Jump to content
  • 56

Window and Door Tool maturity


Christiaan

Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
1 minute ago, Niels Timmer said:

What would also be great is if we can control the 3D-appearance of windows/doors with materials instead of classes. Materials have to be fully integrated in Vectorworks or they are quite useless in my opinion.

 

With the option to overwrite/change/simplify in Viewports

  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • 0
58 minutes ago, Niels Timmer said:

What would also be great is if we can control the 3D-appearance of windows/doors with materials instead of classes. Materials have to be fully integrated in Vectorworks or they are quite useless in my opinion.


I would like classes to have materials.

 

or vice-versa.

Edited by shorter
  • Like 2
Link to comment
  • 0
1 hour ago, Niels Timmer said:

What would also be great is if we can control the 3D-appearance of windows/doors with materials instead of classes. Materials have to be fully integrated in Vectorworks or they are quite useless in my opinion.

Yeap, I still haven't gone near Materials yet. And I usually like to get my hands dirty with new features.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • 0

@Tom W. How do you deal with visibilities of objects that can accept materials (e.g. Wall Components) and those that can't (e.g. Doors) when they both are made of the same real world material (e.g. wood paneling & matching wood door)?  Do you maintain matching Classes & Materials?  Or does it not come up in your workflow?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • 0

 

I'm not sure if I already lost overview.

 

But I was one of the first who (* also) invented the Material System and

voted for it in VW in the past.

(* found it a few months later perfectly implemented in Bricscad)

Because I was tired of manually creating the ever same concrete Components

for Wall, Slab and other Styles again each time.

 

It was just that I did not try so far, because :

- so far I could just directly reuse all my previous Styles for new projects

- I was a bit irritated by Composition Materials, organization and editing

- afraid because of VW Materials default RW Textures, as I was used my own C4D Materails imports

but mainly

- because 2D experienced users warned that using VW Materials will lead to loss of

being able to overwrite Classes in Viewports.

(Although basically not that important for my work)

 

 

20 minutes ago, E|FA said:

(e.g. Wall Components) and those that can't (e.g. Doors) when they both are made of the same real world material (e.g. wood paneling & matching wood door)?

 

Hmmh,

So far I would still apply all my Styles by Components and keep the Components

assigned to "Material Classes" as before.

I have (mostly) everything assigned by Class and a RW Texture assigned to my

Material Classes.

 

If I use VW Materials, I would expect Materials to control my PIOs instead.

I would just make sure to use my own Custom Materials, with my custom RW Textures

and - Material Naming !

 

 

 

Link to comment
  • 0

I've posted on this in a couple of other threads.  Another example of the duplicate need to maintain identical Class and Material would be a wood floor (Component) and a matching Stair tread (materials unavailable for the PIO).  If you need to modify the Material, you also have to go in and modify the Class.  Getting material takeoffs would be more complicated as well.  If anyone has a workflow that alleviates these issues, I'd like to hear about it.  Until then, I'm sticking to Classes for everything.

 

Edited by E|FA
typo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • 0
10 hours ago, E|FA said:

@Tom W. How do you deal with visibilities of objects that can accept materials (e.g. Wall Components) and those that can't (e.g. Doors) when they both are made of the same real world material (e.g. wood paneling & matching wood door)?  Do you maintain matching Classes & Materials?  Or does it not come up in your workflow?

 

For wall/slab/roof/hardscape components I am tending to use the same classes I used before, simply because they’re present already + it allows me to turn on/off the visibility of components individually should I want to. All I’ve done is transfer the way attributes are applied from by class to by Material + I find this a much easier method because once you have Materials set up for the basic building materials you use over + over again it’s very quick to select one + use it + means you’re achieving consistency across all your components whether they’re in a wall, slab, roof or hardscape. 

 

Doors/windows are slightly different because I’m not concerned with visibility in the same way: the classes are only used to apply the attributes. And those attributes are really only textures because I rarely want to see a fill in section on a door/window + never want to use a surface hatch. Plus my doors/windows are generally either painted timber or a proprietary aluminium product so I’m not concerned with specific materials in the same way I am with a wall, slab, roof or hardscape. For example I’d generally want my bespoke joinery to be constructed from sapele but I wouldn’t need that material to be present in the model as such. I’m never going to be reporting on the quantity of sapele the joiner was using or cutting a section through the door to show the sapele under the paint finish. I’d just refer to the door being of sapele construction in the data. All I’m concerned about is the colour/finish so I just have a series of jamb, sash + leaf classes in different colours/finishes plus a couple of different threshold/sill classes. It is a relatively small number of dedicated door/window classes that I have saved in my standards file + it’s very easy to switch between them when I want to change the colours of doors or windows in the file. Sure I could do the same with Materials if the option was there but I don’t feel inconvenienced or that I’m missing anything because I can’t do that at the moment. In fact I’d have to create a load of ‘Painted Sapele’ Materials which I don’t currently have any need of. I consider doors/windows to be a different order of tool which use a different order of material (small ‘m’). But I appreciate that for other people this may be different.

 

What I like about Materials is that it’s made organising + using material resources easier + more consistent. I really like the fact that I can bind a fill to a texture in a once-and-for-all manner + also that I can see at a glance in the Resource Manager whether that texture has a surface hatch applied to it (by means of the Material icon). Previously I’d have to edit a class to see what the texture applied was then find the texture + edit that to see whether it had a surface hatch applied to it + I never really felt completely on top of what I’d set up attribute-wise. Now I have 60 or so bespoke Materials set up the way I want them in Favorites that I can easily call on when I’m creating walls/slabs/roofs/hardscapes : I know that by selecting the ‘Plywood MT’ Material for example, whether it’s for a wall, slab or roof component, I’m going to be assigning the correct texture + fill to that component consistently across all my styles whereas before I had lots of different classes for the different components + had to make sure I was using the same attributes in each case (I think some people have dedicated ‘material’ classes that they use across the board but I have multiple classes using the same materials because I want to be able to control the visibility of different wall/slab/roof components individually.)

 

Plus of course the other side to Materials is the data attached to them so for example lambda only needs to be set once, in the Material, and then is automatically + consistently applied across all my wall/slab/roof components which again saves a lot of work + potential for discrepancy. And Materials also offer extra possibilities for reporting quantities. Previously I was using components to calculate material take-offs but this meant being very strict in the way components were named + counting the different components across different wall/slab/roof styles which used the same material + adding them together in the formula. Now with Materials I can just report on quantity of the Material wherever it’s used in the file. This also allows you to report on Materials applied to 3D solids which is really useful.

 

I haven’t mentioned stairs because I don’t really use them too much but yes in some cases it would probably be useful to be able to use Materials with them but I don’t think it would be a deal-breaker. The fact is there were already several different ways to apply attributes to objects + this is just one extra way. I have been quite happy mixing + matching depending on the context + in reality this is no different to lots of other aspects of VW.  

 

Lastly I think you mention class overrides in another thread. With Materials you use Data Viz to override textures instead of class overrides. Again this is just another way of doing things + if anything I find it more straightforward. Once you’ve set up a Data Viz you can save it to your user folder then it’s just a single click to apply, whether in a viewport or on the design layer. For example I frequently use @Christiaan’s trick of changing the texture on internally-visible wall components to that used on the interior wall finish to quickly ‘wrap’ the finish into door/window reveals so it looks correct in 3D rendered viewports. In multi-component walls this involved overriding several classes individually + whilst once done the first time you can obviously transfer the settings to other VPs it is still a bit of a faff to do. Now I just have a preset Data Viz that is a single click to apply each time to do the same thing. The only annoying thing is the DV legend I have to keep deleting!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
  • 0
9 hours ago, Christiaan said:

Reviewed and updated original post with those features that have been implemented.

Have you done this purely on the basis of the "normal" window & door tools or have you included features that are available in the Windoor plugin?

Link to comment
  • 0
Posted (edited)
On 3/26/2022 at 11:35 PM, line-weight said:

Have you done this purely on the basis of the "normal" window & door tools or have you included features that are available in the Windoor plugin?

Ah yes, good point, my review was purely based on the native door/window objects. WinDoor sounds like a stopgap to me as there are no plans (as I understand it) for WinDoor objects to work with Graphic Legends for instance.

Edited by Christiaan
Link to comment
  • 0

Hi @Christiaan,

thanks for this post.

2 years ago, when I first read this post, I was happy to see that I was not the only one to wait for Windows/Doors tool improvements. Today, I see that we are still here… which makes me less happy.

Your list looks like it is the most complete I’ve seen on this forum.

 

Would it be possible to add the following wanted features in your list ?

- level of insertion following the story level

- 3 and 6 panels sliding windows

- possibility to set different class / attributes for viewed jamb and sectioned jamb

- possibility to set a Rabbet X/Y for doors and windows (including sliding windows)

- materials

 

Kind regards

  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • 0
On 3/28/2022 at 11:51 AM, GatRed said:

Hi @Christiaan,

thanks for this post.

2 years ago, when I first read this post, I was happy to see that I was not the only one to wait for Windows/Doors tool improvements. Today, I see that we are still here… which makes me less happy.

Your list looks like it is the most complete I’ve seen on this forum.

 

Would it be possible to add the following wanted features in your list ?

- level of insertion following the story level

- 3 and 6 panels sliding windows

- possibility to set different class / attributes for viewed jamb and sectioned jamb

- possibility to set a Rabbet X/Y for doors and windows (including sliding windows)

- materials

 

Kind regards

You can try the WinDoor plug in, is free now, it has a ton of configuration for doors and windows, put our native window and door tool to shame

 

Link to comment
  • 0
3 hours ago, Christiaan said:

Not specifically, no, but what is it about them that the current window tool can't do? Maybe I have a more generic wish covering it?

 

I'd love to be able to use typical steel profiles "T" Shaped Glazing Bar or Muntin, The Sash and the Frame so that when sectioning the profiles are correct.  Coming to think of it, when I do wood windows I don't even get the ogee profiles of typical wood windows... so maybe Im reaching too far. 🙂

 

image.png.f8437b069d0017325e4e45f5a27aef7c.pngimage.thumb.png.26155c7500174e123b8e5d4d46ac24d6.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • 0
16 minutes ago, blanger said:

 @Andy Broomell Dream Crusher! I started to investigate windoor but that doesn't seem to have it either. Would you recommend building the whole thing and sectioning, or building with window tool and then drawing sections in 2D?

 

While it depends on the show, I'd probably model the whole thing in detail (which honestly isn't too complex when everything is rectilinear) and, if useful, possibly save it as a custom symbol with a Wall Hole component.

 

Or, if short on time I might choose to model a simpler version where I essentially extrude the "silhouette" of the elevation, so the muntins are the correct width and layout but end up just being rectangular instead of real profiles.

 

Sometimes I take the Window object (which I had started with for general size and proportion), and set it to Opening or Cased Opening, then just add my custom geometry within that opening. And perhaps make that geometry an Auto-hybrid for the plan representation.

 

If I modeled in detail, then the Design Layer model can be used for plan, elevation, & 3D views. But for my FSDs I often choose to go 2D-only since you have much better control over attributes (and I care about aesthetics!) So for any of these 'hand-drawn' details I'll go to a Sheet Layer, make an 'empty' viewport, then draw or paste in profiles. When all linework is 2D it's also easier to move things around, use the Reshape Tool, compress things, add break lines, knock down edges, etc.

 

BTW I might start with a Section Viewport of the 3D model as a placeholder since I've already figured out the geometry there, then eventually replace it or Annotate on top of it with 2D profiles.

 

It's all a nuanced process that I adjust and adapt for each set piece depending on what's best in the moment (and perhaps my mood?). Hope this helps.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
  • 0
4 hours ago, Andy Broomell said:

 

While it depends on the show, I'd probably model the whole thing in detail (which honestly isn't too complex when everything is rectilinear) and, if useful, possibly save it as a custom symbol with a Wall Hole component.

 

Or, if short on time I might choose to model a simpler version where I essentially extrude the "silhouette" of the elevation, so the muntins are the correct width and layout but end up just being rectangular instead of real profiles.

 

Sometimes I take the Window object (which I had started with for general size and proportion), and set it to Opening or Cased Opening, then just add my custom geometry within that opening. And perhaps make that geometry an Auto-hybrid for the plan representation.

 

If I modeled in detail, then the Design Layer model can be used for plan, elevation, & 3D views. But for my FSDs I often choose to go 2D-only since you have much better control over attributes (and I care about aesthetics!) So for any of these 'hand-drawn' details I'll go to a Sheet Layer, make an 'empty' viewport, then draw or paste in profiles. When all linework is 2D it's also easier to move things around, use the Reshape Tool, compress things, add break lines, knock down edges, etc.

 

BTW I might start with a Section Viewport of the 3D model as a placeholder since I've already figured out the geometry there, then eventually replace it or Annotate on top of it with 2D profiles.

 

It's all a nuanced process that I adjust and adapt for each set piece depending on what's best in the moment (and perhaps my mood?). Hope this helps.


What helps the most is knowing that you flow with different processes depending on time and situation. That in and off itself makes me feel better! I've done most of not all of the above methods and have been switching between them.  Lately, in some fsds, I've even been turning off all layers after using the model section as a baseline to annotate over, seems like you do the same.

 

Inspired by your door tutorial I just made my first few symbols to place in walls. I love it! Thank you!!!!

Link to comment

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.

×
×
  • Create New...