Sharing my VisualARQ & Grasshopper stuff

[keithscadservices]

I mentioned in other posts that I had been working on a template. It’s really not much but might be useful. The completion date for that project is for now indefinite. I expected to put a bit of time into it over the holidays but that project just petered out for a few reasons. I might put this on hold until I get into Rhino 8 so that I can adapt it to the new features available.

What I’m hoping to achieve by posting this? Well… this stuff will just sit on my hard drive collecting dust, so I figure there’s no harm in posting it. When I started this project, I was hoping to gather momentum towards building a Visual ARQ community and creating a strong starting point for potential users. It takes a monumental amount of time to create a template where things look and act the way you want (and/or conform to conventional drawing standards). For many this is game over, they simply don’t have the time, but making a very useable template that would also offer a great starting point for custom templates, it would more or less eliminate maybe the biggest barrier to entry for many potential users. More users = bigger community = more content and help available; I preach that Revit’s success is more due to the large community rather than the merits of the program itself. I would resume this project (or help someone else) if enough people are interested. But for now this is on the back shelve.

Buyer be warned you get what you pay for. I can’t guarantee the VisualARQ styles and grasshopper definitions will work as intended all the time. They work pretty good with limited testing.

The two main win’s are the successes I’ve had with creating complex wall styles and windows that look good (at least for what I was aiming for) in sections:

The window and door definitions might be messy compared to an expert level GH programmers standards, but they work pretty good and at the very least serve as a good demo. The grasshopper definitions also contain bare frames. It takes so long to create any unique geometry (for example, a paneled door complete with handle) that one approach I was pondering was simply to use the vaWall and vaWindows to cut holes in the walls, then fill them with ordinary 3D geometry.

kCs-Door-BaseDefinition.gh (26.8 KB)
kCs-Window-BaseDefinition.gh (25.0 KB)
kCs-Window-Double Sash.gh (42.9 KB)
kCs-Window-Sliding.gh (31.8 KB)

The file itself is a bit of a mess, made worse by me messing with it to get it under the 20MB limit. Don’t pay too much attention to the contents. It’s really just a vehicle for the Visual ARQ definitions created from the above GH definitions, along with the various other vaStyles I’ve created.

kCs - VARQ and GH stuff.3dm (15.0 MB)

[fsalla (Francesc Salla)]

@keithscadservices That’s an awesome stuff! thanks for sharing it!
I encourage you to publish these VisualARQ styles in food4Rhino, so more people can find them out.

VA Styles in Food4Rhino

[keithscadservices]

Maybe I’ll go ahead and do that on the weekend. Cheers and thanks for the suggestion!!

[Clayton_Muhleman]

Keith, just wanted to thank you for sharing your template files. Seeing how other offices use VA is incredibly useful, fantastic work!

[keithscadservices]

Admission and disclaimer: I don’t use VA in an office environment and never completed an actual project . That was the intent of course and it’s a project I’ll hopefully be able to resume in the future .

[Clayton_Muhleman]

Hey @keithscadservices, I’ve been diving into your templates to learn from the techniques you’ve developed. First off, once again fantastic stuff, thanks so much for sharing! Your window style alone has saved us weeks of work.

I wanted to ask why you chose to use a 2D view for annotation and a 3D view for geometry instead of putting your annotation in layout space ontop 3D view details. We’re putting annotation in layout space ontop of 3D geometry details to avoid having to line up two different details and export/update which seems to work, but seeing how clean your drawings are makes me want to ask why you set your layouts up this way.

Thanks again and keep up the good work!

[keithscadservices]

Hi Clayton.

Thrilled to hear that you’re using those definitions! It makes me want to get back into creating this stuff. At the moment I’m taking a break from VARQ as I realized that I need a stronger understanding of Rhino’s fundamentals. I started using VARQ so early on that I never even realized certain features were specific to VARQ.

Regarding annotating the 2D view in model space, don’t pay too much attention to it. I’ve had bad experiences annotating in Layout Space in AutoCAD and have preferred to simply avoid it. But now that I’m actually testing out Rhino’s annotations I realize that they work pretty okay in Layout Space.

I may however still annotate the old way. VARQ’s section/plan views include titles and such. If it comes down to it, I would rather all the annotations either be in model or layout but not both. For me, having the 2d stuff in model space is pretty alright. But we’ll see (I’m puttering around with everything as we speak).

Layering plan views: This is a technique I learnt during my brief foray into Sketchup. you get the best of both worlds when you can’t decide between one view style or another. One benefit is vector output (I believe the “Hidden” style does this but not the others). Having one “Detail View” (which is effectively a “Viewport” for us AutoCAD users) with your shaded visual style, and then one for the VARQ 2D plan/section view with a display mode that supports vectors. Such a combo should, in theory, produce a combined vector/raster output (I just tried it out using BlueBeam’s virtual printer and I think it’s working, but I need to test it more).

Also, for what it’s worth I realize that the 3dm file I’ve attached is a mess. I deleted the basement for whatever reason so the layout example is pooched :-S . Maybe I’ll throw something cool together in the near future.

[Fabsye (Fabrice)]

Hi Keith,
Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts and the work you’ve done so far, it’s genuinely appreciated! I’d really encourage you to consider revisiting the project now, especially with the release of VisualARQ 3.5. There have been some excellent improvements, and your vision for a well-crafted, accessible template could be even more achievable with the latest tools at hand.
Your idea of reducing the barrier to entry for new users is spot on, community is everything. VisualARQ needs exactly this kind of initiative to grow and thrive. We need more amazing guys like you!

[user2745 (Sven)]

It would be great to have a ‘Marketplace’ web side where users can share their VisualARQ content!
Grasshopper Definitions, Styles, Layouts, Titleblocks, Blocks, Display Modes …

[Fabsye (Fabrice)]

Absolutely Sven, I completely agree with your idea, it would be fantastic to have a community-driven platform or sharing hub where VisualARQ users can freely exchange VisualARQ content like Grasshopper definitions, styles, layouts, title blocks, blocks, display modes, projects, templates and more. It would not only build community but also help us all grow and innovate faster.
But first, I believe we really need to focus on saving VisualARQ from becoming completely obsolete. With “Rhino Inside Revit” gaining huge traction, there’s a risk that VisualARQ could get overshadowed if it doesn’t evolve into a more flexible, fully-fledged BIM platform within Rhino itself. VisualARQ still has so much potential, especially for those of us who love Rhino’s freedom and want to stay inside that ecosystem.
Let’s hope the developers take bold steps in that direction soon, there’s a real opportunity to keep VisualARQ alive, growing, and truly indispensable.

[keithscadservices]

@Fabsye

I’d really encourage you to consider revisiting the project now, especially with the release of VisualARQ 3.5

Thanks for all your feedback! I’m still struggling with out-of-the-box R8 unfortunately lol! I’m hoping that anything I can create can just be used in conjunction with VARQ rather than being based off of it.

@user2745

It would be great to have a ‘Marketplace’ web side where users can share their VisualARQ content!

Food4Rhino.com - It doesn’t get a lot of usage and there just isn’t a lot of models on there. My biggest hurdle when trying to incorporate Rhino into actual paid work was not having models within reach. My work gravitated towards jobs where that’s less of an issue. It still slows me down and I don’t bill if I have to model something like a microwave that I’ll use in future jobs. Most modern programs have a built-in dialog of some sort where you can actually browse models complete with previews.. Blender does.

https://www.food4rhino.com/en/resource/kit-house-02?lang=en

@Fabsye

But first, I believe we really need to focus on saving VisualARQ from becoming completely obsolete. With “Rhino Inside Revit” gaining huge traction, there’s a risk that VisualARQ could get overshadowed if it doesn’t evolve into a more flexible, fully-fledged BIM platform within Rhino itself

VARQ will have at least a niche following for years to come. The fact that they use Rhino in Revit (along with VARQ) in a program that costs like $2,500? per year says a lot. Asuni also has a couple other projects that look really good.
The thing that surprises me with them is that they don’t use the existing capabilities of the program to give users a better starting space. My window definition above - it works (last I checked in R7 a couple years ago :-S ) but the GH definition could be way cleaner. It fixes a lot of the issues with the way the windows sit in VARQ walls. Someone at VARQ has made a door frame that does similar. But most the windows by default cut the walls in an undesirable way.

[Fabsye (Fabrice)]

Hi Keith, I really felt your comments. They echo so much of our own experience. Rhino and VisualARQ are without question amazing tools with immense potential, and yet at times they can be incredibly frustrating too. It feels like the essentials we need most, solid architectural workflows, polished templates, and truly usable automation, are quite often just out of reach.
We often find ourselves guessing, endlessly researching, and stitching together workarounds just to handle basic daily tasks. Everyone seems focused on modelling, but architecture requires much more: a seamless connection between design, documentation, and automation. Tasks like setting up stairs or paneling in Grasshopper, integrating layouts, or managing a complete architectural set should be ready to use, or at least clearly guided. Instead, we’re often pushed back to clunky tools like AutoCAD, which is disheartening given what Rhino could offer.

Grasshopper’s success came from the energy of its community. People shared, improved, and inspired one another. Even McNeel admitted they were surprised by how widely Grasshopper was adopted. (Check out this interview with Scott Davidson on the story of Rhino/GH):

176: ‘The Rhinoceros Story’, with Scott Davidson

Grasshopper is becoming the standard over Dynamo in the Revit world because of that grassroots momentum. So why not bring that same community-driven spirit to VisualARQ?

We hope one day they’ll understand this, hopefully before the passion fades and users start to drift away. We’ve started using VisualARQ’s project management tools recently and we’re genuinely enjoying it. But there’s still so much untapped potential.

It’s all hands on deck now. We need a thriving, open community sharing files, templates, and ideas. ‘Food4Rhino’ feels too centralized and unintuitive, unlike the old Grasshopper3D.com site, which really ignited a global community. That’s how workflows grow, and how VisualARQ can truly shine.

[Fabsye (Fabrice)]

@keithscadservices

VARQ will have at least a niche following for years to come. The fact that they use Rhino in Revit (along with VARQ) in a program that costs like $2,500? per year says a lot. Asuni also has a couple other projects that look really good.
The thing that surprises me with them is that they don’t use the existing capabilities of the program to give users a better starting space. My window definition above - it works (last I checked in R7 a couple years ago :-S ) but the GH definition could be way cleaner. It fixes a lot of the issues with the way the windows sit in VARQ walls. Someone at VARQ has made a door frame that does similar. But most the windows by default cut the walls in an undesirable way

Hi Keith, We wanted to share an observation and offer some honest feedback from our experience. We’re part of the How to Rhino community (How to Rhino), and it’s been disappointing to see that all VisualARQ-related content has been removed and replaced almost entirely with Rhino.Inside.Revit. We’ve noticed a similar trend on Parametric House (https://parametrichouse.com/), where VisualARQ is now rarely mentioned. When people begin to move away from a tool, it’s often not a good sign, and we say this with concern, not criticism.
We regularly use VisualARQ and genuinely believe in its potential as a native Rhino-based BIM solution. But let’s be honest, it’s not for the faint-hearted. Time is money, and while the interface may seem intuitive at first, working with more complex geometry quickly reveals frustrating limitations. At that point, reverting to basic curve modelling becomes the only viable options.
It often feels like a process of trial, patience, and perseverance. Add to that the ongoing bugs, well documented in the forums, and the continued limitation to IFC 2x3 export, without support yet for IFC 4 or 4.3, and it becomes difficult to trust VisualARQ for long-term, professional workflows. Money is not the issue here, TIME IS!!!
That said, we want VisualARQ to succeed. We still believe it has the potential to become a truly unique and flexible BIM platform within Rhino, especially if supported by an active community and focused development.
We’re still here, using it, learning it, and supporting it. We just hope to see its evolution continue in a more robust and open direction soon.

---

PS. Other possibility, if we can afford it and like to use Revit, is MKS Beam as a way forward and with IFC 4 (BIM)

MKS BEAM

Rhino plug-in to convert 3D models for Revit gains widespread use -...

[thomas20 (thomas)]

Thanks for sharing this project, I’m interested in how you graded the terrain and created the staircase

[keithscadservices]

I could make a video but it wouldn’t be coordinated (meaning it would drag on). I’m just using a lot of bread and butter Rhino commands - just lots of very basic techniques.

Site modeling is more of the same. The issue with trying to do a demo on modeling a site is that if someone’s dealing with even slightly different terrain they might need to use a different approach. If you’re just modeling a fake site (like I did here) versus modeling real topography, the approach would be different. Same goes for accuracy. You can fairly closely match real topography just by manually moving control points. But getting super high accuracy can be more involving.

[Fabsye (Fabrice)]

@keithscadservices

I could make a video but it wouldn’t be coordinated (meaning it would drag on). I’m just using a lot of bread and butter Rhino commands - just lots of very basic techniques.

Site modeling is more of the same. The issue with trying to do a demo on modeling a site is that if someone’s dealing with even slightly different terrain they might need to use a different approach. If you’re just modeling a fake site (like I did here) versus modeling real topography, the approach would be different. Same goes for accuracy. You can fairly closely match real topography just by manually moving control points. But getting super high accuracy can be more involving.

Hi Keith, Honestly, at this stage, anything is better than nothing (or too little…). VisualARQ and Lands Design are powerful tools, but they suffer from a chronic lack of guidance, resources, and tutorials. So even a simple, unpolished walkthrough using basic Rhino commands can make a real difference. Your approach, using bread and butter techniques, is exactly what many users need to gain confidence and take their first steps.
I completely get what you’re saying about site modelling, there’s no one-size-fits-all method, especially when terrain, accuracy, and project goals vary so much. But even just sharing your method for a “fake site,” as you mentioned, helps to demystify the process and gives others a reference point to build from. Sometimes the best learning comes from seeing how someone else thinks through a problem, even if it’s just one possible approach.
If you’re ever up for sharing a short video, polished or not, it would be deeply appreciated. You’ve already contributed a lot, and your experience continues to be a huge encouragement to the community.
And as one of the oldest books of mankind reminds us: “Plans fail when there is no consultation, but there is accomplishment through many advisers” (Proverbs 15:22). The more we share, the stronger we all become.

[keithscadservices]

@Fabsye

…but they suffer from a chronic lack of guidance, resources, and tutorials

This seems to be the new norm in many fields and not just exclusive to Rhino. I think part of it is the pace of development, but I also see lots of things that the developer(s) have obviously spent zero time testing out themselves.

Developers like AutoDesk (pre Revit) and of course McNeel were(are) very user-orientated. Autodesk’s success is very much due to this (they’ve changed obviously but back in the day). They would listen to customers but also they would respect the user experience. Developers would spend A LOT of time actually using the same features they create.

For Autodesk I noticed a huge shift in their approach with Revit. The focus became marketing and the result is an unpolished program. For me it is extremely unpleasant to use. Things that should be fixed (like how several variables aren’t persistent and many default settings are set horribly wrong) and the graphical interface (I get major eye strain due to grips and controls being so small). Autodesk can get a way with this because they can just sell trash to large teams hence why marketing has become king to them. Smaller vendors not so much.

I believe a smaller company, to be successful, needs to have power users who can develop workflows and push programs to their limits. Many developers (often whom have little knowledge of the target industry of their products) insist they know better hence why we have things like Revit that would otherwise be good products but miss the mark in several areas. It’s possible some companies are forcing their developers to do double-duty as well and that is just too much for one person.

I think for a smaller developer to be successful they have to ditch all the mistakes the big vendors are making. A good example of a smaller vendor doing everything wrong would be BricsCAD BIM.

[Fabsye (Fabrice)]

@keithscadservices

The file itself is a bit of a mess, made worse by me messing with it to get it under the 20MB limit. Don’t pay too much attention to the contents. It’s really just a vehicle for the Visual ARQ definitions created from the above GH definitions, along with the various other vaStyles I’ve created.

kCs - VARQ and GH stuff.3dm (15.0 MB)

Thanks so much for sharing this file with us, it’s always encouraging to see community contributions like this! I had a quick look, and I think the file may need to be updated for VisualARQ 3 to work smoothly with the latest version. Some elements don’t seem to translate fully, but the structure and effort are still really appreciated. Even slightly outdated files like this are helpful for learning and inspiration. Thanks again for taking the time to share, it really makes a difference for the community!

[Fabsye (Fabrice)]

@keithscadservices

I believe a smaller company, to be successful, needs to have power users who can develop workflows and push programs to their limits. Many developers (often whom have little knowledge of the target industry of their products) insist they know better hence why we have things like Revit that would otherwise be good products but miss the mark in several areas. It’s possible some companies are forcing their developers to do double-duty as well and that is just too much for one person.

I think for a smaller developer to be successful they have to ditch all the mistakes the big vendors are making. A good example of a smaller vendor doing everything wrong would be BricsCAD BIM.

Hi Keith,

I completely agree with your post. You’re absolutely right, smaller software companies really thrive when they empower power users to develop smart workflows and push their tools to the limit. These users become the sparks that ignite wider adoption, especially when they share their success and inspire others. It’s like spreading the gospel of good software, when something works well, the word travels fast.

BIM is a beautiful concept. On paper, it promises harmony across the AEC world, and many professionals have placed their hopes in its potential. But let’s be honest, IFC interoperability is anything but straightforward. That’s why so many people find it confusing, even frustrating. There are too many nuances, versions, and unpredictable quirks when exchanging files between platforms. It’s no wonder companies like The Open Company and other open-source initiatives are offering alternatives like their Fragments API to IFC.

We’re in a landscape where tools need to be not only powerful but also approachable/affordable. And for that, having a dedicated, vocal community of users is priceless. VisualARQ and others in the Rhino ecosystem could really benefit from more of this energy, less about trying to match Revit’s complexity and more about refining the essentials through community-driven insight.

Thanks again for putting this so clearly. Your insights are always appreciated, and I’m hopeful we’ll keep seeing more voices pushing for the kind of smart, user-powered development the industry really needs.

Any word on those elusive VA sample files? Starting to feel like I’m chasing unicorns in the BIM forest! A few well-made samples would go a long way, right now, it’s like trying to build a house with IKEA parts and no manual. Would love to see something soon to help us connect the dots!

[Clayton_Muhleman]

Hi Fabrice, thanks for bringing this discussion back to life. I’ve been using VA for about three years. During the first two years of VA work, I had frequent worries that I was investing way too much time into the wrong platform that would never work. It was definitely a very expensive choice. I had more than a couple moments where I redownloaded Revit in a panic and had to talk myself back into it.

But I’ve definitely reached a tipping point since then. It’s working and profitable and fun now. Looking back, switching was without a doubt the smart move for someone like me with my kind of extremely small and technologically leveraged practice. I also know that there’s a ton of other people on this forum who are much more skilled with VA than I am that are probably in similar situations.

However, while the VA community would definitely benefit from more shared work, the incentives for sharing VA work is radically different than sharing GH work and our expectations need to match. GH can do tons and powers VA to a large degree, but it also thrives with academic and conceptual work in ways that VA simply doesn’t. It looks great on an instagram feed, etc.

VA is productive and makes money. Expecting busy, practicing architects to freely share their time, hard earned knowledge, and carefully created assets may not be a realistic means of driving a community in the long run.

There’s definitely a good way to achieve this, but probably not the same way that GH did it.

For now, I found it to be very productive to just jump into the forums with what you’re learning and post the thing you’re working on and describe what it is what isn’t working for you. My posts are sort of a breadcrumb trail of that experience, with a focus on communicating and helping the incredible team at Asuni to see what it is that their users are needing.

Let’s not forget, none of this would work without the fantastic work and community support Asuni provides and the framework provided by the frankly inexplicable magical unicorn that is McNeel.

Anyhow, I’m also working on a method to share my templates and workflows that would help the community and be sustainable, so stay tuned for that. If you have specific questions, feel free to PM me anytime.