tamarindi Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 Is there a way to create an elevation view to symbols that will look clean like the 2D/3D hybrids? As for now we need to hide classes in section-VP and insert other symbols in 2D elevation. Quote Link to comment
bcd Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 (edited) In hybrid symbols 2d graphics are only available for Top/Plan View. You might have some success by judicious use of classes when constructing your symbols and using Saved Views to quickly control which classes are visible while working on your Section-VPs. or You might work on your Section-VP Elevations in Hidden Line Rendering mode. or You could render each symbol using Hidden Line. Modify>Convert Copy to Lines - Ungroup. Modify>Convert to 3d Polygons and save this within a 2d-Elevation class in your symbol. Edited August 14, 2010 by bcd Quote Link to comment
tamarindi Posted August 14, 2010 Author Share Posted August 14, 2010 Thanks. I already use all those options. Still.... it's somewhat double work. You make such nice plans, prepare them for sections, and then you need to work all over the symbols. Maybe we should put it as a wish list? anyone supports this? Quote Link to comment
CipesDesign Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 I think we all support it. Having to annotate over nearly everything in a section VP is a huge time killer. Not to mention what happens if changes are made to the model! However, think back to pre-computer drafting. Ouch. Things are improving, but perhaps not as quickly as we'd all like ;-) One reason I prefer to bill by the hour... Quote Link to comment
tamarindi Posted August 15, 2010 Author Share Posted August 15, 2010 Thanks Peter. One of the issues here is that when i teach VP i have this enthusiasm of how great and time saving it is. But then i get to section VP and it's like back-fire. I must admit it's frustrating. How do you convince users that it still worth the effort? And maybe one more question: what is your method of working with details, such as carpentry? for example - i design a table, put it in the model. then need details in VP - plan, elevations, sections. Do you use a reference VP? different file? Quote Link to comment
CipesDesign Posted August 15, 2010 Share Posted August 15, 2010 Hi Tami, Yes, this is the drawback. However I think the positives far outweigh the negatives. We can create all of the Elevations without having to draw anything (aside from the original accurate model). So annotating over Sections is very time consuming, but then it always has been (even when we used to draw them). But on the other hand it also very instructive and allows the user (at least me) to "prove" whether everything actually works... Over time there has been a lot of improvement in Walls and some other objects which has reduced (but not eliminated) the need for loads of annotations. Hopefully we will continue to see these improvements and hopefully they will eventually work with all structural systems and their inter-relationships (floors, roof, walls, etc...). P Quote Link to comment
islandmon Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 Having actually created a hand draughted planset the olde fashioned way ... please don't be too critical of the limitations of ViewPorts, et al. Most certainly it's a pain to have to actually edit over the CAD generated sections and elevations and then add notations to the plethora of CAD details .. . but it sure beats having to "draw&draft " the entire project while avoiding making time consuming mistakes. Perhaps, we can all look forward to a future when CAD Monkeys will become as extinct as telephone switch operators. Eventually the global CAD Cloud will be smart enough to make all the necessary connections from a few spoken commands. BIM = Building Information MEME Until that fateful day ... let's all enjoy the ride : ) Quote Link to comment
bc Posted August 16, 2010 Share Posted August 16, 2010 [quote= Until that fateful day ... let's all enjoy the ride : ) Indeed. Nothing like the good old emotional roller coaster! Quote Link to comment
tamarindi Posted August 22, 2010 Author Share Posted August 22, 2010 Thanks. I guess we just need to wait and hope for the next improvement.... :-)) Quote Link to comment
VincentCuclair Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 Have a look at Windoor (Ozcad) this has separate 2D and 3D view pen/line/fill settings if you want...it's a start. They also have an option for creating a (2D) symbol of the elevation of windows/doors with a separate command, very useful. Quote Link to comment
tamarindi Posted August 22, 2010 Author Share Posted August 22, 2010 Hi Vincent, I'm familiar with windoor. However, the main issue is not win/doors but other elements like sanitary fixtures. Quote Link to comment
VincentCuclair Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 (edited) Ah well I still support your suggestion for hybrid symbols to have 2D symbol representations in elevations/sections, that would suddenly make live sections/elevations very usable in a wide range of situations that are not possible now.........! Edited August 23, 2010 by Vincent C Quote Link to comment
Assemblage Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 other elements like sanitary fixtures In case this helps with your sanitary fixtures (helped me). http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=144138#Post144138 Quote Link to comment
starling75 Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 faceted toilet smooth toilet Quote Link to comment
thirty two Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 hi.... This is my first visit to your site.Your concepts are very nice and understandable.Thanks for sharing 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.