Jump to content
Haydenovative

Raked Hanging Position Truss

Recommended Posts

Hello Again Team,

 

Todays little adventure is inserting truss using the truss insertion tool, turning on "draw 3D only", raking the truss to 45° and converting it to a hanging position..... Doesn't work. 

 

Is there anyone out there who has done this another way? Thanks in advance folks!

Share this post


Link to post

Is it just that you are receiving the warning about the symbol containing 3D info only? if so just go ahead with the conversion, the only thing that will not be displayed is the simplified view of the truss objects, the hanging position will function as normal. If that is not the issue please upload a copy of your save file and I will take a look, as currently it seems to be working fine for me (2019 sp2).

gruße

Jesse

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Hey Jesse,

 

I have arrived at the "correct" way to achieve this through the help of the forum. Building a truss flat and then creating a DLVP which I can then rake to 45° is the best way to go about it. What I was trying to do was to rake a piece of truss first, then convert it to a hanging position and expecting lights would snap to it and move along with the truss as if it was flat.

 

Thanks so much, I ope this helps someone else out there with the same problem.

 

Note: when using a DLVP to rake a hanging position, make sure no other layers are enabled in the viewport or it wont rotate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

@Haydenovative Could you elaborate further on how you did this? I am trying to accomplish the same. I have 6 stick of 20ft truss I want to rake so the front is roughly 5ft higher than the back. 

Share this post


Link to post

Heya @Bhel,

 

Sure thing!

1. So create a layer all by itself and place your 6 sticks of 20ft truss the way you would like it. 

2. Grab the truss and create a viewport, but rather than putting it on a sheet layer, select a design layer, or create a new one called angled truss or something.

3. Select that view port and hit the layers button, make sure the only visible layer is the first one you created. 

4. Turn off the original truss layer you created.

5. select the viewport you have now on angled truss layer, go to a side view and rotate the truss the way you want it.

 

If you want to edit the truss in any way you need to go back to the first layer, otherwise it can be turned off and you'll only deal with the viewport for the rest of the time. I hope this helps, let me know if you need any more help making this happen.

Share this post


Link to post

Note:

When creating your Design Layer Viewport (DLVP) insert whatever symbols and draw whatever geometry you might want on this new layer. Class it just like you would any other part of your drawing. Very important....add lighting element(s) on this layer as well. Without a lighting element, you will not be able to rotate the viewport on your standard drawing layer. 

 

Quick tip; once you’ve created the DLVP and placed it on it’s requisite layer, go to that layer, select the viewport, go to the OIP and select CLASSES. At the bottom left there is a check box that says something like “use current class visibilities”. Make sure to select that as then your viewport will act just like the rest of your drawing. Very important. I also seriously suggest adding a class specifically for assigning your DLVP so you can turn it on and off independently of your primary drawing. 

Share this post


Link to post

To me, the big selling point of this process is not simply the ability to rake production structures, but that it allows you to print plan views without the raked truss. Avoiding wireframe 3D geometry in a 2D print is a huge deal to me. It also allows you to go back and add to or modify the structure very simply without changing working planes and whatever else. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, scottmoore said:

To me, the big selling point of this process is not simply the ability to rake production structures, but that it allows you to print plan views without the raked truss. Avoiding wireframe 3D geometry in a 2D print is a huge deal to me. It also allows you to go back and add to or modify the structure very simply without changing working planes and whatever else. 

 

It took me a while to warm up to DLVP's... it always felt like a clunky solution to the problem. Ideally I'd love to be able to go to a front or side view and rotate truss w/ fixtures and VW just figure it out. But as you said, it's great to have the definition layer for nice 2D top plans for plots.

 

The big issue for me is that Vision turns DLVP's into mesh (truss & fixtures) with no Spotlight instruments. That means if I want raked truss w/ fixtures, I either (a) can't use DLVP's, (b) can't send to Vision, or (c) need to duplicate my work.

 

Vision needs the ability to interpret the contents of a DLVP and place it in the position/orientation of the DLVP object. Or VW needs another solution to raked truss that Vision can interpret.

 

Edited by LJ TMS
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, LJ TMS said:

 

It took me a while to warm up to DLVP's... it always felt like a clunky solution to the problem. Ideally I'd love to be able to go to a front or side view and rotate truss w/ fixtures and VW just figure it out. But as you said, it's great to have the definition layer for nice 2D top plans for plots.

 

The big issue for me is that Vision turns DLVP's into mesh (truss & fixtures) with no Spotlight instruments. That means if I want raked truss w/ fixtures, I either (a) can't use DLVP's, (b) can't send to Vision, or (c) need to duplicate my work.

 

Vision needs the ability to interpret the contents of a DLVP and place it in the position/orientation of the DLVP object. Or VW needs another solution to raked truss that Vision can interpret.

 

Agreed. That said, and I have said this before, DLVPs do offer quite a lot of flexibility beyond simply raking a truss. Let’s say you have some lighting pods that are automated at different trims and different angles throughout an event. No problem. Make duplicates of your initial DLVP, class each seaparately and move/rake to your heart’s content. Have a piece of moving scenery that travels about on stage?  Same thing. DLVP’s are really quite versatile and those are just two examples of uses that could not be accomplished by simply rotating geometry. 

 

Clunky?  Yeah probably, however, my solution to avoid the clunky aspect is to do the following in my template file:

 

- I have ten design layers already set for creating DLVP’s. 

 

- I have ten classes already set up for DLVP’s. 

 

- I have already created the physical viewport for each design layer, assigned it to it’s appropriate class and turned on the “use current class visibilities” option. 

 

For me, all I do is start drawing in the pre-defined layer, go back to my standard drawing layer, turn on the appropriate DLVP class and rotate into position. Done!  

Edited by scottmoore

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, scottmoore said:

Agreed. That said, and I have said this before, DLVPs do offer quite a lot of flexibility beyond simply raking a truss. Let’s say you have some lighting pods that are automated at different trims and different angles throughout an event. No problem. Make duplicates of your initial DLVP, class each seaparately and move/rake to your heart’s content. Have a piece of moving scenery that travels about on stage?  Same thing. DLVP’s are really quite versatile and those are just two examples of uses that could not be accomplished by simply rotating geometry. 

 

I've used DLVP's for multiple lighting positions/scenes, but I've never used them for scenery. If I had moving scenery, I would generally use classes and/or layers. What would you consider the benefit to using DLVP's in that instance?

 

14 hours ago, scottmoore said:

Clunky?  Yeah probably

 

As far as clunky, I think I have more of a problem with the way 'Create Plot & Model View' menu command works than I do with the overall concept.

 

As an example...

I have truss & fixtures sitting on 'Layer 1' that I decide I want to create a DLVP of. I run 'Create Plot & Model View' and it asks me to name a new definition layer and select the model layer (which can't be the the design layer I'm on, so let's say 'Layer 2'). I now have a newly created definition layer, a DLVP on the 'Layer 1', and a DLVP on the 'Layer 2'.

 

I realize the solution after I run this is to delete one of the DLVP objects and get my classes and visibilities setup to work with. But I think many users (especially those inexperienced with the command) would find the end result confusing and would probably be hesitant to delete one of those DLVP's (since they'd wonder why there was a duplicate in the first place and probably think it necessary for some reason).

 

I don't understand why it either (a) it doesn't allow me to select the current layer as the the model layer and place the DLVP there only, or (b) if it's going to force me to select another layer for the model layer, why it's putting a duplicate of the DLVP on the active layer.

 

14 hours ago, scottmoore said:

my solution to avoid the clunky aspect is to do the following in my template file:

- I have ten design layers already set for creating DLVP’s. 

- I have ten classes already set up for DLVP’s. 

- I have already created the physical viewport for each design layer, assigned it to it’s appropriate class and turned on the “use current class visibilities” option. 

For me, all I do is start drawing in the pre-defined layer, go back to my standard drawing layer, turn on the appropriate DLVP class and rotate into position. Done!  

 

Interesting, I've never considered pre-setting up design layers, classes, and viewports to be ready to go for DLVP's in my template, but that's a great idea. Thanks for the tips!

 

Edited by LJ TMS

Share this post


Link to post

This seems extremely confusing for someone not experienced with years of VWX use 😰. As I literally downloaded VWX for the first time about a week ago aha. Im trying to get myself trained up to take on some small projects. 

 

Now why would anyone need to make a plot of an automated rig with hanging positions or scenery at different angles or heights? If I am building someone a plot in my mind I just need to give a view and close ups of the hanging position/pod so they can accurately build it. They wouldn't need to see its various positions changes, just what the structure and fixture placement layout is. Right..? I feel like people that are trying to show concept renders tend to use C4D or illustrator for inaccurate 3D concepts. 

 

For the raked truss scenario I suppose the same question could be asked as I think about it. For a plot they don't need to see the truss raked even if that will be its final flown orientation. And thinking of the geometry of that scenario... If I were to do all this DLVP work and angle truss so the front is higher than the back wouldn't that make the truss appear to be shorter and the lights more condensed on a top view for a plot? In that case I wouldn't want to rake the truss. Correct me here because I have no idea. #greenhorn.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Bhel said:

This seems extremely confusing for someone not experienced with years of VWX use 😰. As I literally downloaded VWX for the first time about a week ago aha. Im trying to get myself trained up to take on some small projects. 

 

No worries, this is the place to learn!

 

4 hours ago, Bhel said:

Now why would anyone need to make a plot of an automated rig with hanging positions or scenery at different angles or heights? If I am building someone a plot in my mind I just need to give a view and close ups of the hanging position/pod so they can accurately build it. They wouldn't need to see its various positions changes, just what the structure and fixture placement layout is. Right..? I feel like people that are trying to show concept renders tend to use C4D or illustrator for inaccurate 3D concepts. 

 

For the raked truss scenario I suppose the same question could be asked as I think about it. For a plot they don't need to see the truss raked even if that will be its final flown orientation. And thinking of the geometry of that scenario... If I were to do all this DLVP work and angle truss so the front is higher than the back wouldn't that make the truss appear to be shorter and the lights more condensed on a top view for a plot? In that case I wouldn't want to rake the truss. Correct me here because I have no idea. #greenhorn.

 

This may be highly dependent on what industry you work in and what type of events you're drawing. I work with a wide variety of entertainment lighting and generally speaking, events like corporate, weddings, and traditional theater wouldn't utilize much angled lighting/truss. Whereas events like concerts, festivals, tours, etc can use a lot of lighting & structures at various 'non-flat' angles. For these type of events, you really want to 3D model what the end result will look like. Not only to show the client with renderings, but also to properly convey the construction and layout to the production crew. Also consider if you were building an event in a constrained amount of space, and/or have different elements close to each other, you need to make sure it's all going to fit, even at funky angles.

 

The beauty of using DLVP's is you end up with a definition layer that you can use for nice 2D top/plan views of raked truss as though it was flat for use in plots, and the DLVP object for use with 3D renderings and front/side views.

 

For renders, Vectorworks and/or Vision can work very well to illustrate your concepts! They both have their quirks and shortcomings (like any software), but it's perfectly achievable without using any other software.

 

Edited by LJ TMS

Share this post


Link to post

@LJ TMS Are there problems with importing those into Vision though? Ive been reading about these DLVPs that create problems when going into previs because they don't show correctly. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Bhel said:

@LJ TMS Are there problems with importing those into Vision though? Ive been reading about these DLVPs that create problems when going into previs because they don't show correctly. 

 

That's correct unfortunately. Vision doesn't understand Spotlight instruments within a DLVP so it converts it all to a mesh. Now that Vectorworks owns Vision, I'm hopeful they'll come up with a method that works for both (either Vision interpret the contents of a DLVP, or VW change it's raked truss solution to something that works with Vision).

 

Edited by LJ TMS

Share this post


Link to post

The big drawback with this workflow is vision and lightwright.. Personally I'm pretty happy with 3d Label legends. but they are still not quite there. Hopefully we can get 2d info in 3d symbols views in spotlight too, that would also make a difference...

Share this post


Link to post

To clarify the “why” I do some of the things I am proposing:

 

if if I have a piece of automation that is moving during an event, I need to be able to depict that in renderings to sell the idea to a client and in drawings to clarify what I need from my vendors. This is especially helpful to automation technicians as they will already know the cues we need prior to load-in. All of this is critically important to me and now instantly do-able by selecting which classes are on in a particular sheet layer viewport. With this scenario, any changes I make to the original structure (in simple to edit plan view by the way) will automatically track to every iteration of it in the drawing sets.  3D drawing will not accommodate any of this. 

 

As to scenery/sets, I am not necessarily thinking in terms of a theatrical set, which would be easily accomplished with layers and/or classes, but more in terms of scenic/set  pieces that might travel about the stage in different locations at different times. You could, of course, turn the entire piece into a symbol and then insert that into various locations. That would work fine. Any changes you need to make to the piece could be accomplished by editing the symbol. The option that I often employ is to create that piece on it’s own layer and then create multiple DLVPs to move the piece around, including where it goes for storage when not in use. It’s just another way to handle those things that I find to be quite useful and why I suggest learning the use of DLVPs because it is far more than a simple work-around. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/23/2019 at 9:56 PM, Gaspar Potocnik said:

The big drawback with this workflow is vision and lightwright.. Personally I'm pretty happy with 3d Label legends. but they are still not quite there. Hopefully we can get 2d info in 3d symbols views in spotlight too, that would also make a difference...

 

Still on VWX2017, but this was one of the gripes I had with the DLVP solution. It still is a good way to do achieve most of what I want, and I still use it to a great extent, but 3D labels indeed need to progress further. 

 

When you have lights hung in tight positions and you want 3D labels to appear clearly, sometimes the truss chords or other fixtures themselves get in the way when using hidden line rendering, which unfortunately is the way forwards in terms of getting clean lines and not wireframe 3D messy lines.

 

It would be helpful if the adjust 3D labels position command had a z option to push them in front of all the hardware. Right now adjusting in the x and y plane is quite restrictive.

 

Unless other people have better solutions?

 

Gabriel

 

 

Edited by Gabriel Chan

Share this post


Link to post

 

@Gabriel Chan  Spotlight label legends received an overhaul in 2019. The 3D label legends can now be orientated in any direction and re positioned by selecting and dragging to where ever you would like them in relation to the fixture. A leader line has been included to show which fixture the legend is associated with. see belowimage.png

Share this post


Link to post

Say if I would like the label legends to be above the fixtures, but not too far away, do they all appear over the truss? Or are they obscured?

 

9 minutes ago, jcogdell said:

 

@Gabriel ChanThe 3D label legends can now be orientated in any direction and re positioned by selecting and dragging to where ever you would like them in relation to the fixture.image.png

 

That is a flexibility that will be appreciated, but I do prefer the xyz offset option if it's still available? Definitely not an efficient way dragging the 3D labels when you have 400 over fixtures. 

 

Still, will be another few years before my upgrade cycle - guess I can hold onto 2017 for now. Thanks for updating!

 

Gabriel

Share this post


Link to post

Just to clarify you set the basic position of the 3d label legend elements when that legend is first created. This is done in the label legend manager in a similar way to the old 2D label legend workflow ie pick what you want to display (for 2D and/or 3D) and then position the labels round your fixture in 2D and in 3D.  

 

The drag and drop is for when you have the legend obscured by another fixture or object. Unless your plan is very crowded (fixture counts in the 1000s +) you should only have to edit a few in any given model as long as the label legend was properly prepared.

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/21/2019 at 11:47 PM, scottmoore said:

Agreed. That said, and I have said this before, DLVPs do offer quite a lot of flexibility beyond simply raking a truss. Let’s say you have some lighting pods that are automated at different trims and different angles throughout an event. No problem. Make duplicates of your initial DLVP, class each seaparately and move/rake to your heart’s content. Have a piece of moving scenery that travels about on stage?  Same thing. DLVP’s are really quite versatile and those are just two examples of uses that could not be accomplished by simply rotating geometry. 

 

Clunky?  Yeah probably, however, my solution to avoid the clunky aspect is to do the following in my template file:

 

- I have ten design layers already set for creating DLVP’s. 

 

- I have ten classes already set up for DLVP’s. 

 

- I have already created the physical viewport for each design layer, assigned it to it’s appropriate class and turned on the “use current class visibilities” option. 

 

For me, all I do is start drawing in the pre-defined layer, go back to my standard drawing layer, turn on the appropriate DLVP class and rotate into position. Done!  

 

Hi Scott,

This is a good thread

I already use a bunch of viewports and have a template for most of my layers working layers,  lighting, audio, scenic etc. and I am venturing into DLVP  for trussing. Etc. 

Could you elaborate on how you use the 10 layers with DLVP and 10 Classes for DLVP  

I am interested in your Naming conventions and how you handle layer height.

thanks,

-Paul

Share this post


Link to post

So I have been playing with this for 2 days and  cant seen to get this to work.

keep getting unexpected results. Entire  DLVP Viewport rotates,  can't change angles etc.

What am I missing here.

FOH truss

2 Mid Truss

2 US Truss

Should be simple Tried turning off Layers Etc

 

Anyone have a sample file and step by step to share.

 

Thanks,

Paul

 

 

DLVP 1.PNG

DLVP 2.PNG

Share this post


Link to post

Sure Paul. I actually name the layers and associated classes by color. This may sound odd, however, when a shop preps a rig, they generally color code the trusses so why not start there. You can always change it later. So my DLVP layers are:

 

red truss

yellow truss

orange truss

etc. 

 

I then have DLVP classes that reside in my rigging master class with the same “red truss” naming convention. 

 

You could simply use DLVP 1 etc for both layers and classes. 

 

If I have an automated piece that needs to show a structure in multiple scenes, I just make duplicates of the associated classand send a duplicate of the VP there. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

The issue is that each truss has to be on a dedicated DLVP. Imagine the viewport as a picture (a very smart picture no doubt) of the contents of another layer. You cannot manipulate the objects in the viewport, you can only manipulate the viewport. I your case, you would need five DLVPs.

 

This is exactly why I set my template file up the way I do. There is really no impact on my workflow. Draw the truss and lights on a dedicated layer, go to my main layer, turn on the necessary classes, rotate them and move them into position. Done. Probably quite a bit faster than trying to rotate a truss, and rotate fixtures to install on them and infinitely more flexible in terms of editing, exporting to paperwork and being able to manipulate the final object. 

 

There was a comment earlier about an issue with Lightwrite. I wonder why that would be?  There is only one instance of any particular lighting fixture or any other symbol for that matter. I can’t imagine that LW can draw data from a viewport. 

Share this post


Link to post

Thx Scott make sense on the naming I do the same essentially with names. FOH Mid SR  MID SL  USL USR.

 

I am struggling with the raking of the individual trusses in 3D for Client  and keeping a good 2D plot for Shop.

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.

×