Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
PVA - Jim

Vectorworks 2016

Recommended Posts

Thanks for posting this Jim!

@acepernich - I'm pretty sure these videos are the same ones from the presentation at the Design Summit that Biplab talked-over, thus no sound.

Share this post


Link to post

Correct, no sound on these samples, apologies. Most likely there will be full videos of the keynotes forthcoming.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Jim,

The Energos is exciting for me (along with the project sharing both are something we have been looking for for ages ) - great that it is based on passivhaus. Lots of questions apologies for the mind dump;

I assume it will have metric figures as well as imperial?

Will you be able to add local regulatory requirements to the compliance page in addition to the presets in the video (or can this be done by resellers?) - i.e. UK energy regulations, I see BREEAM is already in there which is great.

And not really related but does the fact that windows recognise different glass configurations mean that they will show sensible glass thicknesses in plan and section (as well as having the thermal properties?)

Can you expand on the reporting functions, and is there any ability to track and/or compare different options and or combinations of possibilities (i.e. is increasing the u-values of the walls better than more high performance glazing)

Do you see this as being a competitor in terms of ease of use to Sefaira and also the Passivhaus sketch plugin that is currently available?

Can it be used to demonstrate Passivhaus compliance or export in a fashion that can be directly dropped in to the Passivhaus spreadhseet?

What are the performance implications for large non residential buildings? Ie it only shows a project with 8 walls and 1 standard roof objects, many of our project would have hundreds of walls (can it distinguish between internal and external walls?) and far many more spaces.

Further to that does it require the project to be completely enclosed by standard architectural objects (roofs, walls, slabs etc) and completely filled with spaces to function properly? Our projects often use elements in unexpected ways to achieve the geometry we need - i.e. custom symbols, stacked or overlaid walls (where cladding changes halfway up a wall for instance), or windows set in openings rather than in a wall (where windows span across a floor level for instance). Many of these elements currently don't have the same level of architectural layers available as for instance the wall or slab tool - the roof face being a prime example - how would we add insulation to it?

Share this post


Link to post

The five new capabilities are significant improvements to Vectorworks but the two that will have the greatest impact are Project Sharing and Energos.

Project Sharing solves the problem of how to structure and manage projects that require multiple users and its simpler and more logical workflow will make a huge difference to those who work on larger projects.

Energos will help architects make good sustainable decisions about their designs. It will however require better and more complete modelling.

More details on both of these capabilities would be very useful to users so they can start preparing themselves for the new ways of working.

Share this post


Link to post

Tim:

I haven't had as much time to work with Energos as I have with some of the other features, its been a crazy few months, I will see about getting you specifics as soon as possible. I will answer what I can below:

Units: Units will be presented in whatever units are specified for the document.

Geometry: As far as I know, only the architectural objects such as doors, windows, slabs walls, roof and roof faces are given values for this, but I have seen data attached to simpler objects like extrudes so that they will be included in the report. I am NOT sure if that ability will be included with 2016 at launch.

Competition: I don't think it is intended as a direct competitor, more so to help you avoid re-certifying so many times, which is very costly, letting you get at least a rough idea of how energy efficient your model is before you dive into the expensive certification system. Helping you see major issues before you spend a dime getting them certified and re-certified.

Share this post


Link to post

Please take a look at my second post at the beginning of this thread (or the link below) for new information regarding OS support for Vectorworks 2016.

We will no longer be supporting Windows XP, OSX 10.8 and prior, or any 32bit OS. Vectorworks will now only support fully 64bit operating systems.

http://kbase.vectorworks.net/questions/1321/Vectorworks+2016+%96+Operating+System+Compatibility+Announcement

Edited by JimW

Share this post


Link to post

Hello

Marionette will be cool thing!

Can we transfer object from subdivision tool as Subdivision/hypernurbs surface to c4d?

Also will VW team support RW/C4Dware? Or develop own ray-tracer, like allplan team or revit 2016 gave new ad's rt raytracer.

Edited by Ilay

Share this post


Link to post

It should export to C4D the same as a mesh object or NURBS (depending on the kind of shape you make) do now in Vectorworks 2015.

I do not understand your second question. We will support Renderworks which uses the Cinerender engine.

Share this post


Link to post
It should export to C4D the same as a mesh object or NURBS (depending on the kind of shape you make) do now in Vectorworks 2015.

It simply reminds me work with mesh-cage/fdd modifiers

about second, i see situation that several teams move to use own solutions. For example Revit moved from nvidia mental ray/iray

Anyway thank you for answers and i'm sorry for English

Share this post


Link to post

That would be doable without subdivisions in 2015, but it would be more difficult. After 2016 it will be easier.

Ill move the post on slanted walls to a wishlist thread.

Share this post


Link to post

Energos answers direct from engineering:

"Will you be able to add local regulatory requirements to the compliance page in addition to the presets in the video (or can this be done by resellers?) - i.e. UK energy regulations, I see BREEAM is already in there which is great.

The idea is to have the basic compliance checks available. The tool will support customization of the compliance presets via XML files in the default content (users folder or workgroup folder)

And not really related but does the fact that windows recognise different glass configurations mean that they will show sensible glass thicknesses in plan and section (as well as having the thermal properties?)

This feature will add thermal properties for the frame and for the glass of the window/door objects. The thermal properties of the glass are defined by the g-value and U value. The thickness of the glass is not considered as these two values represent the size and material of the glass.

Can you expand on the reporting functions, and is there any ability to track and/or compare different options and or combinations of possibilities (i.e. is increasing the u-values of the walls better than more high performance glazing)

You can use layers to experiment with different designs. Or maybe styles, and switch between them.

Can it be used to demonstrate Passivhaus compliance or export in a fashion that can be directly dropped in to the Passivhaus spreadhseet?

We currently don’t support direct export. We export in tab delimited text file all the numbers, that can be plugged in to the passivhaus spreadsheet.

What are the performance implications for large non residential buildings? Ie it only shows a project with 8 walls and 1 standard roof objects, many of our project would have hundreds of walls (can it distinguish between internal and external walls?) and far many more spaces.

Technically, only external walls are considered in the envelope. Our tests so far show that the performance is not too bad.

Further to that does it require the project to be completely enclosed by standard architectural objects (roofs, walls, slabs etc) and completely filled with spaces to function properly? Our projects often use elements in unexpected ways to achieve the geometry we need - i.e. custom symbols, stacked or overlaid walls (where cladding changes halfway up a wall for instance), or windows set in openings rather than in a wall (where windows span across a floor level for instance). Many of these elements currently don't have the same level of architectural layers available as for instance the wall or slab tool - the roof face being a prime example - how would we add insulation to it?"

We support records. Any object that has a specified record attached that carry energy data, will be considered part of the envelope.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the comprehensive answers Jim, it all sounds good.

Just a bit of clarification on defining the envelope - great that we can use custom geometry - will the building need to be perfectly enclosed by defined geometry to work properly - i.e. if there are holes or overlaps you will get strange or incomplete results?

Cheers,

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Hi Jim

Will the spec on my mac be able to run vw2016

What video card is in that iMac? However judging from the other specs and what Apple normally puts in its higher end iMacs, most likely yes.

Just a bit of clarification on defining the envelope - great that we can use custom geometry - will the building need to be perfectly enclosed by defined geometry to work properly - i.e. if there are holes or overlaps you will get strange or incomplete results?

All of the examples I have seen so far were closed buildings, I would expect it wouldn't be able to calculate it on an incomplete or open building. I am willing to bet that an overlap would still be considered a closed face though, I'll ask.

Share this post


Link to post

J:

Sounds to me the company is quickly becoming bling happy. Pushing the envelope on new technologies is one thing, the fact that they cannot consistently build a stable piece of software is another. In my opinion, too fast, too much, too little spent get it right. We're left to suffer the consequences, too often playing the role of guinea pig while we pay to lose tens of thousands of dollars in lost billable time diagnosing unstable software. While I understand its all a game of growing gross revenue in the fight to control market share (Autodesk displacement), its a dangerous game you play when you begin to develop a reputation for an inability to produce something that doesn't crash at least once a day.

But it sounds to me no one in management is paying any attention to this. Can't wait to see what Beta bling modules (anyone used the stair tool recently?) get dropped into program....

-J

Share this post


Link to post

The "bling" new features are what are worth sneaking a peek at alpha development for. These are just the previews of some of the brand new capabilities, no information about improvements to existing tools has been released so far.

Share this post


Link to post
...its a dangerous game you play when you begin to develop a reputation for an inability to produce something that doesn't crash at least once a day.

Agreed, except that for us at least, since v2015 and 64-bit, Vectorworks has been the most stable version we can remember.

Share this post


Link to post

Christiaan:

I wish I could say the same. Constantly having to revert to, and rebuilding from backup files so that you don't lose thousands of hours of lost work eventual leaves you to work with unstable files, corrupted PIOs, and crapped out tools (stairs, windows, even publishing) gets really old. People are constantly on these boards with legitimate gripes about program stability. I applaud Jim for his willingness to address as best he can all the issues, however I think there is a more fundamental issue at stake which has to be addressed by senior management if they are going to continue to compete successfully. The users are not just a bunch of whiners. We're trying to earn a living and it is not unreasonable to expect that the tools we purchase to ply our trade, actually perform as advertised.

-J

Share this post


Link to post

Has it been getting worse as you progress through versions of Vectorworks or has the regularity of crashes/rebuilds been staying the same? Did the file you mention here start in 2015 or an earlier version?

Share this post


Link to post
J:

Sounds to me the company is quickly becoming bling happy. Pushing the envelope on new technologies is one thing, the fact that they cannot consistently build a stable piece of software is another. In my opinion, too fast, too much, too little spent get it right. We're left to suffer the consequences, too often playing the role of guinea pig while we pay to lose tens of thousands of dollars in lost billable time diagnosing unstable software. While I understand its all a game of growing gross revenue in the fight to control market share (Autodesk displacement), its a dangerous game you play when you begin to develop a reputation for an inability to produce something that doesn't crash at least once a day.

I don't doubt for a second that you experience these issues. But statistically speaking, the stability of Vectorworks has been increasing with every version for, let's say, the last five or six versions. That's what the developers can track thanks to the automated crash reports that VW generates since a couple of versions. It's that report that also allows them to focus all effort on fixing the bugs with the highest occurrence rate. In my own experience from the past 13 years, there have always been "freak" crashes that are hard to explain, let alone solve - and that is true for every software. Again, that doesn't solve your problem, it doesn't address your frustration, but it also doesn't mean that Vectorworks is worsening. The numbers show that the opposite is true.

The good news is that Jim is known for not letting go - so if it can be fixed, he will make sure you get the solution.

Share this post


Link to post

On average stability has only been improving. My most recent challenge has been ensuring that users have adequate hardware to run Vectorworks, as after 2014 and 2015, outdated video card drivers or underpowered graphics hardware cause 75% of the "random" crashing we see these days.

However in jnr's case, this is unlikely as he has a late model Mac Pro. It may very well be file or display (Vectorworks doesn't play well with multiple displays even with adequate graphics hardware, especially at resolutions higher than 2K) related, but I am unsure.

Share this post


Link to post
Vectorworks doesn't play well with multiple displays even with adequate graphics hardware, especially at resolutions higher than 2K

Is there a reason why VW doesn't like multiple displays? If there is, I hope that it is something that is going to be fixed (sooner than later) as I am sure there are many of us that have multiple monitors.

Could this be why the fan on my MacBook Pro runs all the time whenever I use VW?

Share this post


Link to post
Vectorworks doesn't play well with multiple displays even with adequate graphics hardware, especially at resolutions higher than 2K

Is there a reason why VW doesn't like multiple displays? If there is, I hope that it is something that is going to be fixed (sooner than later) as I am sure there are many of us that have multiple monitors.

Could this be why the fan on my MacBook Pro runs all the time whenever I use VW?

I wonder why, as the second screen is ideal for all the palettes, especially the resource palette so it can be big...

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×