Jump to content

STAIR visibility issue on Upper Layer floor plan viewport (HSVP)


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Matt Panzer said:
4 hours ago, line-weight said:

This is an example of why Horizontal Sections are the sensible way forward, not Top/Plan 👍

 

I agree.

 

For Architecture I am sure you two are correct.  But please don't assume that your usage is the same as everyone else's. For Entertainment/Lighting and Landscape, the ability to have total different looking Top/Plan vs. Top  or Horizontal Section symbols is critical.

 

VW is used in many ways. If there is something that you don't need, then don't use it.  But don't assume that since you don't use it it is useless and should be removed.

 

My $0.02

  • Like 3
Link to comment
  • Vectorworks, Inc Employee
27 minutes ago, Pat Stanford said:

For Architecture I am sure you two are correct.  But please don't assume that your usage is the same as everyone else's. For Entertainment/Lighting and Landscape, the ability to have total different looking Top/Plan vs. Top  or Horizontal Section symbols is critical.

 

VW is used in many ways. If there is something that you don't need, then don't use it.  But don't assume that since you don't use it it is useless and should be removed.

 

My $0.02


Absolutely!  There will always be uses for Top/Plan.  It’s not going anywhere anytime soon (if ever). 🙂

Link to comment

I know you know this @Matt Panzer. But I have fought this battle with too many end users who want VW to be tailored to their use and only their use with no consideration of who else uses the program or how it is used.

 

Cutting off their noses to spite their faces. If you took away a feature that was critical to 10% of the user base that would impact the fund available for development of all aspects of the program.

 

I know I am on my high horse. But this is one of the windmills I will always tilt at. (You want to be Sancho Panza?)

 

Pat

Link to comment

As I understand it, the way horizontal sections are being developed, the idea is that you can choose pretty much on an object by object basis whether it is shown in a true sectional/elevational way or in a 2d symbolic way as per top/plan.

 

I'm not asking for top/plan to be done away with but maybe we will get to the point where a horizontal section can be idistinguishable from a top/plan view if you want it to be.

 

 

Link to comment

@line-weight, I apologize if I implied you were suggesting to take it away. I did not read your post that way. But I have had numerous people over the years directly tell me that they never use Top/Plan so that means that no one does and that VW is stupid to have it and it should be removed immediately.  Summarization of longer conversation, but an accurate description of their opinion.

 

I read almost everything that get's posted to the board. I run the Los Angeles Users Group consisting of mainly architects, Set Designers, and Entertainment people. I personally am an engineer doing industrial water treatment equipment. So I see at lot more use cases for VW than others do.

 

I just get touchy when people start talking about things that are used in ways other than what is in their experience.

 

Always glad to have the conversation and as long as there is a version of "Top/Plan Symbol Capabilities"™ that is no harder to use than the existing Top/Plan, I have no issue with progress.  I am a curmudgeon not a luddite. 😉

 

Link to comment
  • Vectorworks, Inc Employee

Right. The ideal is to get horizontal sections with the same graphic fidelity and live editing of them with the same ease and performance as Top/Plan.  The closer we get to that, the more realistic it is to use them instead for creating floor plans.

 

Pat, we have fought battles about trying to take things away but, in most cases, this is to trim out legacy features and workflows that overly complicate the the software, take resources to maintain, and hold us up for moving our technology forward.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Matt Panzer said:

Pat, we have fought battles about trying to take things away but, in most cases, this is to trim out legacy features and workflows that overly complicate the the software, take resources to maintain, and hold us up for moving our technology forward.

And I am OK with that. A change that effects 1% while letting the program move forward is a wise decision.

 

A change that destroys the workflow of 10% without providing an alternative is a foolish mistake.

 

I have yet to see VW make a foolish mistake. At least in hindsight.  There might have been a few that were questionable when first rolled out. 😉

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
12 hours ago, Pat Stanford said:

For Architecture I am sure you two are correct.  But please don't assume that your usage is the same as everyone else's. For Entertainment/Lighting and Landscape, the ability to have total different looking Top/Plan vs. Top  or Horizontal Section symbols is critical.

 

Not only Landmark and Spotlight ....

Architects also profit from current Top Plan features.

 

That is why I tried to explain that these features need to come over and enrich Horizontal Sections.

So Horizontal Sections should be capable of doing all.

As Top Plan is very limited in z depth understanding, which is why people use more and more

real Sections for top plans, I though it is more promising to bring Top Plan Features into Sections

than vice versa.

 

And I liked the idea of a Autohybrid like approach to bring controlled and attractive 2D representation

into Horizontal Sections.

(Currently the Autohybrid brings Section Z Features into Top Plan only)

 

 

And if at one point true Sections can als do all Top Plan illustration features ....

no matter if Planting, Spotlight, or Appartment presentation plans,

if finally Top Plan View has to die - or has to be kept as a simpler and faster option

for 2.5D Illustrations - isn't important for me ....

 

 

But of course I have no clue from software development and what I said may not make

technically or even functionally any sense ....

Link to comment

FYI

 

The Hybrid 2D/3D Symbol and classic VectorWorks Top/Plan View (as it already looks rendered...) are key to ours and many many other work flows. We produce sets of PDF designs for clients with ONLY Top/Plan as the Exported / Published / Printed view. Producing excellent, multi view Class based rendered 3D designs is amazingly simple without the need for a single Viewport . Top/Plan - Hybrid 2D/3D Symbol is a hallmark of VectorWorks and few other applications that I am aware of. That said...

 

Since Viewports arrived in VectorWorks, we have come to the conclusion that asking Tech Support WHY this or that Viewport glitch happens, or searching the FORUM for clues is fruitless. Resorting to adding inside the Viewport annotations, or even just on top of the Viewport in the Sheet Layer... lines, covering polygons, weird crops, even images to replace what is not rendering or displayed correctly.  Get the job out the door is the important part as we assume that fixing the application may not happen for a while, if ever.

 

As @Matt Panzer says ... My $0.02

 

Peter

 

Link to comment

Hmmh, I also use mainly VW Top Plan View for my top plans.

 

But to finally save or publish them, I always use Sheet Layer Viewports.

Like I do for real Sections or Renderings.

 

Even if I would prefer annotations of Section Viewports being done in Design Layer,

I would finally create an overall Sheet Layer Viewport of it.

Link to comment
On 9/18/2023 at 12:50 PM, Matt Panzer said:

 

The only thing you can do in Top/Plan is to adjust the stacking order of the stair and slab (using "Send to Back", etc).  If you keep slabs on a separate design layer, you could move your stair objects to that layer as well.  This will allow you to better control the stacking order between these objects

Thank you for the reply

I am not quite sure how this can be achieved (ie ground floor stair object and second floor slab be on same layer?)if the stair is on Storey-1 layer and the slab is on Storey-2 layer? or am I missing something

It seems the workaround you provided ( changing location (Z) of the stair object in the viewport to hide steps below slab) ) only works with horizontal viewport sections , no Top/Plan

I read the users comments and I would like to know what are the pros and cons of opting for Top/Plan vs Horiz. viewport section when generating floor plan drawings.

I can start by :

Top/Plan cons:

-Stair underneath slab will be visible.

-

-

Horiz. section viewport pros:

-Stair underneath slab will be hidden (yeah!!)

-

-

 

Please feel free to add .

Cheers

 

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, Archistyles said:

Top/Plan cons:

-Stair underneath slab will be visible.

 

I don't really understand this. Can't you just send the second floor Stair graphic to back so that it is displayed behind the second floor Slab in Top/Plan? Like Matt says.

 

So you have the Stair object itself on the first floor layer + in the Stair settings you tell it to display the upper floor graphic on the second floor layer along with the second floor Slab, then just make sure the Slab is in front of the Stair graphic. When you turn off the second floor layer you just see the 'cut graphic' for the Stair on the first floor layer.

Link to comment
  • Vectorworks, Inc Employee
37 minutes ago, Archistyles said:

I am not quite sure how this can be achieved (ie ground floor stair object and second floor slab be on same layer?)if the stair is on Storey-1 layer and the slab is on Storey-2 layer? or am I missing something

 

As @Tom W. describes:

11 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

So you have the Stair object itself on the first floor layer + in the Stair settings you tell it to display the upper floor graphic on the second floor layer along with the second floor Slab, then just make sure the Slab is in front of the Stair graphic. When you turn off the second floor layer you just see the 'cut graphic' for the Stair on the first floor layer.

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Tom W. said:

 

I don't really understand this. Can't you just send the second floor Stair graphic to back so that it is displayed behind the second floor Slab in Top/Plan? Like Matt says.

 

So you have the Stair object itself on the first floor layer + in the Stair settings you tell it to display the upper floor graphic on the second floor layer along with the second floor Slab, then just make sure the Slab is in front of the Stair graphic. When you turn off the second floor layer you just see the 'cut graphic' for the Stair on the first floor layer.

I got it.

in the stair setting , I switched the top graphics from floor-2 layout layer to floor-2 slab layer.

Thanks Tom W & Matt Panzer for your help.

 

So  in summary there is no pros or cons of using Top/Plan vs horizontal viewport section for floor plans drawings?

 

Another question : what is the trick to show building components on floors below ( eg columns ) and floors above ( eg balcony projections )

Thanks again 

Edited by Archistyles
Link to comment
13 hours ago, Archistyles said:

So  in summary there is no pros or cons of using Top/Plan vs horizontal viewport section for floor plans drawings?

 

I personally always use Top/Plan for my architectural drawings + have never had any problems displaying everything I've ever wanted to display. I really like the way it works. For this reason I've never had a reason to try Horizontal Section VPs. But others will no doubt have something to say on it.

 

13 hours ago, Archistyles said:

Another question : what is the trick to show building components on floors below ( eg columns ) and floors above ( eg balcony projections )

 

You can achieve most things with a combination of class/layer visibilities, layer stacking order, class overrides + Data Vis.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
14 hours ago, Archistyles said:

So  in summary there is no pros or cons of using Top/Plan vs horizontal viewport section for floor plans drawings?

 

Well, one of the pros of horizontal sections is that you don't need to do stuff like this messing around with stacking order. If the slab is above the stairs in 3d space, that's how it gets drawn.

 

At least for architecture, I think horizontal sections start working better once you want to build a lot of stuff that can't be made from the standard VW tools and also if you want to build a quite detailed model. Also, the benefits perhaps increase with multi-level buildings.

 

Just like you don't have to fiddle around with stacking order, you don't have to be constantly working out whether certain elements need to be made into auto-hybrids and so on. For the most part you build the model in the way that makes sense in 3d - you don't have to have a parallel thought process of "how is this going to come out in top/plan".

 

Trying to make a list of the pros and cons of each would be a complicated task because it really depends what kind of things you want to draw and what you want to get out of your model. But when I started out on the "horizontal section" approach the list of cons was longer than it is now.

  • Like 2
Link to comment

Hey All.

 

What an interesting convo. We always use the Hz (Clip cube) generated section to display upper floors where the roof cuts in (middle diagram) but I had never considered Hz sections for displaying lower floors and have always used Top plan viewports. Must have a play around with this. I suppose the question is as has been discussed how to display the stair layouts in a trad Architectural stylee as diagram right. Are there any videos on this @Matt Panzer  ? And yes before you ask, this was another very tricky survey being multi level on 2 floors!

 

Cheers

 

D

 

image.thumb.png.235b0496f217707deb199a8a3be788ca.png

Link to comment

@David S that type of house is very familiar to me and the sort of thing I'm also often working on.

 

How do you build your stairs at the moment? Because I generally give up on trying to do these types of stairs with the stair tool and model them from scratch using solid modelling. The stair tool can't do stuff like curved/projecting bottom steps, or represent railings and banisters accurately. Because I model at a fairly close level of detail, I need them to be modelled fairly accurately so that they are correct when seen in things like internal elevations.

 

Using a Hz section VP lets me cut the actual geometry of the stairs and show things like those special-shaped bottom steps exactly as they are. Of course, what it doesn't do, is automatically cut the stairs using graphic conventions such as the zig-zag break line (or add the up-arrows). My approach here is mostly just to accept this limitation, and have my floorplans show a straight cut line. Or I will draw something on top in the annotations layer.

 

I think that there is a way to make my custom-modelled stairs into a symbol, then create a "2d plan" component of that symbol (which can be based on the actual geometry but use whatever graphic conventions I want) and then tell the Hz section viewport to show this 2d component of the stair instead of a section through its 3d geometry. This is something on my list to explore further and make more use of. But, so far, I've judged my current approach (fudge it slightly in annotations space) as fairly workable. As with most things it'll come down to what saves most time in practice. For example, if I change the geometry of the stairs, do I then need to go and edit the 2d component of my symbol, and how long does this take compared to nudging a few lines in the annotation layer of a viewport? The answer will be different for different use cases, depending on things like how many Hz viewports that stair appears in.

Link to comment

@line-weight Gosh! Well if you are familiar, you will know stair accuracy/heights is really important for e.g. loft conversions to comply with building regs. I am a master-Vectorfudger! I gave up on the complicated stair tool a long time ago after a short and painful dalliance and reverted to the simple stair tool, which is what I use. Never had a problem with it. To compensate for its limitations I built my own ballustrades and Newel posts from extrudes and take great pleasure from applying them manually. Where there are more complicated 1st treads I also use manipulated floors. Winders the same.

 

We hang our stairs from the upper floor downward. 

 

I might have a play around with this Hz cut, this afternoon...Business in the UK a bit tight currently due to projects being on hold. Suspect the interest rates are not helping!

 

I also only downloaded 2023 to play around with the windoor tool (couldnt even work out how to add architraves) but also found it to be hugely complicated and quickly reverted to the native tools, and am still on 2021. I might also check out Jonathan Reeves 2024 video this afternoon.

 

HtH. Cheers D

Link to comment

Really there's just this

 

https://app-help.vectorworks.net/2024/eng/VW2024_Guide/Viewports1/Creating_a_horizontal_section_viewport.htm

 

It's all rather unclear about the difference between what the help documentation calls "vertical section viewports" and "horizontal section viewports".

 

https://app-help.vectorworks.net/2024/eng/VW2024_Guide/Viewports1/Creating_section_viewports.htm

 

Neither of them are actually called that in their OIPs - they both just appear as "section viewports" and the only way you can tell them apart is by looking at what options are available in the OIP: the Horizontal section viewport OIP lets you specify the cut plane by Z value. This invisible difference caused me some confusion in the past.

 

Furhermore, what the help documentation calls a "vertical section viewport" (but what I just call a "section viewport") isn't limited to being vertical - it can be horizontal or at any angle you like, if you want (for example, I'll sometimes create a section through a pitched roof build-up, perpendicular to the plane of the pitched roof, so that I can directly dimension the thickness of the materials involved).

 

@Matt Panzer can correct me if any of that is wrong.

 

Perhaps we should have a dedicated "secrets of the horizontal section viewport" thread for those of us who use it in spite of it being kept somewhat under wraps?

Edited by line-weight
  • Like 1
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
Reply to this topic...

×   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...