy modeling, even for residential buildings,will be the norm rather than the exception. Both AC and Revit have us beat here as well. Like it or not, Revit seems to be cornering the market and most consultants and larger contractors are ramping up with it. I'd love to see an alternative but I don't see one on the horizon.

I'll gladly be dissuaded.

[bcd]

A possible if imperfect way is to use wall sculpting - AEC>Create Wall Recess.

[mar schrammeyer]

created with wall projection & recess

sorry did not mean to steal your idea BCD noticed to late that you gave the same answer

Edited May 17, 2010 by mar schrammeyer

[bcd]

STOP - THIEF!!

[CipesDesign]

Really really cool and very innovative. That's what I love the most about VW's - unintended uses!

[Christiaan]

That's what I love the most about VW's - unintended uses!

This is what I hate about all current 3D architecture apps. It may be self-gratifying for techies to find ways to do unintended things with their tools but some of us just want our tools to get out of the way so we get on with design.

No BIM vendor yet has a good blend of intelligent 3D tools and freeform modelling.

I found your comment quite interesting Peter because "unintended uses" is the sort of thing typically associated with the likes of ArchiCAD and Revit, not Vectorworks. With Vectorworks we're meant to be able to do anything by way of its freeform modelling capabilities. Interesting isn't it that the potentially more favoured solution here isn't to use freeform modelling but instead to utilise an intelligent 3D tool in an unintended way?

The 2nd option that Robert Anderson presents is not the solution that people want to this type of problem.

Edited May 17, 2010 by Christiaan

[CipesDesign]

Hey look, I'm sure the engineers are well aware that there are a lot of users who want to be able to model inclined walls, and I'm sure they've given some serious thought to the programming and problems that such an offering might entail. I'll bet it's not a trivial task. But now that someone very creative has sussed out a workable solution two things can happen: first, those who wish to may use the solution and second, because the solution demonstrates that the program is in fact capable of modeling these objects, it gives the engineers a possible place to start if and when they decide to take this on.

I try, when possible, to accentuate the positive. No it ain't perfect. But what in this universe is??

[propstuff]

the solution demonstrates that the program is in fact capable of modeling these objects,

Not Quite Peter.

I tried this when sculpting first became available, and it works only for a *section* of an individual wall.

Wall sculpting does not work properly (as noted in the help) all the way to the end of an individual wall.

It does not work when you have multiple walls and corners.

N.

[CipesDesign]

Hmmm. Cup half empty/ cup half full. I know which one I'll choose. What about you?

[Bob Holtzmann]

I tried the posted inclined wall file, too, and it seems that Wall Sculpting works best when both ends are non-sculpted vertical walls. That sliver of vertical wall on one end just wouldn't go away.

[CipesDesign]

Hi Bob, you might consider filing this as bug... P

[Christiaan]

I try, when possible, to accentuate the positive. ... Hmmm. Cup half empty/ cup half full. I know which one I'll choose. What about you?

I just call a spade a spade. There's no point in dressing mutton up as lamb so we can all feel better; that only obscures the issues.

[Christiaan]

Hey look, I'm sure the engineers are well aware that there are a lot of users who want to be able to model inclined walls, and I'm sure they've given some serious thought to the programming and problems that such an offering might entail. I'll bet it's not a trivial task.

This is a prime example of obscuring the issue Peter. Read Robert's response again. This isn't about feature prioritisation. This is about the fundamental approach to the development of VW. Robert is not saying 'hey, we don't have an inclined wall tool but we're thinking about it,' he's saying we 'should instead utilise freeform modelling to model the wall exactly as we want it; this is the VW approach.'

[CipesDesign]

OK fair enough. After reading Robert's original response I would have to agree. So a modeling we will go, a modeling we will go, hi ho the dairy-o... As long as the client pays me, and as long as I can get them what they're after I'm a reasonably happy guy.

[Christiaan]

I spend most of my working hours working in a way I know is anarchronistic and inefficient. I know there is a better way but that my tools are not up to it. I know how my tools could be but I'm mostly powerless to change them. I know that working in this way causes huge amounts of waste in the form of materials, money and time (including my own) and contributes greatly to the reason our industry is one of the most wasteful and inefficient in the world. Working in this way frustrates the hell out of me and is a continual source of stress, not in the least in the form of the co-ordination issues and errors inherit to working in 2D. Worst of all I don?t see any light at the end of the tunnel and I?m not getting any younger. As you can tell I'm not happy.

[CipesDesign]

That's a bummer. When was your last vacation?? Sounds like it might be time ;-)