hollister design Studio Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 This is a question I repeatedly ask myself as I'm setting up a new project. I tend to use: Slabs for pavers and flat concrete and wood decks Hardscape objects for DG or Peastone areas. Landscape areas for anything with any kind of slope. But I'm starting to think I'm to hung up on the tool 'names' and should be thinking more about the usage. Doing a little deep diving into the forums, I saw that @Scott Lebsack mentioned in another thread "...the tool could be called "Surface Area" tool because it does so well defining an area on a site model surface regardless of what that area is defining..." I remember a video that @Tamsin Slatter did where she mentioned how she loved using LA's for many things that weren't planting beds - I couldn't find the video for a real quote - I think it was about complexly graded driveways... Just wondering what people are using for various hardscape objects for ease of drawing, data collection, data tagging etc... Quote Link to comment
hollister design Studio Posted June 22, 2022 Author Share Posted June 22, 2022 ...then the next question is should LA's all be 'by style' instead of by instance. ...And then should Styles be 'by class' or specific to the style requirements. ...it really is turtles all the way down. Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee Scott Lebsack Posted June 22, 2022 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted June 22, 2022 The use of landscape areas for "hardscapes" is something I picked up from our Marketing and training folks. The Landscape Area tool has some features that would be helpful for hardscapes, it is able to "excavate" a surface model to provide a more accurate cut/fill volume, my understanding is that this is necessary for BIM workflows. It also allows a user to grade the site model directly to finish grades, and have the "hardscapes" match the grades, rather than trying to grade the site model and hardscape separately and keep them consistent as a design evolves, or use hardscapes to grade a site model. It's nice to have hardscapes separate from the grading of the site model. In general I try to keep items by style if they effect material takeoffs - volumes/thickness/types anything annotative can by by instance. That way if I change the physical characteristics of my style everything updates. I do the same with plants, if it should be a different line in the schedule it should be a different style. I haven't completed any production work in the past 8 mo., but while I was in a design office I was convinced attributes by class was the only way to work - in content development with Vectorworks, we never use class attributes, I would have to go back to production to try it by instance to know... 4 Quote Link to comment
Popular Post Anders Blomberg Posted June 23, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted June 23, 2022 For me, I've found landscape areas to be the best tool for all areas outdoor. I rarely have completely flat areas outdoors to allow for water runoff and landscape areas combined with geometry adjusting the site in the Site-DTM-modifer class is the best solution I've resorted to so far though. When modelling a graded surface I typically don't want to grade "per surface" but rather have the slopes flow continually over multiple surface types and grading the site and draping it with LA's allows for this. I would love to see/hear more of how others work regarding this though. I try to use styles and classes for everything I do to allow for quick changes of multiple objects whenever possible. One of the benefits of VW as I see it. 6 Quote Link to comment
bob cleaver Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Thank you all for sharing So site modifiers are used for finished grading ?? use proposed contours and stake objects to modify the site model and then use landscape areas to 'fit' onto the site model ?? This approach sounds easier than manipulating hardscape slopes ?? Quote Link to comment
Popular Post Benson Shaw Posted June 29, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted June 29, 2022 I have explored Landscape areas with components recently. My test terrain is burning! I really prefer using LA in many situations, especially if the perimeter is curved and/or the surface shape is twisted. To paraphrase Douglas Adams narrator in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Landscape areas are almost, but not quite, entirely unlike Site Modifiers. For example, the LA with component(s) excavates the terrain if the datum is set to Top of the component stack. But if such an LA is then hidden to reveal the excavation, the contours do not flow into the hole. Instead, they float at the implied terrain surface. If there is some desire to show the contours bending into the excavation, then apply site modifiers as needed to sculpt the terrain and place the LA at bottom of the excavation and set the datum to Bottom of the stack. Either way works fine. Which is to say that strategy is in play for many aspects of LA application rather than hard workflow rules. Classing of the components, the container LA, any site mods, etc needs focus to achieve the desired outcome. -B 7 Quote Link to comment
bob cleaver Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 Thank you Benson for the clarifications - you always provide incredibly clear examples It seems LA works well if the site model has the correct finish grades - TBD 2 Quote Link to comment
Benson Shaw Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 A bit of mystery to me: Creation of the 1st LA in a file containing a Terrain automatically spawns the new class Site>Landscape Area>Spec. 1. Does it have special properties? eg something similar to effects of Site>DTM> Modifier on 3d polys and NURBS curves? 2. What is intent and common use case for this class? eg assign to component materials? 3. What is abbreviation? Specification? Special? So many options! -B Quote Link to comment
Tom W. Posted June 30, 2022 Share Posted June 30, 2022 This class controls the visibility + appearance of the LA tag. Similarly Hardscapes generate the 'Site-Hardscape Comp-Spec' class for their tags. Stair objects also auto-create a couple of '-Spec' classes too for the walk line + headroom outline. 4 Quote Link to comment
Benson Shaw Posted July 10, 2022 Share Posted July 10, 2022 Another consideration for use of Landscape areas instead of slabs or hardscapes. I believe they need to be present on same layer as the site model and located within the extents of the terrain to conform to the terrain. Move the LA away from the terrain, or place on another layer, and the LA reverts to a flattened volume, at Datum height, on the layer plane. Not necessarily a problem, because visibility can be controlled by class of the LA and/or the LA components. But it is different from true site modifiers which can be isolated on separate layers. If there is need to work with the volume shaped by the terrain, then some conversion to solid geometry is necessary. Again, not a failing of vwx, but needs some forethought and strategy. eg. Work with a Duplicate LA. Convert to Group or Ungroup. Result is a Mesh and a group containing the 3d poly perimeter of the LA. -B 1 Quote Link to comment
Popular Post Jeff Prince Posted July 10, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted July 10, 2022 2 hours ago, Benson Shaw said: I believe they need to be present on same layer as the site model and located within the extents of the terrain to conform to the terrain. Move the LA away from the terrain, or place on another layer, and the LA reverts to a flattened volume, at Datum height, on the layer plane. That does not seem to be the case or follow the Site Model logic of the past. If you put your LA on a separate design layer, all you have to do is to tell your site model to listen to the appropriate DL to get the intended results. I could be wrong, but I just tested this workflow for the first time a few minutes ago and got it to work, see attached 🙂 It's getting pretty fatiguing trying to keep up with all of these changes to the workflows with so little information available on how to implement them in a practical way. LA Sitmodel test - separte DLs.vwx 5 Quote Link to comment
bob cleaver Posted July 10, 2022 Share Posted July 10, 2022 Benson is correct - it is challenging to have LAs be an asset on a site model and use LAs on other layers - Jeff, thank you for the file it is a great resource - 3 Quote Link to comment
Benson Shaw Posted July 11, 2022 Share Posted July 11, 2022 (edited) Thanks, once again, @jeff prince! I stand corrected and hope my claim was not misleading to anyone. In my defense - Doh! I sent my LA from DTM layer to an empty layer which was previously designated to modify the DTM via the Select Layers option. Then I changed name of that layer to indicate the LA. Then I tested and found the LA did not modify the DTM. Problem was the new name caused the DTM settings to uncheck that layer in the modifying list. Strangely, the layer name updated in the modifying list, but the designation automatically unchecked. It tripped me up, but I can't decide if this is a problem or a benefit? Seems a little inconsistent. -B Edited July 11, 2022 by Benson Shaw just dropped in for a visit 3 Quote Link to comment
Popular Post Jeff Prince Posted July 11, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted July 11, 2022 @Benson Shawno worries, thanks to you guys for having the conversation, it motivated me to test the workflow out. That’s the nice thing about the forum, a virtual office where we all keep pushing each other forward 🙂 5 1 Quote Link to comment
therorhodion Posted July 13, 2022 Share Posted July 13, 2022 Hey can someone please change this file to 2021 version? Sorry its kinda urgent - I'll delete this message afterwards. ABC.vwx Quote Link to comment
therorhodion Posted July 13, 2022 Share Posted July 13, 2022 Never mind, someone helped me out. Sorry for going off topic. Maybe a moderator can delete my previous comment! Quote Link to comment
hollister design Studio Posted July 13, 2022 Author Share Posted July 13, 2022 Going back through some of these comments and I was struck by this. On 6/23/2022 at 1:03 AM, Anders Blomberg said: ...landscape areas combined with geometry adjusting the site in the Site-DTM-modifer class is the best solution I've resorted to so far... Since I first posted this I've "refined" my workflow to use hardscapes for anything with a specific grade - whether flat or sloped- and using the "aligned surfaces" (with "selected layers" but with no layers checked) and then using "edit surface modifiers" and stakes and grades inside the hardscape surface modifier editing space. Your process simplifies this by keeping all the surface modifiers in one place and as DTM modifiers. This is a bit brilliant! I realized I was using DTM modifiers AND hardscape surface modifiers and having to remember what was doing what and where... Plus the whole hardscape surface modifier editing space is just awkward and seemed to crash VW more often than not.... I will be giving this a shot on my next project! 4 Quote Link to comment
Amanda McDermott Posted July 15, 2022 Share Posted July 15, 2022 On 7/11/2022 at 8:24 PM, jeff prince said: @Benson Shawno worries, thanks to you guys for having the conversation, it motivated me to test the workflow out. That’s the nice thing about the forum, a virtual office where we all keep pushing each other forward 🙂 Hear hear - I'm not currently working on anything that needs this, but watching the conversation with interest for future ref, thanks all for sharing your experiences and learnings! 3 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.