Rossford
-
Posts
328 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Marionette
Store
Posts posted by Rossford
-
-
A little OT, but has anyone bought the land planning module from Software Customization Services and how does it work?
-
I think VW 2010 will be much better. I also think (haven't used this feature yet) that you can use site modifiers on only visible layers, expanding the choices from VW 2009 and previous which were one layer or all layers.
I had an L shaped property, and trimed the site model with a polygon just outside the boundary. It used to be called Hull, but in 2010 they have changed the name and improved it.
Not really germain, but I did trim contours on a recent project to just outside a site and another engineer on the project sent back the base map with the contours trimmed right to the PL. I wanted to know how the drainage came under the road and on to the site, but she just couldn't understand why I went past the property lines.....
-
http://techboard.nemetschek.net/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=130308#Post130308
Check the mid to end of this discussion in the general discussion thread from just a week ago. I think they probably nailed it.
-
I third that! Just today I put a worksheet on a plan and wish it would have read larger than it did.
-
http://www.youtube.com/archoncad#p/u/5/FvLpD0ehtjk
He already has it up - Video 103 on his youtube site just a month or so ago.....
I used it to label my drain pipe sizes.
-
Miquel,
Greetings from North Texas....
I am not too familiar with scripting, but will try to see if I can craft a new one that does what I want.
I already have the 2D conversion set to low res (I think 8 parts to a circle) but still get pretty high vertice counts that cause site models to take a long time to run.
If I understand you correctly, the script would simply automate my sequence of drawing a polyline, and then
Convert to 3D poly
Simplify
Convert to 2D poly
I will give it a try!
-
For those of us on tablets, or who like to draw in polys, but need polygons in the end, why can't VW2010 have a simplify 2D poly command like that in the simplify 3D poly command?
I have found that I can convert polylines to 3D polys, simplify (filter previous to 2010) and then convert back to 2D polys when necessary, but it seems like doing it in one step would be a lot easier. It also seems obvious the technology to do so is written somewhere in the VW code!
I know there was an add on from Vectorbits, but I don't know if it works with the new parasolid engine, etc.
Thanks in advance.
-
I have had that happen and its always a video driver problem.
-
Ray,
Where do I submit the suggestion of adding a simplify 2D Poly command to VW and/or NNA?
-
There is no simplify polygons command in 2D, but there is one in 3D if you have the Designer series packages. If that is the way you choose to go, then convert to 3D poly, simplify, using the VW recommendations or more, and then modify-convert the 3D poly back into a 2D poly. It will have the same number of vertices.
-
Re: Simplify Polygons - for some reason, they renamed Filter 3d Polys to Simplify 3D Polys in 2010. Same command, though.
The literature claims that 2010 will be a more stable version of the topo modeling package. We shall see!
I have saved groups of proposed site modifiers/3D polys for future use in other files by grouping them and creating a file I call "topo signatures" but of course, I have to relabel all the lines to correct Z or pad value.
-
Jeremy,
My problem has usually been larger sites and many swales and watersheds make it hard to actually get the contours in any ascending order. 2D to 3D contours is probably better on a simple site, and quicker, but I find myself having to assign the Z value manually many times.
Good luck!
-
I posted this in the general discussion area, in a thread that went nowhere, but repost it here in case you didn't see it.
First, as far as I can tell, there is no reason not to just convert the polylines directly to 3D Polys, using the Modify>Convert to 3D Polys. Yeah, you have to set each Z value but I have never seen a topo map yet drawn perfectly from low to high contour.
I was testing things this morning by drawing a 10 acre freehand polyline at 200 scale as a test. On high smoothing it came out to 21 vertices.
At low res conversion, that freehand polyblobs converted to 81 vertices when converted to either a 2 or 3D polygon. (High res was 787 - No need to go there!)
Accepting the VW suggested filtering cut the vertices by about half (to 36), setting it to 2X the recommended filter reduced it to 34, 5X to 26 and 10X right back to my initial 21 vertices.
I agree you need to study each contour to make sure you have the right trade off vertices and accuracy, but in general, I would double the recommended value in the simplify command, at least.
-
I would think processor and RAM would be a good investment for almost any program, no? I presume that while VW doesn't use multi core, that if you were multi tasking that cores 2-4 (or 8) would still be helpful for those other programs you might have open? I guess the practical question from the above is, what is the reasonable RAM you need? I have 4MB, and see many computers with 6 or 8 now. Anyone ramp up and see a noticeable difference?
For those of us who use open GL, I doubt it would be worth back shopping for a 64MB video card, when 256 or 512 are standard and 1GB doesn't cost that much more anymore. Same question as above - anyone see an Open GL difference when moving up?
-
I do a lot of free hand and polyline work, and contour maps, using polylines for edges. They look better in plan graphics, but can add up in site models, because VW converts them to polygons "under the hood" which results in a lot more vertices.
I was testing things this morning by drawing a 10 acre freehand polyline at 200 scale as a test. On high smoothing it came out to 21 vertices.
At low res conversion, that freehand polyblobs converted to 81 vertices when converted to a polygon. (High res was 787 - No need to go there!)
If I convert the polyblobs to 3D polys, the vertice count was also 81. However, I can filter them easily using the "simplify 3D poly" tool, which I have done for contour lines.
Accepting the VW suggested filtering cut the vertices by about half (to 36), setting it to 2X the recommended filter reduced it to 34, 5X to 26 and 10X right back to my initial 21 vertices.
I can then convert that back to a polygon with the same amount of vertices, provided I do it in the wire frame rendering mode.
Why doesn't VW do a filtering mode for 2D polys? I know someone wrote an add on script years ago, but I don't know if it works currently.
But obviously, if VW can do it in 3D, they can do it in 2D and those of use who do freehand and curvalinear work would get a real timesaver. where do I make that suggestion to VW?
-
Ray,
Just in case I get a new desktop, then, what would you say is a decent windows GPU where I wouldn't see any benefit - say 512MB dedicated memory? Or would 1GB prove any different?
As always, thanks in advance.
-
Well my laptop loaded up just fine, so I think I may have some issue on my desktop with Adobe that I need to look into.
-
Thanks, Ray. I will give it until morning when I have to go on a trip.
-
This afternoon, I put in the CD for my Windows upgrade to 2010, put in serial number, etc. It is still loading, stopped at 96% and at the point where its installing the Adobe Air Help system.
I hate to start it over, but am wondering what is stopping it. Do I need a certain version of adobe on my computer?
-
Can someone please explain why Open GL only uses one core and the other rendering modes use several? As it happens, my office usually renders landscapes in open GL thinking its faster, at least for prelim viewing. On a multi core machine, would Fast Renderworks be even faster?
-
Thanks for the input. First, the comment on waiting for the i7 was based on the fact they had virtually no computers in the store - waiting for Windows 7 they had let the stock run down. I had a feeling that, while knowledgeable, he may have been trying to stop me from going somewhere else to buy saying "all the stores were low".
It was also clear that despite being 50ish that he was a gamer and the VW knowledge base calls for a true workstation rather than gamer computer, so I figured his input was perhaps from the wrong perspective.
Speaking of dual monitors, does anyone run a small second monitor just to keep the tools and etc. out of their way?
-
Ray,
Thanks for that info. I was at Best Buy last night on non VW business, but couldn't help checking out the desktops re VW and got the following advice:
Wait for the Intel i7 processor - while most quad cores can't really be accessed by most programs, this is new architecture that lets programs access all 4 cores if necessary.
Two mid level graphic cards (most computers don't have slots for two, but new version of Gateway FX does) are better than one higher end for fast rendering.
As you can see, my computer isn't that old, and $1000 doesn't seem to be too expensive to me if I can avoid long waits and numerous crashes, which I have now. I haven't worked in 3D a lot just because of the crashes and delays.
I guess I am asking what you think the highest level of Windows computer, graphics card and memory for someone moving into 3D with VW 2010 (just got my copy, not loaded)
Thanks in advance for supplementing the VW knowledge base info.
-
I do a lot of grading and the sand box tools would be great!
-
I can't recall the site without digging through my libraries, but I downloaded some photorealistic grasses from a site devoted to gamer design of golf courses, like the Arnold Palmer Golf Designer, or Tiger Woods golf designer.
They import fine into VW. I have some issues with slow rendering, as you mention but not more than normal with VW.
iMac i5 graphics card is it enough for VW and renderworks
in Site Design
Posted
In reading the VW recommendations, they say Nvidea graphic cards are more stable with VW, and I don't think that is unusual for CAD type programs. Some ATI cards are more geared to video games, from what I understand.