Jump to content

Setting a viewport within a model


Recommended Posts

I seem to be hitting quite a few problems trying to get hatches working on a 3D model using the planar model tool.

The scheme I am working on has 3 separate buildings the first 2 I have successfully rendered in 3D with the planar object tool and showing the elevation hatches within a normal viewport, as in this thread:

http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=171014#Post171014

The third block is a series of terraced houses with single and two-storey parts. see attached image (plan view).

How do I create a viewport at the position shown on the sketch to show the Elevation?

When I try and create a viewport using the View>look at working plane, it sets the view to the edge of the model. Is there any way to move this point to show the elevation i want?

A section viewport would have been ideal but cannot get it to show the planar objects.

Has anyone got any solutions to get this to work, I would really appreciate some help on this one?

Link to comment
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Instead of a normal viewport, you need to create a section viewport.

I always use section viewports to show my elevations because otherwise, too many trees, terrain etc... are in the way.

I really like using section viewports, they are fast and easy and you have a nice ground line if you have a terrain (like a DTM).

I also would advise you do get renderworks, then you'll not need those planar objects because you can then simply use textures. It will mean less work for you and nicer elevations.

EDIT: Did you try all options for the render method you are using for showing the planar objects fill?

Edited by DWorks
Link to comment

Thanks DWorks

I did not want to hear that though!

That would add a lot of compexity to the drawing as there are several elevations needed. I have also used the new stories method to create these models so not sure how to do this properly.

It just seems there has got to be a simpler way!

(but probably not as you seem to be a bit of a genius with Vectorworks).

Edited by Alan H
Link to comment

This isn't even just a BIM fail it is basic modelling fail!! not sure where to go from here this has left me really frustrated with Vectorworks.

The people at VW really need to get their act together and develop a decent way to have section cuts and a surface textures as in Revit and ArchiCad etc. and be able to show them in a 2D format. This should have been implemented in Vectorworks years ago!

VW seems so far behind when it comes to doing 3D especially since they advertise themselves as such

to realize my most inspired visions at the moment is simply to get some elevations with hatches on a sheet layer, how difficult is it to get that right!

I don't want to rant I just want this to work

Has anybody got any other solutions?

Link to comment
Thanks DWorks

That would add a lot of compexity to the drawing as there are several elevations needed. I have also used the new stories method to create these models so not sure how to do this properly.

No added complexity. You can make design layers that you bound to stories with no elevation type. The objects on that layer can just use the elevation types you already have. So you just need to create those layers, make sure they belong to a story, but don't have an elevation type, and copy/paste the objects in place.

You can also use classes if you prefer it that way, but with layers, you can reference the buildings if your documents becomes too heavy.

Link to comment

to realize my most inspired visions at the moment is simply to get some elevations with hatches on a sheet layer, how difficult is it to get that right!

Exactly.

We got this far with our BIM trial and gave up. VW fails at the first hurdle in the BIM race.

Link to comment

That was quite a workaround compared to simply having the ability to use the section viewport, it is something Vectorworks definitely needs to address pronto.

I definitely won't be using this approach again of using extract tool to place planar objects on the model at least in the near future, it seems very problematic and unfortunately is static, but VW don't seem offer a better option!!!

It is a pity but these tools still need to be developed further to allow us to accurately show hatched surface materials, for our construction drawings.

Now that i have tried working in 3D it is definitely my preference the ability to extract all Elevation, Section, Plans etc. from one model is great and if you make a change everything is updated! VW just need to sort out this major problem of surface materials. Fingers crossed it will be in their next issue

You can add your name to this wish list and hopefully they will make this a priority

http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=171325&gonew=1#UNREAD

Link to comment

I definitely won't be using this approach again of using extract tool to place planar objects on the model at least in the near future, it seems very problematic and unfortunately is static, but VW don't seem offer a better option!!!

I was wondering why you would extract the surfaces to get hatches on your elevations?

You could render your elevations in hidden line, and then annotate the viewport with the hatches. You need to edit them when the model changes, but you also had to do that with the extracted surfaces, but now you have an advantage that you can use the paint bucket mode of the poly tool to quickly fill in your elevation. It's a bit like paint by numbers.

If however, you wanted the hatches also in your 3D views, it's another story because you can annotate that view, but you will need to alter their mapping, and that would take more time than extracting surfaces.

Link to comment

Dieter, the advantages of getting the hatches into the model are:

1. The hatches will show correctly skewed on roof faces and walls that aren't straight on to the view.

2. You don't have to draw/edit them every time you create/edit a viewport.

3. You don't have to draw them around rainwater pipes etc.

4. 3D views.

Link to comment

You could render your elevations in hidden line, and then annotate the viewport with the hatches. You need to edit them when the model changes, but you also had to do that with the extracted surfaces, but now you have an advantage that you can use the paint bucket mode of the poly tool to quickly fill in your elevation. It's a bit like paint by numbers. - DWorks

I know you can use the annotation layer to draw the hatches, but this just seems so wrong!

When you go to the effort of creating a 3D model you have to mask it in 2D hatches. This doesn't provide much of an advantage of creating a 3D model as it has to be rendered in 2D. It just seems silly to me.

Plus you have got to skew hatches to get them to look right

The advantages of doing it the way that I did, are as Christiaan has pointed out in his post.

It just seems there has got to be an easier or more instinctive way that they need to build into VW.

Edited by Alan H
Link to comment

It's possible to create some hatch-like textures.

The addition of a rotation field in the creation dialogue box would allow for diagonal hatches.

Providing the ability to use a selection of polygons as the color of procedural textures would greatly enhance the software and for the most part resolve this issue.

ubbthreads.php?ubb=download&Number=7305&filename=Hatch%20Textures.png

Link to comment

This is what I'm going to try (textures). The downsides are:

1. Time-consuming rendering

2. Fuzzy lines that will require printers capable of greyscale (meaning our prints may cost more) and will reduce the contractor's ability to photocopy the drawings.

3. Shadows (or can I avoid these by just not using a lighting source?)

4. Renderworks required.

Edited by Christiaan
Link to comment

One rather big disadvantage of extracting planar objects and applying the hatch to them is that the origin of the hatch is not consistent across layers, so you end up with, for instance, brickwork hatches where the coursing doesn't match across floor levels.

To overcome this you either need to:

1. Adjust the mapping of the hatch use the Attribute Mapping tool

2. Add the surfaces of the planar objects

The problem with 1 is that it's hugely time consuming and doesn't seem very consistent or straightforward.

The problem with 2 is that if your walls are out of alignment by 000000000.1 mm then your planar objects won't be on the same plane so you can't add surface.

#BIMfail

Link to comment

Another problem with point 2. is the angle of the walls, if they are out by the smallest of a fraction again the planar objects will not join, this is turning into extreme precision engineering.

#BIMfail

Edited by Alan H
Link to comment

To overcome this you either need to:

2. Add the surfaces of the planar objects

The problem with 2 is that if your walls are out of alignment by 000000000.1 mm then your planar objects won't be on the same plane so you can't add surface.

That's why it is handy to have a model layer where you model extra thing to the building that you can't do easily otherwise. Like when you have two types of exterior brick, just build as on type and add the extra surface in this model layer to represent the other one, or like in this thread, put your planar surfaces in this layer.

Another advantage of this is that you can adjust the building without those surfaces in the way, once you finished adjusting, you can adjust the planar surfaces.

I never had problems with walls being out of alignment after my first months with VW. I had them the first months, but you really need to draw very carefully and have to see the on screen hints and be certain that you have to correct point snapped.

Link to comment
Here's one of my planning elevations with the colour (but not greyscale) eliminated. It's pretty but it probably won't be suitable. I'll need to remove all the greyscale, including shading, somehow.

ubbthreads.php?ubb=download&Number=7308&filename=elevation.jpg

Hey Christiaan,

That elevation looks great. Is their a requirement to "dumb" it down by removing the shading, or am I missing something?

V-G.

Link to comment

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...