Jump to content
  • 42
Christiaan

Window and Door Tool maturity

Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Tested sills in 2021

Timber sill still wrong way in wall and still no alignment with frame, utter rubbish, so still no normal 3d modeling for me, back to the old workarounds which take 3 times as long as it would if this tool worked as it should, come on Vectorworks team get a grip on this terrible flaw in your so called best for BIM software!!!!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
On 9/11/2020 at 9:53 PM, DBrown said:

Those tools are amazing!! And they are present in the German, French and the Italian version, I don't know why we don't have them in the English version, it blow my mind, how stupid it is...

 

They either don't like them or don't listen to the user's needs. Or both.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
On 9/11/2020 at 9:53 PM, DBrown said:

Those tools are amazing!! And they are present in the German, French and the Italian version, I don't know why we don't have them in the English version, it blow my mind, how stupid it is...

One of the possible reasons could be that all these local tools are local, i.e. they adhere to local standards and may as such not be completely useful in other countries.

 

This is something that should be relatively easy to fix because the vast majority of the underlying code should work almost everywhere and it is "merely" a matter of adjusting for local/regional specifications. Given that standardized doors and windows are most likely adhering to international standards (EU/ISO etc) it should not be that hard to make a window/door tool for the international version that actually works.

 

As I have mentioned before in discussions about tools available in localized versions only, it is silly that those working internationally are running into such barriers when using VW and making it unnecessarily difficult to adhere to standards used in another country. At least make these tools available for users outside those countries/regions, even if it is as a reasonably priced extra cost option.

 

Specialized/customized window/door items probably need to be modelled anyway because there are way to many permutations to be covered for coding.

 

Edit: changed typo "could" into "code" for clarity

Edited by Art V
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

hi Art V,

 

i think the same. the local standards could be a possible reason.

 

but I also think that it should be possible to design a comprehensive basic tool for every standard

and local distributor then adds its local standards/needs.

 

A window is a window everywhere.

In principle a hole in the wall with various surrounding shells and the window geometry.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Hi Tobias

 

I agree with that, though there should be a way to have access to those tools that use local standards, e.g. if I would have to create a building for e.g. an Italian client it would be nice if the door/window tool with local standards would be available for use (assuming I would have sufficient knowledge of the local standard to use it properly).

 

Whether that would be a paid extra or part of VSS or otherwise is secondary. In the DWG world there are sufficient options to make this work but for VW it seems to be somewhat of a problem to get it right.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Hi Art,

 

as an Italian architect who studied in France and Denmark and working since 25 years in Germany, I can assure you that the standards are irrelevant as long as the elements are configurable enough.

I do construction drawings and BIM stuff for a living.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Hi _c_ my experience is more in the civil/GIS and mechanical area than architecture. I agree that if the elements are configurable enough you can adapt to the standards.

 

But having the tool being standard compliant right away can save quite a bit of time depending on complexity of the standard.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Can somebody within the Vectorworks team give us any idea if they have read these posts and understood our problem. This is not a bug it is a fundamental problem with the window tool, it would be great if there was a reply which said that they were at least looking at this problem and a timeline for a fix (2026 perhaps) instead of a stony silence and no apparent action.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Most of the ISO 128 parts are at least 15-24 years old, predating current CAD systems and sometimes still based on pen drafting practices. Some of the sections on CAD are imho outdated.  Still a lot of those things apply today when it comes to presentation and should be implemented properly but the current technical possibilities for (re)presentation should not be left by the sideway because it may not be fully according to the ISO standard.

 

It is the end result that matters, not exact compliance with standards. The latter will not necessarily guarantee a good result but it should, in theory, at least prevent botched jobs/results. Besides that, standards often offer some leeway in implementation because of practical conditions that require some adjustment.

 

I've seen examples of projects that complied with standards and regulations and still didn't come out well/as intended because the focus was too much on the theoretical aspects of compliance and not of the situation in reality and adjusting for that (requiring corrections and sometimes even that turned out to be a fail too requiring another batch of corrections). Reality always wins over theory. At best theory matches reality.

 

As line-weight mentioned, they should get a decent sized group of practising professionals to work with them on how to implement things. Even then some things may still get criticism but at least the glaringly wrong things should then be solved.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Art, even just a little bit of drawing standards would make us happy.

 

And I am afraid I must state that we have no choice too, in Germany you must draw things cut, if they are cut and not cut, if they are not.

 

In USA there is a consolidated praxis where cut objects show a single thick line around. 

We don't. We use differently thick lines and different fills, depending on project phase (scale) and material.  And the fills are often normed.

Don't get me started citing the norms, that would be very boring for both of us.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

That's a great example of a real world situation that VW can't currently deal with properly.

 

My solution here would be probably be to create the inner insulation layer either as a separate wall, or as directly modelled solids. I then make my floorplans as horizontal sections to allow me to make the cut plane where I want it, and for it not to section that inner insulation layer.

 

For the dashed "something overhead" line, I would add this manually as an annotation in the sheet layer viewport. I've not yet found a reliable way for VW to automatically give me dashed "overhead" lines in the right places. So I give up on that and do it manually. Of course, this means I have to keep on top of any updates by adjusting the viewport annotation as necessary.

 

Very interesting that you have written your own code to produce window and door plugins (I see a door frame with a stop on it - hooray!).

 

If individual users are writing their own code to make usable doors and windows it makes it even more ridiculous that VW still cannot supply us with this as a basic and fundamental part of the programme we pay for.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

The direction they are going, is that in order to see things properly cut, you must cut horizontal sections.

This means that you'll have to set up object by object, 2D components by 2D component (those new pesky things that every symbol and plug-in has), override by override, class by class, beyond cutting plane and afterwards... just in order to see if you have a proper plan.

 

All these settings. All scattered around.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
3 minutes ago, line-weight said:

My solution here would be probably be to create the inner insulation layer either as a separate wall, or as directly modelled solids.

 

 

Then you are in for a nice exercise in IFC settings and 2D stuff (autohybrid only hope).

 

Quote

I then make my floorplans as horizontal sections to allow me to make the cut plane where I want it, and for it not to section that inner insulation layer.

 

Then you are in for LOADS of annotations, since you loose the hybrid display. And this is in a bloody (allow me) special group, so you have to do it in every viewport.

 

Quote

For the dashed "something overhead" line, I would add this manually as an annotation in the sheet layer viewport. I've not yet found a reliable way for VW to automatically give me dashed "overhead" lines in the right places. So I give up on that and do it manually. Of course, this means I have to keep on top of any updates by adjusting the viewport annotation as necessary.

 

Nice job on anything spanning more floors. See theme of special groups and annotations. Hate them.

 

Quote

Very interesting that you have written your own code to produce window and door plugins (I see a door frame with a stop on it - hooray!).

 

Thank Orso B. Schmid

 

Quote

If individual users are writing their own code to make usable doors and windows it makes it even more ridiculous that VW still cannot supply us with this as a basic and fundamental part of the programme we pay for.

 

That's exactly my line of thoughts.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

To be clear, when I say horizontal section I mean literally a horizontal section - not one involving any hybrids or 2d symbols. So if a door is modelled correctly in 3d, it will be correct in my plan.

 

However you're quite right, this sets me up with lots of annotation, for example door swing lines. This may seem crazy and would be for larger projects, but for the smaller type of projects I do (lots of non standard detail) I've decided it's the "least terrible" option for now. It's less time consuming for me, than fighting with plugin tools.

 

Unlike you I don't have to worry so much about IFC and so on - I just need clear accurate construction drawings.

 

I hope that some day the time will come that I don't have to have this kind of home-brew solution.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

@_c_ Thanks for sharing your issues and for suggesting solutions. That is indeed good example where VW needs to get better...

I wonder have you tried using horizontal section with Object Display.../Hidden object display? Is it of any use for this scenario? I see you are using regular viewport for plans.

 

I did tried those settings for controlling visibility of objects before cut plane, but really didnt get fully satisfied with result. But I guess I need to spend more time to fully explore it. I have moved to using solely horizontal sections for creating plans (doing mainly smallish residential projects) but I see it is not still ready yet... for example space objects tags don't show up correctly once more than one floor plan is visible beyond cut plane ... 

 

Edited by drelARCH

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I would be interested to hear @herbieherbopinion.

He is an experienced german version VW user and I am

sure he has a lots of ideas about workarounds.

Things like stacked SLVPs, special 2D annotation Classes

and such.

And maybe the german version covers already some of the

drawing demands.

Edited by zoomer

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Question remotely related, we have set up a 6 story apartment building with the units referenced from another file in design layer viewports.  This way we made up each floor plan with the units as viewports.  Then we made a viewport on a sheet just showing one unit at a time.  I have the dimensions on the referenced file but they don't show up in the master file, even if the class is turned on.  

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I have only skimmed this thread as it is very long. I hope I didn't miss the point. First of all: The window tools needs improvement. But in which aspects? The Benelux windows are great with the variety of shapes they offer and of course the live preview. For the German version I would be disappointed about the level of detail, which somehow seems to be quite limited. (Maybe I'm wrong there, as a German user I only know the Benelux-tool from the various impressive videos). Users of the English version would probably curse the overly complicated settings of the German version.
These localized tools also reflect the local way to plan and build. I don't know where the journey for the Vectorworks developers is heading and hope that the holy grail of window tools will finally be found. 😄

 

Now to all the display problems that come with the current limitations of the tools:

In sections, I tend to use stacks of SLVP's to generate most elements automatically (including terrain, hidden objects dashed lines, some of the details via the new symbol side views etc.) and only add very few details.

In floor plans, however, I want to see the correct view while drawing and solve display problems directly at the drawing elements, where they occur. I think this is the more logical way, because in the ground plan in contrast to the section all objects are directly accessible. Since we draw our plans completely in 3D, but BIM data is secondary for us, we tend to use symbols instead of PIO's very often. The Stairs tool is not even touched anymore. Standard windows are solved with the tool, but will surely get additional symbols in later construction phases. Unusual windows are directly drawn with 3d-symbols. If BIM data is desired, we pack PIO's into symbols and, where necessary, supplement the representation in this way.

We solve the insulation situation above with separate walls which include only the insulation. There is a disadvantage with wall openings, but to be honest, it often takes a lot more time to adjust the tools until you solve such a situation than to model it with a few additional walls. We also often use Symbols to model such situations completely without any PIO's.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
4 minutes ago, herbieherb said:

We solve the insulation situation above with separate walls which include only the insulation.

 

Beside the problem with openings,

don't you have issues with Auto Wall Connections mixing up between

both Wall groups ?

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


 

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.

×
×
  • Create New...