Support for 3D 'Wall Detail' component returns at windows

[Christiaan 1,039]

For a while now we've had the ability to return wall components at either side of a Window object in a Wall. Which is great.

 

The problem is that it's only in 2D, in Top Plan view.

 

I think it's well past the time that this should also work in 3D (including separate control of the window head). This is of critical importance for us.

 

Apart from just not showing in 3D it also causes problems for things like Section Viewports. Without 3D returns we end up having to add masks to our Section Viewports to hide the wall components that shouldn't be showing. Pretty anachronistic for where Vectorworks is these days.

 

Here's an example of Interior and Exterior Window Detail component returns in plan view, which is great:

 

But these returns don't show in 3D:

 

This is how our Section Viewport ends up looking:

 

And this is roughly what we'd expect it to look like:

Edited June 27, 2017 by Christiaan

[mike m oz 414]

This is an essential need so model derived Sections and Details can be correct. 

 

We need to be able to have the required appearance in 2D and 3D on all four sides of an opening.  

 

We also need to be able to have different behaviours on each jamb for contexts where the building condition is different on each side.  For example when Door and Window units are ganged together or when one side of a Door or Window unit is adjacent to an internal corner or a projecting pillar.

 

A more complex need that also needs to be solved is the treatment around the edges of non rectangular openings like 'L' shapes and circular/polygonal openings.

[whashisface 13]

+ 1 for both of the above. Essential!

[JROCCI 0]

Agreed.  Essential.  (Please, please, please)

[blimey 8]

I will add my vote as well. It is not only for the sake of the section viewport (as masking and 2D cosmetics in the annotation viewport can be a (timeconsuming) work around. But if we want to use or model in a BIM way or even just for 3D rendering. This is essential. 

 

Also the wrapping works only on the side wall. I want to be able to wrap the top wall. 

 

As an illustration : I managed more or less to get the window I want in plan view : 

But here is what if looks like in 3D : top jam is not hidden (no wrapping of the wall) and the insulation is visible (no 3D wrapping)

 

>>> So I tried to add external trim as a work around... but the top gap remains... 

[Kevin C 73]

Can I also ask that when reviewing any door and window tool that you take account of how doors and windows are placed within walls and that there is more than one way to generate a window / door reveal, which VW is very bad at doing.

 

Also, if this is a Wishlist:

 

• When setting out a window or door it should be set out in relation to a specific component of the wall which we should be able to choose.  My own preference would be to attach the window or door to the inside face of the outer leaf of the wall, so that whatever the internal wall make-up is, the door or window would be set out correctly and I wouldn't have to keep manually adjusting the offset to make it sit correctly.  We should also be able to select a check reveal of a size which can be set in to the OIP
  • You should assume in the first instance that when a multiple component wall is created or selected that the designer actually wants detail a project and the rendering is secondary (I think that you will find that is the case with the majority of users).  If someone wants a beautifully rendered project, let them do it with a basic wall - but don't let difficulty in rendering prevent producing competent working details and drawings.  Information for statutory consents and actual building is still done in wireframe drawings conveying the information to the contractor etc. There is no point producing beautifully rendered images and drawings if competent working drawings cannot be produced.  IMHO, the only way to sort this is to think out of the box in relation to how we create models and present information.
    • Allow the user to create a custom profile which can be simply attached to the door or window object and is in effect a 2D symbol with whatever customisation the user wants, creating in effect a hybrid door or window. This should also be able to be created in plan and section form so that we can add custom cills / lintels / thresholds etc. without having to navigate the current system that is not suitable for purpose.

The holy grail and the best modelling solution is to be able to fully model each component and for VW will assemble correctly (or as instructed by the user),  but as we have found time and time again, if the VW engineers are not given the correct detailed information at the time of creating a module, they will create to the best of their abilities at the time - or at worst, just make assumptions and once the module is created it will be working as 'designed' and very little can be done as it confirms to the parameters that were given at the time of production (no matter whether they were right or wrong).  What is being proposed would create a simple functionality within the door and window objects that would allow users to attach the correct detailing parameters to each object.

 

In relating this to BIM levels 0, 1, 2 & 3 - which is something that VW seems to champion at every opportunity

 

BIM Level 0 - 2D Drafting with collaboration by paper or electronic means.

• The majority of the industry is well ahead of this.

 

BIM Level 1 - Typically a mixture of 3D CAD for concept work, and 2D for drafting of statutory approval documentation and Production Information with an element of CDE, usually managed by the main contractor. 

• The is probably the stage at which the majority of the industry is at just now.

 

BIM Level 2 - This is distinguished by collaborative working – all parties use their own 3D CAD models, but not necessarily working on a single, shared model and all design information to be shared through a CDF - the only CDF for 3D models currently available is ifc or COBie.  Note that detailing is not a requirement of BIM Level 2, although detailing must link to the building model - this can be done by simple referencing.

• The is where governments have said we should be at right now and where only very few VW users are, because of the apparent misunderstanding and difficulties that VW ( and all the other 'minor' design software providers) has because other suppliers are again championing their workflow and selling it as the only solution and from what I have seen, is no better than VW, but what they do, is listen to their users and admit when something doesn't work - throw it away and start again.  They have is the ability to join up their components (roofs/walls & floors etc.).  If VW is to try to   remain a player in the BIM market, VW must look at its overall workflow and realise that there is no point having all this connectivity and fantastic modelling and rendering functionality if it struggles to get basic technical functions.

 

BIM Level 3 - Currently seen as the holy grail, this represents full collaboration between all disciplines by means of using a single, shared project model which is held in a centralized repository. All parties can access and modify that same model, and the benefit is that it removes the final layer of risk for conflicting information.  Again, detailing is not specifically mentioned, although it would not be too much to expect that each discipline would still be creating details (2D and 3D) within their own systems and have the project model make reference to them, as the ifc file format has a long way to go before it will be capable of supporting 3D models at that level of detail.  It is also extremely unlikely that the 'Open BIM' model will be required to have the detail hard coded into it, but to have it referenced.

• VW has the capability to be a main player in this, but it must get its house in order.  Things like automatic mapping to ifc are going to be critical / importing and exporting revit files - with full functionality (the import function loses all object data except the graphics) and the manufacturing and supply chain have already decided that rvt files are the file format of choice for objects (irrespective of BIMstore as the vwx and ifc object are almost non-existent).

 

Taking this to the next level, detail hybrids could be attached to many of the standard junctions which VW struggles with and although the principles would be set out (as they currently are), when producing sections etc. the correct detail would always be displayed.  The next stage would then to the details to be create the details as 2D/ 3D hybrids and attached as part of the overall structure.  This could get round a lot of issues that users are currently wasting a lot of time trying to overcome.

 

[zoomer 1,206]

Exactly.

100% agree.

[mbft 3]

Hello all,

Not sure if this subject is still valid but I could use some help. I see that the wall component returns work for the PIO windows but not for a custom symbol.

Anybody know if it's possible ? In 3d clipcube the wall components follow the 3d wall opening I defined for the symbol but in 2d view they do not.

 

[Christiaan 1,039]

mbft, with a little bit of work you can use Auto Hybrids in your symbol to achieve what you want.

Edited April 30, 2018 by Christiaan

[Alan.AHA 7]

I'd just like to bump this request again. The lack of 3d returns make the use of the editable window and door tool useless. I cannot see why this has not been fixed in the last 5 years despite repeated requests and the fact that better tools exist in different regions of Vectorworks

[JoeStewart 0]

🙏

[Eric Nickerson 9]

I was really hoping this would be resolved in 2021 given that Rubina directly talked about it in her design summit video. Hoping maybe it will make it into a service pack.

 

It's really difficult to make models look good without being able to wrap finish components into the windows and doors.

[_c_ 1,002]

3 hours ago, Eric Nickerson said:

I was really hoping this would be resolved in 2021 given that Rubina directly talked about it in her design summit video. Hoping maybe it will make it into a service pack.

 

It's really difficult to make models look good without being able to wrap finish components into the windows and doors.

 

Exactly.

[Tobias Kern 59]

yes, more than 100% agree.

 

vw needs much more love for the 3d bim tool.

- flexible stacked walls, stacking each shell separately

- flexible 3d windows, it seems vw benelux has the best window tool yet

  take this as reference

- flexible 3d doors

- flexible structural member tool

- flexible 3d stairs (please no ugly triangulated surfaces in 3d)

 

all combined with the new material source, for getting the right masses in tabels

and 3d rendering/representation

 

... in 2022 we trust

[_c_ 1,002]

17 minutes ago, Tobias Kern said:

 

all combined with the new material source, for getting the right masses in tabels

 

 

The materials coerce the fill, and fill only, not the pens, to some attributes or class.

And as it is now, you cannot use materials only for the data, you MUST swallow the coercive fill.

 

This means that if you need an object above, which normally would be drawn with dashed lines, you must either duplicate the material (with all the data) or, which I advise you to, not use the material.

 

We need materials detached from this fill attribute. Data only.

Edited September 18, 2020 by _c_

[Christiaan 1,039]

The workaround I've been using for a while now is simply to set the texture of the components manually in the Wall Style. Generally 'white paint' for any components inside the window position and whatever the cladding texture is for any components outside the window position.

[_c_ 1,002]

20 hours ago, Christiaan said:

The workaround I've been using for a while now is simply to set the texture of the components manually in the Wall Style. Generally 'white paint' for any components inside the window position and whatever the cladding texture is for any components outside the window position.

 

Christiaan, we are speaking here about the new resource type Materials. They strangely take over control of the fill of whatever unlucky object you apply them to.

Try them please on a wall component or structural member where the things are seen as above cutting plane. There you are, they display cut, no matter what you do.

 

So there you go, you can only use materials when you are sure that they never need a cut plane-ruled display.

Edited September 19, 2020 by _c_

[Christiaan 1,039]

Ah I see. I haven't had time to use Materials yet. I was just about to get started, but that is a bit worrying.

[Alan.AHA 7]

My point remains, there are workarounds but none of them fix the limitations of the tool itself. 

 

[_c_ 1,002]

10 minutes ago, Alan.AHA said:

My point remains, there are workarounds but none of them fix the limitations of the tool itself. 

 

 

I began filing issues about the lack of proper wrapping in 2D and 3D around 2007. It's a crux.

The wall insertion in VW is very basic, to put it down mildly.

Edited September 18, 2020 by _c_

[Eric Nickerson 9]

8 hours ago, _c_ said:

 

Christiaan, we are speaking here about the new resource type Materials. They strangely take over control of the fill of whatever unlucky object you apply them to.

Try them please on a wall component or framing member where the things are seen as above cutting plane. There you are, they display cut, no matter what you do.

 

So there you go, you can only use materials when you are sure that they never need a cut plane-ruled display.

So, if I'm hearing you right, the same would be true for walls you wish to show below the cut, such as a short pony wall. There is no way to give that a solid fill and still have components/materials be the same as a wall that is part of the cut?

[_c_ 1,002]

12 hours ago, Eric Nickerson said:

So, if I'm hearing you right, the same would be true for walls you wish to show below the cut, such as a short pony wall. There is no way to give that a solid fill and still have components/materials be the same as a wall that is part of the cut?

 

The attribute display of walls and their parts has become on my opinion a matter of such a complexity, that I rather avoid adding materials on to it.

If you use a material for a component, and let's say that it has a fill by class, the fill of that component is not overridable any longer in the wall/wall style dialog.

If you don't use the material, but just the same class, you can do it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kevin C 73]

I was hoping (almost praying) that the people in Vectorworks had listened to our pleas for a design tool this is as good as others in the marketplace, but to no avail as they know that we are all tied in to them and to change design software would quite simply put most of us out of business.

 

It is really saddening that we are still having to voice our complaints of basic errors in the software and no-one is listening - or caring by the silence.  have the programmers even looked at this issue? My own view is that they have and realised that their coding (or whatever) needs to be ripped up and started again and we (as building designers) are not high enough up the food chain to warrant it being reviewed.

 

I think that we need to start the 2022 wishlist now, but with a few mandatory exclusions to allow resources to be spent where they are needed.

1. No changes to the UI - It's not perfect, but it works well (and has done for quite some time) and doesn't need to change every year
2. No improvements to concept modelling or any of the 'early design stage interfaces' - It's not perfect, but again they work
3. No changes to the fancy coding algorithms for design (like marionette) - how many of your user base actually use this??

I could go on, as I realise that you have to innovate to improve, but this should never be at the expense of your existing users.

 

Wishlist (not numbered as all are priority):

• Door / Window tools - I could write a couple of thousand words on what is broken (and it has all been said before), but I will summarise below:
  • Being able to choose the anchor location of a door or window (not the centre of the window) such as the inside or outside of outer leaf of the external wall component in addition to the centre of the wall
  • A simple check box to wrap the internal component(s) (if one exists) round the internal reveal up to the door / window frame.  This could easily be identified by setting the component(s) function in the wall style to 'Internal Finish' and those components could be wrapped. E.g. plasterboard or plasterboard and service void etc.
  • Allow us to anchor our own 3D components to windows and doors - cills (internal and external) / lintels (internal and external) / thresholds etc. as VW just cannot seem to get it right after many years of just not being able (or bothering) to fix it.
  • Being able to add roof windows and dormers to window schedules - treat the roof like a wall.
• Roof Tool - Just rip up and start again (Not the freeform modelling which I don't think that very many people use, but the whole roof tool - it is just basically crap and not fit for purpose, as said before - treat it like a wall)
• Stairs - Multi level stairs required. Not to all buildings are 2 storey (I think you know that though)
• Get the new features working properly before release - Thinking about the new join railing / fence feature.  Really needed fix (not improvement), spend a good 2 hours yesterday evening - couldn't get it to work
• Walls - Ability to change components in a wall elevation.  Easy solution would be to allow us to simply cut out part of the external leaf (in 2D and 3D) and replace it with our preferred material - a single component wall for example - we could then quantify it!!
• Review of the curtain wall - allow us to edit components and move things like mullions and transoms using the move object command within the 'edit curtain wall' and not having to drag components

Notice a common theme - These are the tools which we all require to use on a near daily basis, they need to work properly and without having to use 'workarounds' or annotation overrides' just so that we can produce a competent set of drawings.

 

I put it out there - If we have to end up exploding and breaking up our model to edit it, then draw over the model in annotations to get an output drawing that can be presented to a contractor to build it for example - What's the point in drawing in 3D in the first place??

[Eric Nickerson 9]

On 9/18/2020 at 11:54 PM, _c_ said:

The attribute display of walls and their parts has become on my opinion a matter of such a complexity, that I rather avoid adding materials on to it.

If you use a material for a component, and let's say that it has a fill by class, the fill of that component is not overridable any longer in the wall/wall style dialog.

If you don't use the material, but just the same class, you can do it.

Thank you for the thorough explanation. It seems the best solution, which I have since seen suggested in other threads, is to have the ability to define attributes for above and below the cut of a wall within the materials.

[Tom W. 441]

On 9/18/2020 at 10:42 AM, Christiaan said:

The workaround I've been using for a while now is simply to set the texture of the components manually in the Wall Style. Generally 'white paint' for any components inside the window position and whatever the cladding texture is for any components outside the window position.

@Christiaan Could you explain how you do this? I am relatively new to 3D + a bit dismayed at the much-discussed inability to wrap components around reveals except in plan. If I take what you say literally you mean half your components share the internal finish + half the external finish, just to have them show the correct finish on their exposed edges within the window reveals? So what happens if you want to strip off an outer component + show the material behind? Or maybe I misunderstand.

I suppose the components can at least retain the correct 2D fill for display in section.

I made a 1mm thk extrude along path to get a practise window looking right but hardly a practical solution + doesn't help when it comes to vertical sections... (ignore the colours I just did the pink interior + green exterior to help understand the orientation of window + sill in the wall but that's another story!)

Speaking of which, is there a reason why it's necessary for the sill to extend right the way back to the inner face of the wall?

I know from trawling through the posts that there are massive shortcomings with this tool + I don't want to repeat what's been said many times already, I'm just interested to know what creative workarounds people have found to achieve better results than me. Any advice gratefully received.

Thanks