Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rossford

  1. Jeff P, I think so. The client mentioned that firms he talked to that use ACAD also get the same problem with mesh generated slope models. He didn't say what program they transferred it over to to get the more solid looking areas he was looking for.
  2. Thanks. I am using the max number of categories, and there is a limit to how close the hues should be to represent the slope differences. I tried a few more settings, and in a way, using the 3D grid color slopes method works better with bigger squares rather than smaller ones, but in irregular site shapes tends to not render the partial squares at the edges. Seems like there should be a fix for that, as well.
  3. I think you could get a contour over cut and fill look by copying your site model, using the contour only setting, and then laying it back over the red/blue cut and fill version. If that second model messes up the ability to generate the cut/fill quantities, then ungroup it to polygons, smooth, and lay it directly over the cut fill map. And, I wonder if a third model of a grid of 3D loci could represent that grid of elevations. Agree, the shaded bits might work better. I wonder if they could adapt the six category slope analysis model categories to at least get cuts from 0-2, 2-5, etc.? All in all, yes, that site model tool could use some upgrading for big earthwork projects. I know one LA who exports it to another program to do his cut and fill models, but I would prefer to stay in VW.
  4. I am doing a slope analysis project, but in whatever mode I use, 2D triangle, 2D contours with colored slopes, 3D grid, etc. the client is objecting to the pixilated nature of the slope areas. He says some programs have a feature that cleans up various color areas into one color for graphic clarity, using some kind of blur effect. The VW graphics look like those hurricane maps with a lot of swirling that is hard to look at. Also, I have having loads of trouble with the preformatted slope analysis report. I seem to have it narrowed down to the fact that there can be only one site model in a drawing for it to report accurately. Anyone else experience this? (I had actually be overlaying site models to get all the graphic and info I needed, and even making sure the criteria for the report was by "on site model layer only" in the graphic settings, and also in the report criteria, the reports seem to pick up every site model and / or crash the program. Any help would be appreciated, thanks!
  5. I am doing a slope analysis project, but in whatever mode I use, 2D triangle, 2D contours with colored slopes, 3D grid, etc. the client is objecting to the pixilated nature of the slope areas. He says some programs have a feature that cleans up various color areas into one color for graphic clarity, using some kind of blur effect. Any help would be appreciated, thanks!
  6. Alan, thanks for that. A few of those resources look like they might have promise and I will look into those.
  7. Alan, Yes, that is what I am doing. I just need to convince the potential client that 7 variations is enough. We asked VW if it was possible to change those number of categories of slope, but apparently, that is pretty well buried in old code, and not easy to change. I will keep looking into Marionette and Data Viz, but obviously, the easiest is to just stay in VW basic functions, and perhaps convince them that 7 categories is enough!
  8. Exactly, but for a competitor!
  9. These are golf green "heat maps." Their intent (although I have never, as a golfer, figured out just how the book tells me how hard to hit the putt!) is to help both golfers and also greenskeepers in putting the hole locations in an area golfers could be expected to reasonably make a putt, with anywhere from 3-4% being the absolute maximum, and 1.5% the minimum for drainage). So, then, the map needs to show <1.5%, 1.75, 2, 2.25, 2.5, 2.75, 3, 3.5, 3.75, 4, and then areas of steeper slopes (in some kind of deep, warm, red!) for slopes from >5%, >10, >15%, >20%, etc. With a little tweaking I might get them to accept fewer, but not only 7.
  10. Jeff, I need to overlay slope analysis models to get the number of classifications I want. I figure if the lower slope model has the over 5% slope clear (I tried white) or very opaque white, I can put it over the other site model where the slope analysis will be from 5.1% up. I have tried one opaque site model over the other, but it doesn't work. I suppose I could trim the site model on top, leaving no color. Is there a way like Photoshop where we can remove color from an object? Thanks in advance.
  11. Related to my overlapping site models, my client has asked for more slope categories than VW's standard 6 (7 if you count the "in excess of" category. They actually want about 12. My idea was to copy the reduced area site model and do one slope analysis from 0-5%, leaving the excess white, and the next model with various colors from 5%+. However, even with low opacity it doesn't work with the bottom layer colors dulled out. It occurs that if a white color could be given very low opacity in the color palate manager, maybe that would work? But, I don't see anything in the help guides that suggests such a nearly "no fill" color can be produced. Any other ideas?
  12. bcd, Thanks, and I have done that in the past, but Bryan's method works as well. It seems my problem was closing VW and reopening it, and then everything seems to work as expected.
  13. I have a situation where I need to replace an existing site model crop with a smaller one inside and meld the two models. This is because I need a contour interval of 0.1' one the smaller model, and only 1' on the larger model. So, I want to copy, then crop out the smaller site model, and then place it right back on top of the other one so both display as I want. The manuals say I can go to the Edit Crop mode, delete the polyline that is the current site border and replace it. For whatever reason, I cannot pick on the second polyline in crop edit mode and pull it in. I have seen it done, and think I am either missing something obvious, or maybe a bug but if someone knows what I am missing (if that is the case) I would appreciate the help.
  14. You only have one 3D poly or am I missing something?
  15. What kind of polyline are you drawing? I don't see it listed in the help section, but I think you can only use cubic vertex, or maybe arc tangent mode, but not Bezier, when creating a road via polyline.
  16. Yes, it looks like my gremlins went to visit you, LOL. Finding those geometry quirks are needle in haystack type operations. What version do you have? I haven't played with the alter surface mesh modeling tool in VW 2021 much, but maybe this is a possible way to adjust the surface. I take it your basic site model with smoothed mesh is just "standard" VW green? Sometimes, we leave the lawn areas with no Landscape Area and just do the roads, etc., that may take out some of the problems?
  17. On the photo above, I see a cross in just about the area that the landscape area doesn't meet the model. Any chance that is a stray stake? Also, hard to tell from the isometric view, but the 4 contours on that side of the retaining edge look like they might cross. They don't necessarily look like the similar 4 contours on the cutout further right on the page. Just guessing, trying to help.
  18. Have you tried looking at your site model in left, right or bottom views? I find most of my first site models have a few stray points that affect results at first, and using other views usually highlights those, if any exist. They don't show up as conflicts, because they aren't, but sometimes a stake or partial contour gets left well above or below the mesh surface. Also, sometimes we have tried elevating the landscape area +0.1 or so above the surface, which helps it not be pierced by any ridges sharper than the landscape area might cover. Would be interested in other responses, as I may have misinterpreted your intent here.
  19. Auto Cad used to have (been decades since I ran both programs) a nice contour labeling too. You drew a line over the string of basically parallel contours you drew, and it labeled them. That allowed us to place the labels quickly where we wanted them. We also prefer existing contour labels on the perimeter of the site model or bounding box we are working on to avoid confusion with proposed. (yes we vary size and color as well, but they always seem to get in the way. It seems like that could be a check box in the site model set up.
  20. Saw a presentation at the last live summit. An urban designer drew streetscapes without topo change, figuring, I guess people perceive most streets as flat enough that they don't need the 1-2% road and sidewalk topo. He used 3D rectangles, for streets, walks, curbs, buildings, etc.
  21. He could be in every client rendering for several years and still draw a laugh. Has anyone else put in other characters just for fun and to see if people notice? It's risky. I once rendered a fender bender in a parking lot, but I upset a person who had been disabled in a car wreck, and never did anything like it again. But, I could see a Homer Simpson or Where's Waldo type addition, at least for the right client.
  22. Not sure this is exactly what you are talking about, but in the OIP of the viewport, click advanced properties. The top of that box allows you to scale symbols, text, line types, line weights, etc. We usually do grading plans at 100 or 200 with detail areas from 30-40-50 scale. And, we sometimes label contours or have them in 2D. So, if we are going from 100 to 30, we type in 0.33 or 0.25 for text size (experiment a bit) and it puts the text size where we want it in the 30 scale viewport. I think you can customize a standard viewport you use often that way. I played with it for dimension arrows, and they don't seem to scale, but I wonder if you could do a custom dim with tiny, tiny arrows that would just look good at larger scales?
  23. Kevin, Here you go, I think (never have uploaded to VW boards, so let me know). I looked at a few more contour lines, and was able to simplify them without losing important info all the way up to 6 units apart as maximum distance in the simplify poly mode. 7 started taking out road crowns and the like. On a few partial polygons (they are broken, which is fine, but if connected perhaps more impressive) I got 170+ vertices down to 42 at that maximum distance. Not sure how much it will reduce file size, but should be a chunk. 1022-2D_v2020 vw boards 2020 12 19 12 Cen.zip
  24. Took a quick look, but looks like you only simplified the major contours. I was able to simplify a minor contour from 172 vertices to 30 by using simplify poly, and setting the maximum distance to about 3, (after trying 1.5 and 2, not sure you might not go further on some of them without losing details)
  25. I think you have to use that class exactly as VW labels it, at least that has been my experience as well.
  • Create New...