VW2011 Wall Joins - still poor

[Chris D]

I sometimes think that the people who write Vectorworks have never been architects..and I'd probably be right...you wouldn't qualify as an architect and then start over to become a software engineer I guess. You WOULD think, however, that NV Inc would employ somebody who has actually worked in a drawing office, to advise on their 'architect' tools. Heck, I'll advise you, for free, if you'll fix the bloody software.

Never mind your weird doors and windows, let's just look at walls. The wall tool has been re-engineered in practically every version since version 12, and yet it still doesn't work. The drawings in our office are littered with time consuming symbols that we call 'wall patches', there but to do one job which is to mask the mess that VW makes of joining wall components together. VW has not one, but two wall join tools, one to join the whole wall and one to join the wall components, but lord help you if you live in the real world, where three walls meet.

Just try drawing an internal angle of an external cavity masonry wall, then running a masonry party wall into the back of it. How these components meet is crucial for fireproofing, soundproofing and many other reasons, but Vectorworks can't do it, not even in 2011.

[Christiaan]

Disappointed to hear this.

[Robert Anderson]

Chris, can you provide a graphic example? Are you talking about a so-called "Y" join?

[Dieter @ DWorks]

A "Y" join can be easily resolved by stretching the middle wall to the end of the other two and then joining by 'T' the others to it.

But You'll have to try to make an X-join with 4 different walls! I had to draw this today and it can't be done. But there is a workable workaround: Using columns for the components. It's a bit of work, but renders like walls in 3D.

[Chris D]

Chris, can you provide a graphic example? Are you talking about a so-called "Y" join?

This is the desired arrangement of wall components at a three way join. A pretty simple join...

This is the wall patch (a symbol made of polygons) which is hiding the Vectorworks join in the first image

This is an attempt to join a party wall component to a component of the external wall.

[Robert Anderson]

Chris, thanks for the visual aids. I'm not sure I agree that it's, ahem, "a pretty simple join". 3 different wall styles, 2 different exterior materials. Anyway...

Would you not in an ideal world want the insulation (rigid?) hatching to merge? Are they different types of insulation in the exterior and "party" walls?

[Jeffrey W Ouellette]

Chris,

Can you send me the file?

[Chris D]

I'm not sure I agree that it's, ahem, "a pretty simple join". 3 different wall styles, 2 different exterior materials. Anyway...

Robert, that's the simplest junction I could find to illustrate the problem. You're selling this product to firms that do more than little boxes on the hillside.

Would you not in an ideal world want the insulation (rigid?) hatching to merge? Are they different types of insulation in the exterior and "party" walls?

The insulation in the party wall (a wall common to two parties, in this case the wall between two houses) would normally be mineral fibre but it's drawn as cellular insulation as it's easier to show as a hatch.

[Chris D]

Chris,

Can you send me the file?

I'm at home on the iPad now. I'll fire up my home iMac and mock something similar up...just as soon as SOKO Leipzig is finished on TV...

[Chris D]

Chris,

Can you send me the file?

Ok, file added. I've mocked up the junction in VW2011 with similar wall types that I had available.

If anyone else wants to have a look, you'll need version 2011, or at least the 30 day trial version like me...

(trial version available for download here:)

http://www.nemetschek.net/eval/eval_form.php

[mike m oz]

Chris, I had a go and was able to get closer than you have. What I couldn't do was get the:

- uninsulated cavity to finish where required.

- internal linings on the LHS to L join correctly.

- internal lining on the RHS to be all filled.

Edited October 2, 2010 by mike m oz

[maarten.]

The only problem is the insulation, the rest is doable (did it in VW2008 so i guess it's also possible in VW2011).

But indeed, it's a real pain in the ass to make these kind of connections because you need to move the walls to the for- and the others to the background. So when you have a wall with on it's beginning and end such a connection, you're unable to do so... And yes, here in Belgium this is also a quite normal wall connection.

[Dieter @ DWorks]

Did noone read my post? This is perfectly doable! You only have to know how!

I also had many problems with wall connections, but I found a solution two years ago, and it's so simple to do it. But you need to think it through at first and know how to join in order.

I'll post a pic on how to do it.

[Chris D]

Maarten, could you post the VW file please. I believe what you are saying is that you can make the wall "look" like the correct arrangement, but they are not actually component joins, and therefore not robust during adjacent edits...like the next junction 5 metres away...

We've tried to get the walls joins to work over the years, but the danger of a junction going wrong and being issued on a drawing is too high, so we use wall patches, which are static and safe.

[Christiaan]

We've tried to get the walls joins to work over the years, but the danger of a junction going wrong and being issued on a drawing is too high, so we use wall patches, which are static and safe.

Same here.

[Dieter @ DWorks]

Did noone read my post? This is perfectly doable! You only have to know how!

I also had many problems with wall connections, but I found a solution two years ago, and it's so simple to do it. But you need to think it through at first and know how to join in order.

I'll post a pic on how to do it.

Windows Live SkyDrive

And there are so many other situations where this comes in handy. Sometimes, you have an L-join and a T-join on it. You will get a line in hidden line render mode at this join where you don't want it. The solution is using the same trick to get rid of it.

Edited October 2, 2010 by DWorks

[Christiaan]

Now try moving some of those walls DWorks. Or editing components. Or just generally using it in a real world situation. "Doable" is not necessarily "usable."

Edited October 2, 2010 by Christiaan

[Dieter @ DWorks]

Now try moving some of those walls DWorks. Or editing components. Or just generally using it in a real world situation. "Doable" is not necessarily "usable."

Move the walls by selecting them, use the marque tool and move them. Editing components means the wall is totally different, so you'll always need to rejoin some wall components. And I use this on all projects we have. We have many projects with difficult wall joins. It's really usable, but that doesn't mean there's no room for improvements, because there are lots of it.

And when they get to hard, just use columns to get it. This way, the join will be correct in plan and in 3D. I only use columns where 4 different wall types meet.

[Christiaan]

Move the walls by selecting them, use the marque tool and move them.

Try, for example, moving the middle external segment of the external wall. The left hand segment doesn't follow, so you have to manually resize it and do the join all over again.

I appreciate what you're saying, sometimes one can actually achieve joins that are not obvious. But this misses Chris' point, which is how poor the process has been and still is.

You can call this method many things but "really usable" is not one of them. It completely contradicts the definition of "usability." "Usable" wouldn't require us to treat component joins like a combination lock and nor would we constantly need to remove and rejoin joins (or use masks).

Editing components means the wall is totally different, so you'll always need to rejoin some wall components.

For arguments sake let's say I change the 100 mm insulation to 50 mm insulation and a 50 mm cavity. The behaviour I would expect from a decent wall tool is for it to substitute the full fill to full fill joins for cavity to cavity and partial to partial. Instead your join is simply broken.

And when they get to hard, just use columns to get it. This way, the join will be correct in plan and in 3D. I only use columns where 4 different wall types meet.

Interesting tip. Presumably won't work with walls of multiple components though right?

[Ozzie]

I am really empathising with you guys over this after following this thread

Chris, thanks for the visual aids. I'm not sure I agree that it's, ahem, "a pretty simple join". 3 different wall styles, 2 different exterior materials. Anyway

This is just a cop out

With a new release of VW all new bells and whistles are advertised, promoted and extolled but what this thread is about really is today basic functionality of the wall tool

In oz commonly today we have 2 or more different exterior materials - stone facing, brick, render, corrugated iron, timber etc and probably dependent upon those materials different insulation types and of course internal finishes also

This should be fixed - pronto rather than denied as what is quoted above - a total cop out

And what do you call your patches - masks

NV should get rid of their mask with this or maybe admit they cannot perhaps

[Bart Rammeloo]

Hi Chris,

Although Robert is right (it isn't a simple join), I do agree that this type of join happens too often in the "real world" to just ignore them. Thanks for pointing it out.

[Dieter @ DWorks]

And when they get to hard, just use columns to get it. This way, the join will be correct in plan and in 3D. I only use columns where 4 different wall types meet.

Interesting tip. Presumably won't work with walls of multiple components though right?

Works with multiple components, I do it from time to time. You just have to make a column for each component. I know that when you need to change the connection, you'll have to change the columns, but you get a correct 2D/3D visualisation.

[Dieter @ DWorks]

Move the walls by selecting them, use the marque tool and move them.

Try, for example, moving the middle external segment of the external wall. The left hand segment doesn't follow, so you have to manually resize it and do the join all over again.

That's only true if you click the wall and move it by dragging. When you select all four walls, activate the 2D edit path tool, select the part which needs to be moved, and then move it (like you can do with other shapes), the join will stay intact.

[Dieter @ DWorks]

Move the walls by selecting them, use the marque tool and move them.

I appreciate what you're saying, sometimes one can actually achieve joins that are not obvious. But this misses Chris' point, which is how poor the process has been and still is.

I do not and I do agree with you. I also think that they need to take the components to a higher level and make them easier to handle. But I also think you must try to use the program on a way it fits your needs the best, not to let the program act the way you think it must act. I know that NV is trying to get it right, and each edition it gets better, but they also need to add new things all the time. Well, it's a hard topic.

NV should make the components to be objects on their own that can be any shape and can be handled individually. Then for objects in the wall, the components should act like a group so you can add the object in all components directly. The way it is now is the other way around. They start from the group (or overall wall) and then let you adjust the components, which is not good anymore. To be flexible, the components should be totaly independant, but act as a group for object insertions.

[J Lucas]

Dieter,

Thanks for your wall joining tips and the time you took to illustrate them!! I read your earlier post and tried to do it but could not figure it out. I understood it when I followed your graphic instructions. Helped me resolve a three-way wall connection very neatly.

When you said you use "columns" to resolve other more difficult wall intersections did you mean "pillars"?