Vectorworks 2014, big wishlist items in by end of October

[Christiaan]

I'm taking one last shot at documenting the BIM improvements we need in Vectorworks Architect on http://needleandmortar.com By v2014 we'll either be BIMing economically in VW or we'll be transitioning to Revit/Archicad.

I've recently updated the wiki software to be easier to use but I've also lost Chris D who made a great contribution to the site (his company is moving to the dark side), so I'd welcome input from others: http://needleandmortar.com/wp-login.php?action=register

I want to get in as early as possible in the development cycle this time too. That means we need to have any large requests specified by end of October.

You can see view current content here:

http://needleandmortar.com/projects/

Edited October 1, 2012 by Christiaan

[Christiaan]

This type of 'disfunctionality'....

Vincent, you're so polite.

[Christiaan]

I'm meeting NV engineers today. These are the key takeaway points I want to get across:

How did this go Christiaan?

It went well. These kinds of meetings are always good, invaluable really. They're all great people and it's good to get a chance to meet face-to-face so they know I'm not a complete prick, lol.

I'm always slightly surprised by the lack of architectural knowledge. I used to think it was a lack of knowledge about UK practice but I've come to realise that it's a lack of knowledge about architectural practice in general. As far as I can tell they're making ongoing efforts to deal with this.... but enough? I was also surprised, for instance, that in producing the image-in-worksheet feature they hadn't even discussed the idea of vector-based windows that we could dimension. How is this possible? What link is missing in their development process that would cause them to not even think about this?

I got my point across that development is not going quickly enough, but I didn't really get a direct response to that, just an acknowledgement or perhaps an agreement.

[VincentCuclair]

I'm always slightly surprised by the lack of architectural knowledge. I used to think it was a lack of knowledge about UK practice but I've come to realise that it's a lack of knowledge about architectural practice in general.

That's scary considering a large part of the user base is an international one. Step one would be to increase the architectural knowledge, step 2 would be to increase international architectural knowledge, sounds remote .

[Kevin McAllister]

I am surprised they are so out of touch as to how users are working with the program (well, I guess I'm more surprised that they're ok with this). It would be really easy to send someone around to major centres and meet with users. If the software doesn't work for users, who is it made for?

Kevin

[AndiACD]

I'm always slightly surprised by the lack of architectural knowledge. I used to think it was a lack of knowledge about UK practice but I've come to realise that it's a lack of knowledge about architectural practice in general.

That's scary considering a large part of the user base is an international one. Step one would be to increase the architectural knowledge, step 2 would be to increase international architectural knowledge, sounds remote .

This is what REALLY %i$$*d me off about NAG dropping the MD Modual of VW, but at least it seemed that NAG aimed in the direction dedicated to the profession they claim to support. . . . .

Not much good if "You" still don't get what you want.

[Bret]

I know it's probably to late to be useful, but I thought I'd air my biggest immediate requests one more time:

1) Direct2D/DirectWrite/etc. support for Windows (since GDI+ font handling is basically broken)

2) Full 64-bit support

3) That Fundamentals users would be brought into conformance with the Design series with regard to a handful of basic file organization standards and capabilities: DLVP, PDF support, detail viewports, rotatable axis...batch printing would be nice too.

(Yeah, I'm obviously coming at this from a lower-tech angle than most of you, but still...)

[VincentCuclair]

I'm meeting NV engineers today. These are the key takeaway points I want to get across:

How did this go Christiaan?

As far as I can tell they're making ongoing efforts to deal with this.... but enough?

What do those efforts encompass, do you know, when will that actually give results?

What do you personally consider the best way to influence the development of the architecture module and specific wishes? The wish list? Direct contact in the form of bug submits? Needle and Mortar? More detailed wishes explaining why and how we need certain functions (considering they don't have any architectural knowledge)?

Edited October 25, 2012 by Vincent C

[Christiaan]

Vincent, I think detailed but clear as possible wishes explaining how and why we need things is the most important, and as early as possible.

That's why I created Needle and Mortar, because we can develop detailed peer-reviewed descriptions of what we need and hone them until they're as clear as possible.

Face-to-face meetings beats everything hands down but clearly they're of limited supply.

[Christiaan]

By the way, the v2014 wishlist on Needle and Mortar will be frozen by the end of this weekend and submitted to Nemetschek.

[Chris D]

By the way, the v2014 wishlist on Needle and Mortar will be frozen by the end of this weekend and submitted to Nemetschek.

Are you going to add the Stake Object improvements?

On a related note to this I realise that what VW needs for metric countries (everybody except the US and Burma) is the ability to use dual units, i.e. metres AND millimetres in the same document. I don't just mean dual dimensions, but units which can be used within PIOs likes the Stake Object, that have their own rounding settings and their own trailing zero settings.

[VincentCuclair]

By the way, the v2014 wishlist on Needle and Mortar will be frozen by the end of this weekend and submitted to Nemetschek.

Are you(we) going to continue with a new list? It would be helpful (for NV staff) if we could easily and clearly add images and visual suggestions to the Needle and Mortar page (perhaps this is already possible I haven't tried yet.)

Will you be submitting the wishes from Needle and Mortar on a regular basis or shall I continue to focus on the Forum wish list?

Edited October 25, 2012 by Vincent C

[Christiaan]

By the way, the v2014 wishlist on Needle and Mortar will be frozen by the end of this weekend and submitted to Nemetschek.

Are you going to add the Stake Object improvements?

On a related note to this I realise that what VW needs for metric countries (everybody except the US and Burma) is the ability to use dual units, i.e. metres AND millimetres in the same document. I don't just mean dual dimensions, but units which can be used within PIOs likes the Stake Object, that have their own rounding settings and their own trailing zero settings.

If I get a moment. Super busy at the mo unfortunately. Of course you're welcome to add it.

[Christiaan]

Are you(we) going to continue with a new list? It would be helpful (for NV staff) if we could easily and clearly add images and visual suggestions to the Needle and Mortar page (perhaps this is already possible I haven't tried yet.)

Yeap, you can already add images easily.

I will freeze the content of the v2014 requests so they don't keep changing while NV are trying to absorb them, but we can continue with a supplementary list or clarify any v2014 content at the request of NV engineers.

The main thing to realise though is that if we don't ask for something by the end of October, especially major stuff, it's not likely to be considered. So, really, anything added after October is best assumed to be part of a v2015 wishlist.

Will you be submitting the wishes from Needle and Mortar on a regular basis or shall I continue to focus on the Forum wish list?

I think probably concentrate on the forum where things can be discussed with a wider audience and then as an idea develops or needs more explanation we can transfer it to Needle and Mortar, so it can then be submitted at the end of each October.

[Bret]

That Fundamentals users would be brought into conformance with the Design series with regard to a handful of basic file organization standards and capabilities: DLVP, PDF support, detail viewports, rotatable axis...batch printing would be nice too.

(Yeah, I'm obviously coming at this from a lower-tech angle than most of you, but still...)

Why dont you just hustle clients directly with Architectural/Structural/Energy BIM and with the extra cash upgrade...IMO (we) Real Engineers are in the driving seat on project, presentations, data and control.....step up man theres a S*** Load of money to be made.

We've looked into BIM on and off, and for most of the types of projects our structural firm does (high-end custom homes, low-rise commercial, educational, solar, etc.), I'm not convinced that the utility is there. If it were, we'd make the pitch, but I just don't think it's cost-effective yet unless 1) a project is highly repeatable and/or highly complex and/or quite large AND 2) everyone on the team is on board.

The architects we're working with are (mostly) working in 3D but very few are using BIM at all. I haven't heard any push from the mechanical or energy guys either. Clients don't want to pay for it, not for the extra time it takes in design and much less for subsidizing our office-wide upgrade.

(I was at a meeting a couple of years back where another structural engineer spoke on BIM, and he said that after thousands of dollars in upgrades and training and over a year of 100% switchover at their office, it only took them 30% longer to produce the same plans...with real but indeterminate amounts of cost savings. Not a strong sales pitch, especially when most of our projects are much smaller than theirs.)

BIM may be the future, but we're not "hustling" anyone unless/until we think it'll really benefit a project.

[Dieter @ DWorks]

1) a project is highly repeatable and/or highly complex and/or quite large

I must say that our smaller/easier projects are getting more out of bim and are faster then we did them without bim. So I would sugest it to everyone, especially with smaller homes. But of course, your library, standard files and class system have to be made for it to be able to get it done. Because we have set all into place, I have done 4 small homes in 3 days in design phase and was able to show the level plans, elevations, simplified section, 3D, Interior renders and terrain. Ok, it's all basic at design phase, but you get a lot of a well build bim library!

Bigger, more complex buildings require more 'hand-made' symbols because most pio's just can handle standard situations, therefore, the bim we have in VW out of the box is better for small standard buildings.

I'll upload the file: Here

Edited October 25, 2012 by DWorks

[Bret]

1) a project is highly repeatable and/or highly complex and/or quite large

I must say that our smaller/easier projects are getting more out of bim and are faster then we did them without bim. So I would sugest it to everyone, especially with smaller homes. But of course, your library, standard files and class system have to be made for it to be able to get it done. Because we have set all into place, I have done 4 small homes in 3 days in design phase and was able to show the level plans, elevations, simplified section, 3D, Interior renders and terrain. Ok, it's all basic at design phase, but you get a lot of a well build bim library!

Bigger, more complex buildings require more 'hand-made' symbols because most pio's just can handle standard situations, therefore, the bim we have in VW out of the box is better for small standard buildings.

I'll upload the file: Here

Thanks for sharing that...

I suspect that the simpler the project, the smaller the time difference between 2D and BIM probably is, but also, the lesser the overall benefit of BIM. Still, if our architects set up the plans like yours, as opposed to us having to do it ourselves, I'd be more willing to dive in and really check it out.

That ties into my point #2 - Right now, it's pretty efficient for us to communicate most structural designs with 2D drafting using architectural bases and our library of standard 2D details (with additions and customizations as necessary, of course). Unless we're given a BIM base model to work from, it's not going to be a time saver, and we're not being given BIM models.

From a wider perspective, the ultimate question is whether or not the benefits of working in BIM offset the extra design time and provide net cost savings and/or better buildings. My answer thus far has been, "For our engineering firm, taking into account the projects we do, the people we work with, and the state of BIM: not yet."

As a side note, unless big steps are made, I'm not expecting that the eventual switch to BIM in our circles will come from VectorWorks users choosing to stay within the VW system. Everyone we've worked with who has moved or thought about moving to BIM (including one or two architects whose firms started in and then backtracked) were talking about that other program. I suspect the problem is not merely technical but educational as well.

Anyway, most of this is really a topic for discussion in another thread...sorry for the detour.

[VincentCuclair]

I must say that our smaller/easier projects are getting more out of bim and are faster then we did them without bim. So I would sugest it to everyone, especially with smaller homes. But of course, your library, standard files and class system have to be made for it to be able to get it done.

In general, if you have a functioning complete workflow setup, BIM for architecture (not construction, engineering, energy, ventilation, airflow, heating/cooling, solar, CFD etc.) is faster than 2D drafting seen over the whole of the project. (exception is perhaps small additions and changes on existing buildings, where drafting the whole thing in 3D to add 2 new windows is obviously ineffective.) ArchiCAD and Revit + others have this workflow out-of-the-box, in VWs we need to create our own, this initially takes time however once in place makes VWs as effective as it's competitors.

Bigger, more complex buildings require more 'hand-made' symbols because most pio's just can handle standard situations, therefore, the bim we have in VW out of the box is better for small standard buildings.

Perhaps, however I still believe BIM is faster if a functioning complete workflow is in place. Revit and ArchiCAD are less flexible when it comes to non standard situations (read workarounds) than VWs, (on the other hand it must be said that their PIOs are more accomplished to deal with different situations though)

The problem is people are in general more competent in 2D than in 3D drafting on a computer, that is not a software issue..........and therefore you can't say 2D is faster in general than 3D......

Edited October 26, 2012 by Vincent C

[Dieter @ DWorks]

In general, if you have a functioning complete workflow setup, BIM for architecture is faster than 2D drafting seen over the whole of the project. ArchiCAD and Revit + others have this workflow out-of-the-box, in VWs we need to create our own, this initially takes time however once in place makes VWs as effective as it's competitors.

I still believe BIM is faster if a functioning complete workflow is in place.

The problem is people are in general more competent in 2D than in 3D drafting on a computer, that is not a software issue..........and therefore you can't say 2D is faster in general than 3D......

Totally agree. And that's why architect offices need a cad manager these days. One that can build the workflow and libraries, so the others can just draft and get the benefits from it. Als the cad manager can help the others, teach them, customize VW, .... Sadly, most of the offices doesn't want to spend money on these tasks because they don't see the benefit and the money it will bring them in the future. A bim workflow is really effective and Always faster over the whole lifetime of a project. I'm Always happy if I need to change a thing and knowing that it will change everywhere. The initial setup may be the same time from a 2D workflow, but it's all that comes after that initial setup....

[Christiaan]

I'll upload the file: Here

Nice one Dieter. How'd you do your floors in the Homes predesign file? Is that with VW Tiles?

[Dieter @ DWorks]

Nice one Dieter. How'd you do your floors in the Homes predesign file? Is that with VW Tiles?

Thx, and yes, they are done with the tile resource.

[Christiaan]

I really like your aesthetic Dieter. Love your use of earthy colours, for things like drainage runs too (instead of bright garish colours).

Curious about some of your drafting standards. What's the red "DO----->" to each door mean?

And what's the difference between your solid red foul water pipes and your half blue/half white foul water pipes? Is one for WCs and the other for everything else?

[Dieter @ DWorks]

I really like your aesthetic Dieter. Love your use of earthy colours, for things like drainage runs too (instead of bright garish colours).

I like colours and you can really clarify stuff with them while keeping it easy on the eye. Also in 3D's I like to show textures so that it looks 'realistic' but not 'real'. It should stay a drawing and not a photo because otherwise, poeple get too attached to that result and are dissepointed by the real life result. The aesthetic of my drawings is really a work in progress wich constantly evolves, although the last years, it's getting somewhat stable. I also do a lot of commercial plans, so that also has influence on all other type of plans. And in the end, when you have plans that look really nice to show customers and are clear to contracters, you don't have to change the attributes often.

Curious about some of your drafting standards. What's the red "DO----->" to each door mean?

DO means 'Doorvoer Opening'. It's the way the air will flow for ventilation. Depending on the requirement for ventilation, it will be a ventilation grid at the bottom of the door, or just a shorter door. I don't know if it's from a real standard, but it's used quite a lot here. Personally, I don't Always follow the real standards. YOu just have to make your plans clear to other poeple.

And what's the difference between your solid red foul water pipes and your half blue/half white foul water pipes? Is one for WCs and the other for everything else?

Yes, red is for the toilets, green for the rainwater and blue for the other waste water. the blue is half blue/half white for seeing the difference on copied plans. Rainwater pipes have a cross in them for that reason.

[Christiaan]

Can people read through this list and identify anything you don't understand? Especially Priority 2, 3 and 4 lists. If you can't understand it then NV engineers are unlikely to either.

http://needleandmortar.com/wiki/main-headline-wishlist-for-v2014/

Edit: I've numbered them all now to make it easier to identify each item.

Edited October 30, 2012 by Christiaan

[Bryan G.]

stake object should also include auto sequential numbering of stakes.

Other than that its a great list.

[Christiaan]

Done Bryan, ta.

I've added the pages on specific improvements/tools to the list too, including window and door improvements to Priority 1.