Jump to content
Jim Wilson

Teaser Tuesday - 2D Components for Hybrid Objects - Vectorworks 2019

Recommended Posts

Different workflows for different industries is a phrase I like to hear people say.  For us it is very rare to use a model. We certainly have applications that call for it, but most the time we don't deal with a full model.  Its nice to have flexibility its very rare that 1 size fits all.

Edited by HEengineering

Share this post


Link to post

@Jim Wilson Thanks for answering my question about the way the 2D components are rendered! However, not having the same texture as on the original 3D part of the symbol will probably be too high a price using it to speed up render sessions. Will there be an option to choose the rendering mode in future versions so that I will have that same texture in both 3D and the 2D component?

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Jan-Burger TROOST said:

Will there be an option to choose the rendering mode in future versions so that I will have that same texture in both 3D and the 2D component?


Likely you'd be able to choose the render mode, but planar 2D geometry isn't going to look right in a full Renderworks render ever really unless I'm misunderstanding your question. In a realistic Renderworks style, you'd generally want only 3D objects ever and would want to disable any 2D elements.

Share this post


Link to post

You are right, I was too much in How-Can-I-Save-On-Rendertime mode…

It’d seem convenient to use if I would have a viewport with a lot of ‘geometrically challenging’ furniture that had been imported as dwg from an external site…

Share this post


Link to post

Regarding the "Generate 2D from 3D Component" command, you mentioned in the teaser video that it's essentially a version of the "Convert to Polygons" command... My original question was going to be whether there's a way to have this utilize the "Convert to Lines" function as an option instead, since that can be preferable depending on the geometry.

 

But then in today's Facebook Live video... Matt mentioned that it can actually create curved 2D geometry, which neither Convert to Polygons nor Convert to Lines can do.

 

So then is this actually a brand new type of "convert" operation?

 

If so, might this be available to use outside of Hybrid Objects, such as in the Edit<Convert menu? It sounds like it'd be a useful command in a more general sense. I do a lot of 3D to 2D conversion and both of the existing options have their limitations.

 

Also, does it utilize the document's Line Render Smoothing Angle (in the way that Convert to Polygons/Lines does), or is it based on something else?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

@rDesign

In 2019 when I create a Section VP, will the new 2D symbol cut-plane mean that we can control which objects will show as a “cut section”? Meaning that furniture, Plumbing fixtures, etc can be made to no longer show as being cut in section?
We will readdress this question after the official release, as it pertains to another major feature that we have not teased yet. Please remind us!
 

@zoomer

Does this work for all PIOs?

Not ALL PIOs but any PIOs that have a hybrid component. Doors, Windows, Plumbing Fixtures, Columns, etc.

 

Will VW batch update all Symbols from the Library to have 6 2D Views ?

Not all. We will be picking and choosing which libraries we apply this to, but if you have any specific requests to be expedited, please file a wish and the content team will take it into consideration! They are also able to update the resource separately from the release cycle now, so they are free to send them out as they are ready.

 

Will these updated Symbol Components Data, when exported to a previous VW Version, just be ignored or destroyed after again migrated to VW 2019 ?
It will not, Vectorworks 2018 isn't capable of even temporarily storing these components, so they would be lost on backwards conversion.

 

@Kevin McAllister

How does VW autogenerate the "section" views for a symbol? Can the user choose the cut plane?

It is not actually section automatically like auto-hybrids are. We use a combination of line smoothing and Hidden Line to generate a much cleaner profile that can then be edited to the users liking.

 

@herbieherb

Can we add 2D-objects into hybrids to make annotations and similar?

Yes, however it was not strictly designed for it. You may want to wait for the release to see another major feature that changes a lot about how annotations can be done in Vectorworks.

 

@line-weight

Doesn't your video show up a fundamental weakness of this, in that a 2d component can't be generated for the two chairs set at 45 degrees? Or am I missing something?

Right now this feature focuses on thing like plumbing where you very often have items pointing at or perpendicular to the view. The chair was picked just because it's very easy for everyone to immediately wrap their head around. We have (and had during the development of 2019) many talks about this and we have a few proposed solutions, but those will come in future versions after the main bulk of feedback from everyone using this feature have been collected.

 

If I auto-generate (for subsequent editing) 2D views of a symbol which contains complicated mesh elements, is it going to give me a horrible mess with every triangle drawn?

It should not, we have combined a number of existing technologies to ideally make this command quick and provide clean results, certainly clean enough that a user can touch them up as desired easily. 
 

@Matt Overton

Does VGM use this to prioritize low-level detail for redraw when moving views?

The VGM does not interact with the LOD system at the moment, it has a lot of tricks for optimizing speed at lower levels than this.
 

@elepp

Will the various LOD states be readable in a worksheet? For instance, can a worksheet be configured to pull more limited information when the hybrid is displaying its Low state vs its High one?

Not at the moment, but this is being looked into. Please post wishes with what youd like to do with them ideally and that will help development.

 

My question is how it exports to IFC. Can we export different LODs? That would be really helpful to reduce complexity in IFC Models.

At the moment no, but we do indeed plan for something like this in the future.


How do LODs work with the Hide Details button for walls?

This buttons functionality was changed, so that walls show on the design layer or in viewports set to LOW will show no components, but in MEDIUM or HIGH it will show them.

 

@zoomer

What will happen to all this new geometry when you run the convert to group command on a symbol?

You will get resulting geometry based on what you are currently looking at. This should not change from previous versions.

 

Do we get the LOD setting generally for all kind of objects in OIP ?

Not per-object, but this topic is also related to another feature we have not discussed yet, so remind us about this after launch please!

 

@marcel

Interested in the 3D level of detail here. Will this be implemented in all the architecture tools? So i can define three sets of attributes for one wall/window/door/etc.

This is not the intention of this feature, however if you do try this after release, please let us know what you would like it to do that it doesnt do. We may not end up expanding the LOD system specifically for this, but may develop something similar.

 

@Altivec

Will we be able to control the level of 3d detail displayed in a viewport while using the same scale?  For example: Can I duplicate a viewport and have one set to high detail and have one set to low detail?

Yes. This can be controlled per-viewport which would override the design layer setting.


 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Andy Broomell said:

Regarding the "Generate 2D from 3D Component" command, you mentioned in the teaser video that it's essentially a version of the "Convert to Polygons" command... My original question was going to be whether there's a way to have this utilize the "Convert to Lines" function as an option instead, since that can be preferable depending on the geometry.

 

But then in today's Facebook Live video... Matt mentioned that it can actually create curved 2D geometry, which neither Convert to Polygons nor Convert to Lines can do.

 

So then is this actually a brand new type of "convert" operation?

 

If so, might this be available to use outside of Hybrid Objects, such as in the Edit<Convert menu? It sounds like it'd be a useful command in a more general sense. I do a lot of 3D to 2D conversion and both of the existing options have their limitations.

 

Also, does it utilize the document's Line Render Smoothing Angle (in the way that Convert to Polygons/Lines does), or is it based on something else?


The simple answer: It is a mixture of some existing tech, plus a little bit of new secret sauce. You CAN extract any geometry made in this view for use anywhere you like, but I will see what it would take to bring this command out of this editing mode, and/or if it can simply replace one or more existing conversion method.

Just now, Jim Wilson said:
4 minutes ago, Andy Broomell said:

Also, does it utilize the document's Line Render Smoothing Angle (in the way that Convert to Polygons/Lines does), or is it based on something else?

 


I will double check on this, I suspect it might.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I watched the facebook thing. It's good that you do these. Shame the discussion couldn't be a bit longer and in depth though; maybe the forum here is the better medium for getting into the details. Thanks for answering a couple of my questions. While I think the LOD stuff is potentially very useful I remain quite sceptical about the 2d component views. Personally I don't really understand when I'd want to use them. The fact that they only work when the view is completely orthogonal I think is a big limitation. Maybe you wish you hadn't used the chairs as an example...but I think the same issues will come up with things like windows or indeed even plumbing fixtures - in the real world they aren't always viewed straight on.

 

Anyway, the most interesting answer to me was about the conversion of mesh type geometry. There seemed to be a hint that it used a kind of 'improved' version of hidden line render. My subsidiary question remains - can this be used to improve the process of converting a hidden line viewport into linework. Currently that makes a bit of a mess. Being able to do that tidily would be a big plus. It might return to me the ability to produce final linework output for things like elevations that I'm actually happy with.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, line-weight said:

There seemed to be a hint that it used a kind of 'improved' version of hidden line render. My subsidiary question remains - can this be used to improve the process of converting a hidden line viewport into linework. Currently that makes a bit of a mess. Being able to do that tidily would be a big plus. It might return to me the ability to produce final linework output for things like elevations that I'm actually happy with.


Ill check this for sure, I also had a few questions related to this above. And honestly, I agree completely.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Ah, I see Andy Broomell already asked much the same!

Edited by line-weight
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, line-weight said:

I watched the facebook thing. It's good that you do these. Shame the discussion couldn't be a bit longer and in depth though; maybe the forum here is the better medium for getting into the details. Thanks for answering a couple of my questions.


Also: I really want to do more of this, and to have them get even more focused. We have a ton of engineers that could explain things better than I ever could and I wanna go all over with this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Jim Wilson said:


Ill check this for sure, I also had a few questions related to this above. And honestly, I agree completely.

You know what - if that 3d-2d conversion plus tweaking process that seems to be possible in these symbol components could be brought to hidden line sheet layer viewports - that would be a big deal for me and that alone would probably convince me to shell out for 2019.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Thanks for the Q&A! And thanks to Matt for participating too. 

 

9 minutes ago, Jim Wilson said:

The simple answer: It is a mixture of some existing tech, plus a little bit of new secret sauce. You CAN extract any geometry made in this view for use anywhere you like, but I will see what it would take to bring this command out of this editing mode, and/or if it can simply replace one or more existing conversion method.

 

When VW autogenerates the geometry is it 2d polygons (read as facetted or many points) or is it 2d polylines (read as smooth or fewer points)? I almost never use the existing "Convert to Lines" or "Convert to Polygons" because they generate way too many points.

 

Kevin

Edited by Kevin McAllister
Missing question mark....

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, line-weight said:

Personally I don't really understand when I'd want to use them. The fact that they only work when the view is completely orthogonal I think is a big limitation.

 

But then wouldn't you have to manually create an infinite about of views for every potential rotation? I don't quite understand the alternative you have in mind.

 

But I agree that the chair perhaps doesn't best illustrate the usefulness of the feature, because the (green) Hidden Line geometry generated from the 3D and the new 2D Component Views essentially look the same. I think the true usefulness is for more complex objects that just don't look quite correct in Hidden Line. Things based on meshes, for example, where hidden line might have extra facets and overly complex geometry. This new feature allows you to have a "cleaned up" and/or simplified orthographic view, without having to manually overlay a 2D symbol in annotations on ever instance of a toilet, for example. And if something isn't straight on to the world, it'll still generate the view just like it currently does.

 

The 'bespoke' (great word, Jim) orthographic views is the key element, since you can manually clean up as needed.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Andy Broomell said:

 

But then wouldn't you have to manually create an infinite about of views for every potential rotation? I don't quite understand the alternative you have in mind.

 

But I agree that the chair perhaps doesn't best illustrate the usefulness of the feature, because the (green) Hidden Line geometry generated from the 3D and the new 2D Component Views essentially look the same. I think the true usefulness is for more complex objects that just don't look quite correct in Hidden Line. Things based on meshes, for example, where hidden line might have extra facets and overly complex geometry. This new feature allows you to have a "cleaned up" and/or simplified orthographic view, without having to manually overlay a 2D symbol in annotations on ever instance of a toilet, for example. And if something isn't straight on to the world, it'll still generate the view just like it currently does.

 

The 'bespoke' (great word, Jim) orthographic views is the key element, since you can manually clean up as needed.

 

I think both things mentioned in the last few comments have their place. Here's what I mean -

 

  1. A good 3d model will always win if the render mode it up to the task. By good 3d model I mean something created using solids tools or clean NURBS surfaces combined with Stitch and Trim. This means that progress still needs to be made to improve the hidden line render module so it creates clean renders (read as smooth) faster.
  2. This new 2D Components for Hybrid Objects is a different approach for when the 3d model is poor (facetted, mesh or non-existent). You could create a quick model using a 3d "cube" component for 3d massing and 3 component views from a manufacturers cut sheet. Using this approach you could get useable plans/sections and straight on elevations.

This feature might be even more useful would be if you could have VW show both the 3d with the 2d component overlaid in a render. That way you could layer extra information over a 3d render or section (eg. section cut detail laid on top of a sectioned model).

 

Kevin

 

Edited by Kevin McAllister

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Andy Broomell said:

 

I think the true usefulness is for more complex objects that just don't look quite correct in Hidden Line.

 

Then the solution should be either to improve how hidden line works, or improve the way the symbol's 3d model is drawn. This seems like a bit of a bodge workaround to paper over deficiencies elsewhere.

 

I do think the LOD thing is good though, and indeed perhaps having a lower LOD version of those complex objects, that is modelled in such a way that it *does* look correct in hidden line (without having to lose the higher detail version for other purposes) is the way I'd see of solving the problem that these extra 2d components seem to try and address. Then it works whatever angle you're looking at your window or toilet or chair from.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, Jim Wilson said:
35 minutes ago, Jim Wilson said:
39 minutes ago, Andy Broomell said:

Also, does it utilize the document's Line Render Smoothing Angle (in the way that Convert to Polygons/Lines does), or is it based on something else?

 


I will double check on this, I suspect it might.

 

It is based on the document setting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, Jim Wilson said:
35 minutes ago, line-weight said:

There seemed to be a hint that it used a kind of 'improved' version of hidden line render. My subsidiary question remains - can this be used to improve the process of converting a hidden line viewport into linework. Currently that makes a bit of a mess. Being able to do that tidily would be a big plus. It might return to me the ability to produce final linework output for things like elevations that I'm actually happy with.


Ill check this for sure, I also had a few questions related to this above. And honestly, I agree completely.

 

I agree as well. This functionality will be constrained to the command with 2D Component edit mode for VW 2019. However, we will certainly be exploring other places for it in future versions. The Auto Hybrid comes to mind... Of course, viewports also come to mind. However, this functionality is more computational intensive and would result in a performance hit - especially in viewports of large models. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Kevin McAllister said:

This means that progress still needs to be made to improve the hidden line render module

 

11 minutes ago, line-weight said:

Then the solution should be either to improve how hidden line works, or improve the way the symbol's 3d model is drawn. 

 

I agree completely 🙂

 

 

That being said (regarding this---)

9 minutes ago, line-weight said:

This seems like a bit of a bodge workaround to paper over deficiencies elsewhere.

there are instances where even if the hidden line render generated it faster and more cleanly, you might instead want a more graphic representation rather than something based on the actual 3D geometry. Just like the 2D Top/Plan portions of symbols are often more simple than the actual 3D object.

 

This might be more useful in some industries than others, but this functionality certainly has its place, and I know it's been wished for on the forums in the past (not by me).

 

In the end I view this feature as simply adding the ability to add bespoke 2D drawings to all orthographic views of a Symbol, rather than just Top/Plan. The fact that it will also help reduce Hidden Line render time is great, but yes, there are additional separate improvements to be made there.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Matt Panzer said:

 

I agree as well. This functionality will be constrained to the command with 2D Component edit mode for VW 2019. However, we will certainly be exploring other places for it in future versions. The Auto Hybrid comes to mind... Of course, viewports also come to mind. However, this functionality is more computational intensive and would result in a performance hit - especially in viewports of large models. 

 

Isn't the method currently used for Auto Hybrids single core? I'm assuming that this new functionality is multi-core..... 🙂

 

Kevin

 

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, line-weight said:

 

Then the solution should be either to improve how hidden line works, or improve the way the symbol's 3d model is drawn. This seems like a bit of a bodge workaround to paper over deficiencies elsewhere.

 

I do think the LOD thing is good though, and indeed perhaps having a lower LOD version of those complex objects, that is modelled in such a way that it *does* look correct in hidden line (without having to lose the higher detail version for other purposes) is the way I'd see of solving the problem that these extra 2d components seem to try and address. Then it works whatever angle you're looking at your window or toilet or chair from.

 

It not as much about deficiencies in how 3D geometry is rendered as it is about schematic 2D representation of the geometry. Think about how floor plans would look if there were no 2D Top/Plan graphics and components. Drawing standards require these graphics to look a certain way that do not reflect the true 3D geometry. This feature also allows far more detail to be shown in a 2D "cut" component than you'd ever care to model (and wait for to render).

 

How you use this feature depends on the kind of drawings you need to get out of your model.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Kevin McAllister said:

 

Isn't the method currently used for Auto Hybrids single core? I'm assuming that this new functionality is multi-core..... 🙂

 

Kevin

 

 

This I do not know, but their is additional processing (the secret sauce) done to these objects to get the results.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Matt Panzer said:

This I do not know, but their is additional processing (the secret sauce) done to these objects to get the results.

 

11 minutes ago, Kevin McAllister said:

Isn't the method currently used for Auto Hybrids single core? I'm assuming that this new functionality is multi-core..... 🙂

 


Well, if it uses aspects of Hidden Line, it should be at least partially multicore. Autohybrids are pure geometry calc so they're single still. I'll run some heavy objects through this new command and see both what I get and what kind of resources are accessed and report back.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
43 minutes ago, Kevin McAllister said:

This feature might be even more useful would be if you could have VW show both the 3d with the 2d component overlaid in a render. That way you could layer extra information over a 3d render or section (eg. section cut detail laid on top of a sectioned model).

 

I just talked to some people in high places and they went ahead and tossed that in for you. 😛
Actually this is already built into the feature. Any object in the 3D component of a symbol can be set to display along with any number of 2D components.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, Matt Panzer said:

 

It not as much about deficiencies in how 3D geometry is rendered as it is about schematic 2D representation of the geometry. Think about how floor plans would look if there were no 2D Top/Plan graphics and components. Drawing standards require these graphics to look a certain way that do not reflect the true 3D geometry. This feature also allows far more detail to be shown in a 2D "cut" component than you'd ever care to model (and wait for to render).

 

How you use this feature depends on the kind of drawings you need to get out of your model.

 

Sure. But plan view is different from other views in this respect. Few conventional architectural elements are commonly found or drawn in a variation of rotations except around their Z axis, which not coincidentally corresponds to the direction of gravity, and also the direction in which they are viewed in plan.

 

 

 

 

 

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.

×