Jump to content
Wes Gardner

Model Set Up (Revisited for 2019)

Recommended Posts

Thanks a lot for the updated Stories and Level Tutorial.

 

Nevertheless I think the Story and Level System is unneeded complex on one side and not very flexible

on the other. I needed to go through the your first Tutorial to understand how it is meant and even back

to the old VW feature release videos (former Model Setup) even to understand where that complexity

originated.

 

It is hard to understand that System.

The reason for me is the integration of an auto-create Layer feature into Levels.

While being a nice feature to auto-create Layers when creating Stories, when you use a lot of Stories,

I see it as a low priority feature and add on that makes things complicated when included in this way.

Like when you start to add multiple Default Levels with same nam, just for the sake of auto-creating a

Layer or not.

Multiple Layers used on a single Story were mandatory as long as there didn't exist any Levels.

(former Model Setup)

Like for for Slab+Wall or even more Layers as the only option to parametrize height levels of PIO's.

Today, since we have Levels, at best, you want only 1 Layer per Story.

If you want to have more Layers per Story it is just for organizational purposes or as a drawing aid.

In most cases it really works for my by 1 single Story Layer. And it is easy to bind a Layer to a Story

later or while creation. I even never thought of any other way to need to do this nor did in a different

way.

 

 

If you exclude all those Layers from Stories+Levels System,

you have a simple System that any user can understand.

Set Stories for each Story = normally your Finish Floor Levels

Set different Levels = Height Levels that you can bind your PIOs top and bottom boundaries in Z axis.

Easy.

 

 

If there wouldn't exist Stories in VW, it could be even done by Layers only, which could include these

Levels. So why Stories at all ?

Currently the only advantage or flexibility from having a Story definition is the Automation to adapt all

adjacent and following Stories Z level, if you change the vertical Z level of a Story in between of these.

(+ "the auto creation of Layers")

Beside that Stories are mandatory because needed as they carry the Levels, there isn't much use of

these if we are talking about buildings with less than 4 Stories only.

Stories are useful when having a certain amount of these. And this is exactly where you will need a

a certain Flexibility and parametrical options which are currently not available.

Why not include something like Story Styles or Default Stories, so that you can parametrically adjust

the height of all Standard or Basement or Technic Story Prototypes of your skyscraper in one go ?

Which would also allow to create 27 new Stories on top of Story 1 by using Story Prototyp "Standard"

by its Height setting of 4,15 m. And change that to 4.28 later in one go, to satisfy the engineers

and the client.

 

 

Level's Flexibility.

The Default Level Setting currently does nothing more than prevent you from creating each Level

again from scratch when creating a new Story.

What I initially expected is, and even the term "Default Level" implies it, that when you change a Default

Level's height, all assignments in Stories will follow.

Like the Architect designs all Windows nicely from ceiling to floor, then client says, no, too expensive,

make balustrades, you will want to adjust your "Window Bottom Level" to +90 cm to comply clients wish

in one go.

 

And beside the tangling duplicates of Levels with identical names caused by the "auto create Layer"

feature. This will also happen when you want to use a Level Type having a different unique height setting

in a special Story. So there needs some recognizability, if it is still a (better linked) Default Level or

a unique Special Setting of Level, beside just the height entry and the need to remember which was your

default height.

And those duplicates will stay appearing in every Story's option - until the last used copy of it will finally

be found and eliminated manually.

 

And those "duplicates of Levels with identical names" only happen because you currently can can

(and maybe will) choose one single Level only into your PIO setting.

But such a Limit is not necessary by itself.

Of course there could be an option to choose more of these :

"Window Top Level Default" + "Window Top Level A= delta + 30 cm" + Window Top Level B= 1.36 m",

what ever Level applies to the Window in the current Story. The Window would still know what to do.

(Given that only one of these Levels can happen at each Story)

 

Generally I think it is simple, therefore better, that PIO's let you choose only one Level at a time, as they

currently do. So therefore such Level "Types" and their names have to be unique in each Story.

 

But there is a need for a clear UI in a Story Setting, which of those identical named Levels is which.

Where I propose to only show that one Default Layer + a checkbox to unlink from its default values

with an input field for the alternative height in that Story.

(So this way also allowing to re-link to default height binding, if needed)

And for as it is now, at least that Levels that have an additional Description Option that you can differentiate

clearly between a  : "Window Top Level (Default)" and its "Window Top Level (Custom-A)" counterpart.

 

 

Coming Back to the "the auto creation of Layers"

I think it should happen in the Stories creation settings options, as a simple checkbox behind each Level

to avoid redundant Levels. Maybe set the Layer name Suffixes in the Levels Box.

 

 

I still don't get why there is 

a) a need for a "Level Type" Box, instead of doing that in the Default Levels Box

and

b) if, why it is in the Layer's Tab of Organisation Toolbox and not in Stories Tab

 

 

"Stories : CANNOT be copied and pasted into a another file."

I think this is not nice at all and there is no need for that limit.

There could be (hidden or not) Default Story Settings included in any File.

So that VW is aware of what a an Elements Story information is (Like 4rd Floor above ground) and will

keep that information for later use.

So when I drag and drop a 3rd floor Window into another File without explicit user created Story Information,

VW will ask :

The Object you try to insert hast Story information, (looks your Files misses that), will you

a) discard that Story information and put it in using its height based on ground level

b) Keep that Objects Story Information and even copy all Story Information from the other file as you still

didn't create your own, as I told you

or

c) convert that Story Information of the Object to adapt to the Story Settings provided in your file

 

That Limit is especially irritating as there generally is no option in VW,

when transferring Elements from one Layer to the other, to decide wether to do make that possible jump in

height levels between these Layers or just, for organization/visibility purposes, keep the Objects "World"

height level over ground.

(Imagine you had the wrong 1st Story's Layer active when creating new objects in correct World Height

of 3rd Story, because snapping to the correct height level elements of the proposed Layer. 

If it is a crowded drawing and you can't drag, you will need to open your calculator and start thinking about

what your delta height differences between your Stories may have been)

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks, Zoomer.  You just invented a possible workaround to all this!  You seem to suggest a Level object that is a resource.  The Stories system can remain as designed and evolve as needed for use by those who need it.  Meanwhile, designers who need something less comprehensive than the Stories system can apply one or more of these new Level objects/resources to any plain old design layer or to several design layers for vertical binding. If the Level object/resource has a setting for z offset from the Layer z, then apply/copy/paste it to any other layer and it will assume the correct relative height within that design layer.  The resource can be named to describe design conditions.  eg "Top of Rail" or "FinishFloor + 90cm", or "Bottom of Joists -30cm "

 

Edit a Level resource in the manager, change the z value, apply, and all the objects bound to this resource adjust to the new height (relative to their various Layer z)

 

Copy the Level resource in the resource manager, rename it, set the z value and now it can be added to any layer or, like symbols, is available for Replace function - dialog asks whether objects bound to Level A should be reassigned to Level B.

 

A Levels quick pref could show/hide a semitransparent colored plane in 3d views or a colored line in edge views.

 

OK just thinking about it.

 

-B

Edited by Benson Shaw

Share this post


Link to post

Wes, very sorry for hijacking again your thread for my bit off topic monologs.

I am very enthusiastic about the tools I use.

And as long as no one contradicts and convinces me, I think it is true what I write :)

 

Back to your Tutorial.

The Model Setup Sheets are a great resource and will help me a lot visualizing when setting up

new projects and their Stories !

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Benson Shaw said:

Thanks, Zoomer.  You just invented a possible workaround to all this!  You seem to suggest a Level object that is a resource.  The Stories system can remain as designed and evolve as needed for use by those who need it.  Meanwhile, designers who need something less comprehensive than the Stories system can apply one or more of these new Level objects/resources to any plain old design layer or to several design layers for vertical binding. If the Level object/resource has a setting for z offset from the Layer z, then apply/copy/paste it to any other layer and it will assume the correct relative height within that design layer.  The resource can be named to describe design conditions.  eg "Top of Rail" or "FinishFloor + 90cm", or "Bottom of Joists -30cm "

 

Edit a Level resource in the manager, change the z value, apply, and all the objects bound to this resource adjust to the new height (relative to their various Layer z)

 

Copy the Level resource in the resource manager, rename it, set the z value and now it can be added to any layer or, like symbols, is available for Replace function - dialog asks whether objects bound to Level A should be reassigned to Level B.

 

A Levels quick pref could show/hide a semitransparent colored plane in 3d views or a colored line in edge views.

 

OK just thinking about it.

 

-B

 

 

Thanks Benson.

 

It was just a thought that Levels also "could" reside in Layers.

But I think it is very ok that they generally happen in Stories.

(Beside that it can be very useful if there would be some additional Level Type that happens from VW (User) Origin's Z only)

 

I think it is ok for all users that currently say they don't understand the Story/Level System

to be told to create a Story for all their Finish Floor levels

and

add some Story Levels for all the height levels they will use constantly in PIOs and for Symbols.

Create their Layers manually and assign these to Stories.

I think that is quite easy to understand.

 

As for the Story Styles, as we are in VW and try to keep things simple,

that could be also done by giving the Stories, beside their Z location an additional delta Z Height value and

allowing to choose and edit more than one Story at a time in the Story List.

Just like we can do with Classes, Layers, ....

So maybe there is only 1 Story Style to keep things, all other special Stories will need manual edits.

Should allow some intelligence to primarily influence from the Entrance Story at ground level,

every Stories above will be moved upwards, everything below will be forced downwards,

for Story height changes.

 

 

As there was a talk about an advanced Project Setting,

(feeding with Office Addresses, Project Location, Building Type, ...

and all other Info widely used in things like Sheet Borders, at one single location)

I think in there also could happen a : "insert number of Stories" and "insert Standard Story (delta Z) Height"

(With connection to the Story dialog and vice versa)

That already preset the basic Story Setup.

 

 

I don't know if "Levels" have to go into the Resource Manager, things like Classes and Layers don't either.

(Not sure why Saved Views do and if that is good ?)

I think they reside well in the Stories Tab of Organization Palette.

(Which I would love to be accessible from Navi Palette like Classes or Layers too)

 

 

"A Levels quick pref could show/hide a semitransparent colored plane in 3d views or a colored line in edge views."

 

 I think this is a great idea !

And maybe snappable at a special point, to overcome the

"move objects between Story Layers while keeping their world height" Limit.

 

Edited by zoomer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

@zoomerYour comments led me to the Design-Layer-Level-that-needs-no-Story. So hats off for a great idea, even if it's not your intent!

 

I think it would be helpful to many designers to have  a Level object or Level resource that is completely unrelated to the arcane (my opinion) stories system.  These imaginary planes control vertical binding of objects and can be placed in any design layers - no Stories necessary. They have a z value relative to layer z or layer height.  If they are resources, they are easily accessible for duplicate, delete, rename, z reassign, classing, and other edits.

 

 

4 hours ago, zoomer said:

But I think it is very ok that they generally happen in Stories.

Yes, the Levels I am describing do not remove Levels capability from Stories.  The Stories system remains intact.  These Levels are just a new kind of Resource(?) or Object(?) so I can avoid Stories altogether and still have vertical binding in my design layers.

4 hours ago, zoomer said:

I think it is ok for all users that currently say they don't understand the Story/Level System

to be told to create a Story for all their Finish Floor levels

and

add some Story Levels for all the height levels they will use constantly in PIOs and for Symbols.

Create their Layers manually and assign these to Stories.

I think that is quite easy to understand.

This is great advice, I have done it on many occasions. Tried to learn it. Then I don't need it again for a year. I find that the Story system is poorly designed and overly complicated for anything I need to do.  

As you say, designers of 3 or 4 stories can work very efficiently with standard design layers, without the story system.

 

Anyway - This is not the place for an excessive rant.  Good work, as always, zoomer.

 

-B

Share this post


Link to post

I'm a brand new user of Vectorworks (trial copy, so no investment except of time and gray hair), and I just can't resist throwing my own few stones at this bush.  I've been working through trials of all the major programs (Revit, Archicad, AllPlan, Chief Architect etc).  Each of them to seem to have their own (for me) major, deal-breaking issues.

 

It would actually be refreshing if the programmers at these companies would put their selfish ego's aside, and have a good, humble look at all the other programs, and SHAMELESSLY COPY what was BETTER in the competition - instead of refusing to admit somebody else had a better idea or implementation, and continue with an imperfect solution that their users must continue to suffer with (all because of the programmer's ego!).

 

The company that does this will soon best the competition, and become the User's favorite.  Seems a no-brainer to me.  Just the ego problem to get over, huh?

 

Vectorworks touts itself as particularly "User-Friendly".   All these architectural programs tout themselves to be user-friendly, but the actual user experience often falls very short of the claims.

 

I have been really struggling in Vectorworks to get my head around understanding how to set floors up, and my head is just spinning. 

 

It's all as clear as mud. 

 

The User Interface all seems so unnecessarily complicated and convoluted on what should be quite a straightforward issue. 

 

The very fact that the tutorials "explaining" this only ADD to the confusion points to a MAJOR UI problem.  There is even a video on Youtube where Jonathan Pickup is being interviewed to explain this stuff, and at the end of the interview, although the interviewer says he now understands the subject, it's pretty clear he is none the wiser afterwards, and is just being polite.  One of the commenters on this video remarks on this fact also.

 

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  And in my opinion, that is EXACTLY what is missing from the UI dialog.  Instead, the User is asked to make selections from a table format, and is expected to somehow visualize in his head what his tabular choices would mean and look like.

 

You will note that whenever anyone is pressed to explain what is happening here with floors in Vectorworks, they CANNOT do it just in words!  Almost invariably, they resort to producing some sort of sketch to help explain themselves, and to try to get the message across to the other party.

 

THAT - right there, Gentlemen - has to be the AHA! moment for the Vectorworks UI Designer.  (Or it certainly SHOULD be!)

 

The model worksheet examples that Wes Gardner attached at the beginning of this thread is EXACTLY how the initial dialog box should appear!  And yes, if that is a HUGE dialog box that takes up half the screenspace or more, then so be it.  Not a problem for me.

 

Ideally, this diagram should ALWAYS show THREE floors simultaneously:

   the floor ABOVE (on top);

   the CURRENT ACTIVE floor (in the middle)

   the floor BELOW (show at bottom of sketch)

 

As the User moves between floor levels, this view of the "current 3 floors" should move dynamically up and down also.

 

And the User should then be able to just input his values / or tick his choices, DIRECTLY into that diagram - which dynamically changes accordingly. 

 

This is dialog box is pretty much the most important - and useful - dialog at the beginning of a project.   In ONE diagram, a LOT of the project defaults are both visible and accessible.  There is no hunting around into several disparate windows to try and solve a problem.  The User can immediately see the full picture, and directly intervene, and confirm that his intervention is doing what he wanted.

 

In this ONE diagram, the User could also have the opportunity to set some important defaults right there as well.  For example, the User could also visually set the window sill appearances, as well as the initial top and bottom window default heights.  Same for the door heights.

 

And of course, the User must be able to VISUALLY set which feature is LINKED to which other feature eg THIS wall height is linked to THAT surface of THAT slab or Floor.  It must be visually clear where the linkages/relationships are (by similar color-coding or special symbols).  And it must be easy to click and change them at will.

 

So the INITIAL opening view in this dialog box looks just like one of Wes' Sectional Views in his example worksheet

 

And just as Wes has provided several sample worksheets, so too should there be an initial dropdown list from which the User can select his initial basic "Section View" setup.  He should then be able to subsequently save his final adjustments as a custom setting or favorite, and be able to call this up later for other projects.  And be able to export it to his colleagues for their own use.  And likewise, import similar from other users.

 

Section View - MSW - Residential (16 Dec 2016).pdf

Edited by Jonnoxx
spelling
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Sometime things look like a rant but at the end it means that someone really cares about something.

 

Design-Layer-Level-that-needs-no-Story

 

Seems I come from the opposite site and immediately an idea is arising,

Levels and Stories need no more Layers :)

While it may be the same at the end.

 

With Stories, Layers degrade from their "Where" to another dimension of a Classes "What".

So to say a "What +" as the Story defines the new "Where".

 

So your "no Story Level" make sense, as it is the same.

I just think for organization purposes, when files get crowded, and even legacy reasons, a separation

between Stories and Layers makes still sense.

Story-less Levels, at the end just means you just need to have 1 single Story at file's Z= 0,00 m.

Or your base level Story if you have more of them, which could be just a default for any File Template.

 

That way my wish for extra Levels outside of Stories (Facade Boards and such things) could be done

in the current system but there is a wish for a separation as you want to hide these from your normal

Story aware PIO's Level Settings Dialogs.

(So no new feature from VW internals but a UI separation of the functionality already there)

 

I do not know if Story/Levels are available for Spotlighters and Landscapers at all, but I think they are

also as useful there. Maybe in most cases there's no need for more than 1 Story for them, but Levels, yes.

 

 

In you case Benson, where Layers with Z values only still work fine,

I understand the wish to not need Stories but want to have Levels as it is easier.

But I think it is ok to force you to set your 3 Stories one time and forget them - bang.

 

Stories and Layers do slightly differ and have different functions and I do not see that a

marriage between these 2 makes really sense, as long you need Level's being aware of your Layer heights.

You would still need a second kind of Layer that is not Level-parenting as there are cases where you may

want inter-Story Layers for any kind of things. Even if they are workplane substitutions only to draw at a

special height.

As such a separation is already given by the addition of Stories to current Layers, I think it is good to

keep them.

But some improvements needed to take the fear from users that avoids using Stories.

 

 

 

I always set my Story and Layer settings for any projects.

I don't fear them and they do help a bit.

 

But indeed I have cases where I even delete Story Binding from Layers and set them back to Z=0,00 at one point

because there is no Story Setting Exchange between files.

I may get in some 3D DWG or IFC files where all Objects Heights are bound to ground, which geometry i want to use directly,

and I am not willing to assign Stories to their Layers, if any, and move the geometry back down manually afterwards,

each time I have to refresh these.

 

 

 

 

Edited by zoomer

Share this post


Link to post

Zoomer et al,

 

Don't think for a moment that we don't read your thoughts and consider them carefully.

We do thank you!

 

BTW, for those who work with layers only, I commend you!  Stories, to a large degree, were included to make transfer of info via IFC more automated.  If this is not in your workflow, rock on!

 

I believe, in the tutorial, I included the brief instruction set for eliminating the Default Story Levels so that they will NOT appear as a binding option.  This may lead to less confusion as you won't see them at all.  Once done, save that file as a Template (.sta) and you'll be free!

 

Wes

Edited by Wes Gardner

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks Wes.

Such a feedback is important.

Also to what kind of ideas will not work for several reasons or is not considered as useful.

 

I also would advice anyone to use and set Stories and Levels.

 

> Create Layers as you are used but don't care about Z-heights for now

> look at Wes's Sections and decide which Levels you will need

> Set these in Default Levels

If you don't like the names or need more of them, go to Layers Tab and edit these in Level Types.

> Create a Story a Story for each Floor at its Finish Floor Z and activate all Levels needed for each Story.

You can change that at any time later too.

> Assign the Stories to your Layers in Layer Settings to get their correct heights.

if you need more intermediate Layers for each Story set these same way and a Z deviation from story in Settings.

 

 

As you will finally have Wall Styles and such things, like a load bearing Wall Style that always goes from

Top of Structure (Same Story) to Bottom of Structure (Story above),

it is important that such a Level is available in all Stories where the Wall will happen.

So also for a kind Roof Story where a "Structure" (Story above) may not happen in this form, but you can set

a Dummy Story above and such a Level height to be the Top of your Attic Walls.

This way you Wall Style will work in any Story.

 

Also if you set your Wall Components like Insulations to start with the bottom of Structures instead of

Top of Structure like the Core, at the top or bottom ending Stories of your building, you can set both

these Level Z Values to the same height.

So these components will overlap as expected in all adjacent Stories but end with the correct heights

at an Attic Story though.

Edited by zoomer

Share this post


Link to post

wes,

there are a few good thoughts behind the storey-level-system, but the result is somehow messed up.

 

first of all:

- we need storeys for the bim ifc-based energy calculations (exported with brep activated - space boundaries level 2)

- we need a limited set of storey levels because of files' exchange between designers working on one edifice (but with work sharing this is not an issue anymore)

 

now i think the best workaround begins with starting to think as a contractor's foreman: they need for each storey a clear level ('meterriss' for zoomer - it's a line drawn on the walls 1 meter above the future finished floor level). if somebody ever visited the building site, they know that no world levels are necessary, the contractor needs a clear 'z' height above or below the fixed level for each floor (storey).

 

i would do the following:

- set up each main storey level at the finished floor level.

 

- add the design layers for elements, like walls, slabs, furnishing a.s.o. (matching the standard storey level names) at the appropriate main storey levels (= finished floor for ground floor, 1st storey, 2nd storey a.s.o.) - in this way all the elements can get the manual 'z' value above the finished floor, which is understandable for every construction worker - those values you can read from the pio.

an example: a design layer for suspended ceilings has a level of the ground floor finished floor, if there are different suspended ceilings you can see their height above finished floor in the 'z' values in the pio - you don't have to calculate deltas.

another advantage is that we can assign any number of design layers to a storey, they are all set up at finished floor level.

 

- all other storey levels that don't have design layers attached may be used for the association of the, say, claddings, plasters, tiles, or similar building elements, so they may remain at levels other than the finished floor.

 

rob 

Edited by gester

Share this post


Link to post

wes:

 

dropbox link doesn't work. can you refresh?

thx

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for this Wes.  I am a very casual user of VW but my productivity has ground to a halt trying to make the move to drawing a house with 3D.  As a home builder I am amazed that it is so hard to find any info utilizing the stories with pre-cut stud dimensions (8' 1-1/8" or 9' 1-1/8" plates) in mind since the vast majority of homes are built that way in my neck of the woods.  

 

Pointed question - I'm doing some conceptual plans and modeling of a SIPS house to be considered on a difficult terrain site.  In the model worksheet, would there be any value in model set up to use the elevation set by the site civil engineer i.e.:  First Floor Elevation is 272.0'. Set model elevation to 272'-0" to make my model VOILA set at the right spot if I make digital terrain model of the site?

 

Thanks

 

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Inspector....

 

Yes, that's exactly what I would do with Story Elevation.  You ++can++ of course, forgo stories all together if you build your wall styles accordingly...after last year's release that lets us manipulate components on a "per wall" basis however, stories might still be worth getting into...your call. Just make sure your wall styles are set up to deal with whichever system you ultimately go with...BTW, you ++can++ combine "Layer Bound" wall styles in a "Level Bound" model and the wall style will work just fine (don't forget to include a "Layer Wall Height"... BUT you cannot include a "Level Bound" style without stories/levels...

 

Also keep in mind with the whole 2D vs 3D thing, you can always just build a very course 3D model using it to "proof out" floor-to-floors, etc and then use it as an underlay to embellish the drawing in 2D.

 

Wes

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

@Wes Gardner Is this tutorial still applicable for VW2019? I'm having a hard time getting my head around setting up for #D drawings, hopefully this will help.

Also, a bit unrelated, but did 2019 come with fewer templates? There were Architectural BIM templates in my copy of 2018 which I don't see in 2019.

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Cam

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/27/2018 at 5:47 PM, MaltbyDesign said:

That should read 3D, not #D!

You can edit your original post.  😜

Share this post


Link to post

I tried to, but a dialog box came up saying I had timed out and was unable to edit. Even though I tried within seconds of posting. I think there were some glitches going on with the forum or me because I wasn't able to respond to a post for quite some time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for this @Wes Gardner These are very clear and well laid out.  This will definitely help explain stories better to folks I work with.

 

Rob

Share this post


Link to post

Could someone explain why is this in a Dropbox and not on the official Vectorworks training page?  I wonder how much secret training have I missed because I haven't been looking for it in the right place.  

Share this post


Link to post

It is not in my DropBox, maybe somebody shared it with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

After using Vectorworks for 18 years, I finally sat down to understand stories. Four hours later I have no idea how to create stories, set levels, or name things correctly. I can't even modify the default architectural template to create a single-story building. I can figure out almost anything, but this is needlessly complicated. Who designed this system? Is there anyone who can do a screen share to help? I'm happy to pay for a tutor. Send me a direct message.

Edited by ThreeDot

Share this post


Link to post

@ThreeDot, here's what I would do...first read and understand the thread "No Stories, No Problem."  Take the time to create some wall styles and slab styles FROM SCRATCH.  Do NOT use any template stuff as they may or may NOT be set-up for a layer bound system.  Build a small model, working through walls, slabs roofs.  You can use the two sample/exercise files to help you get going but I HIGHLY recommend trying a set-up from scratch.  Once this is all understood then move on to the level-bound scenario in this Model Set-Up thread.  Do the same thing - create stuff FROM SCRATCH so that you thoroughly understand the connection between the levels, stories and how they relate to wall styles so that changes in set-up "drive" the heights of walls.  Yes, it's confusing ... no, I did not create this system but I CAN make it work.

 

Reading the instructions in both threads FIRST might be helpful.

 

Wes

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

 

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.

×