Jump to content

J. Wallace

Member
  • Posts

    667
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by J. Wallace

  1. @jeff prince @Tom W. @Benson Shaw thank you very much for looking at this.

     

    @jeff prince yes I pulled these contours from QGIS (which I'm in a steep learning curve, I'm taking a fantastic online course which is a huge help) with the hopes of creating a site model. The model you created looks great, thanks! It might be a bit flatter than actual as my contour intervals where 2 meter.

    Jeff I'm not sure how you discovered the Modify by record tool but it worked like a charm. I discovered that I made an error while exporting from QGIS as I did not extract the Z value correctly. No worries as VW has the tool to change this. Amazing.

    I'm also surprised that the resulting model is pretty stable given it's 850 acres.

    Thank you all so much for helping me learn more about this software. I

    850 acre site model.jpg

    • Like 3
  2. Hello Everyone, i hope you are all having a great day.

    I have been trying to import a shapefile which was created (exported) in QGIS.

    The shapefile has the elevation data within it but when I import this via Import Shapefile command I get contours but these are regular polylines.

     

    When I've imported shapefiles in the past it's been a pretty stratighforward event.

    Thanks in advance to any help.

    Below images are screen shots from QGIS showing the elevation data, then on VW.

    Shapefile.jpg

    shapefile1.jpg

    Shape file import.vwx

  3. Hello everyone.

     

    A question that I'm sure has a straightforward answer. I have a small curved retaining wall that's base is going to follow the existing terrain.

    I'm trying to provide a stone mason with the area or face of the wall in sq ft but for the life of me I don't see any area measurements available in the OIP.

    Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.

     

    wall.jpg

    wall1.jpg

  4. 8 hours ago, unearthed said:

    Increasingly I see open source GIS as an essential (at least for the landscape consultancy workflow), it's becoming very mature, most CAD operations, I can imagine in two years doing most of my work using QGIS and just the occasional work in VW.

    Interesting to read this @unearthed I'm soon to be taking a QGIS course from the Regrarians...http://www.regrarians.org/product/qgis-for-mapping-and-design/

    Are you using QGIS on farm scale projects?

  5. 7 hours ago, hollister design Studio said:

    Thanks J. Wallace - but that's not what's happening here.

     

    I've update the site model.

    Also the site model is NOT outlined in red/white nor is the "update" button in the OIP red.

     

    Updating the site model doesn't send the hardscape to the surface nor does it get rid of the "update' outline.

     

     

    I had some challenges with hardscape objects in 2019 but these seemed to diminish with the current 2021.

    I see that is what you are running.

    You might want to post the file if you can.

    I usually use pads and place hardscape items on top of these.

    • Like 1
  6. Hello everyone

    I have a question that I haven't been able to answer as of yet.

    I just imported some shapefile contour lines from a drone survey and the 185 acre site model creation was quick and painless...yeah!

     

    The high resolution Tiff file (overhead view of site) is about 1.6 GB and will not import into VW or any other software I have which is not a total surprise. The drone operator has asked me what is the max size I can handle??? No idea...I do see that I've used images that are 200+ mb but I'm not sure of VW limitations. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks 😀

  7. When adding multiple site modifiers to a site model, it would be awesome if VW had an offset option specifically for modifiers.

    Perhaps a control that would allow someone the option of snapping to an existing modifier, this would automatically offset the new modifier by a per-determined distance (example might be 1mm). This way modifiers could be easily added to a model (in particular pads) without the inevitable conflicts occurring.

    This would certainly speed up my workflow on some projects, thanks for considering this.

     

    • Like 4
  8. You should be able to import this into excel (https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Import-XML-data-6eca3906-d6c9-4f0d-b911-c736da817fa4) then export as a text file, This from the VW help menu
    Site model source data can be generated by tabular coordinate information from an external file. This file must be a text file with fields delimited by separators in one of the formats available.

    Hope your able to get this to work.

    • Like 2
  9. You may need to create a pad beneath your stairs for it to rest on, also check into grade limits as a way to control the amount of space that is graded to accomidate the site modifier. Also your smaller pad would need to be next to but not touching your other pad. You might also be able to adjust the existing pad your walkway is using and modify it to take your stairs. Posting a screen shot might help. Hope that helps.

    • Like 1
  10. I posted this within the site design forum but perhaps it  is better suited here.
    Hello everyone

    I started having an interesting challenge on Friday with a small site model and a curved retaining wall site modifier that was inserted.

    I've never experienced this issue and hope others might see an easy fix.

    To clarify:

    I have a small site model (under 1/2 acre) that was created using survey 3d polygons. All the polygons have low numbers of vertices so the model itself seems stable and easy to move around.

    In this design we are placing a new retaining wall that curves across the rear landscape.

    The file is not huge 120+ mb

    It appears that when one creates a retaining wall site modifier in a curved shape that the results can cause severe slow downs and crashes in this file.

    If you take a look at the second image I attached you'll see countless lines coming from the site model and running behind the retaining wall, this is where I think the issue is

    If I delete the retaining wall site modifier the file behaves itself, when it's present I have to wait several minutes for the site model to update and for the open GL to render. Even then the open GL looks poor regardless of settings. This has never happened to me on my current computer.

    When I change the retaining wall shape and reduce the curves, add a new retaining wall site modifier makes for a more stable file. I can conclude that these curves are causing some issues with the site model and making the file un-workable even with a robust computer. Has anyone noticed this limitation before? It's not great for us as we often work with organic shapes.

    I've attached the file having removed everything but the site model, the wall, retaining wall site modifier and a small pad in front. No modifier conflicts are reported.

    I would love to hear peoples comments on this.

    Thanks for any thoughts you might have.

    site model issue.png

    site model issue1.png

    site model issue2.png

    Site model.vwx

  11. Hello everyone

    I started having an interesting challenge on Friday with a small site model and a curved retaining wall site modifier that was inserted.

    I've never experienced this issue and hope others might see an easy fix.

    To clarify:

    • I have a small site model (under 1/2 acre) that was created using survey 3d polygons. All the polygons have low numbers of vertices so the model itself seems stable and easy to move around.
    • In this design we are placing a new retaining wall that curves across the rear landscape.
    • The file is not huge 120+ mb
    • It appears that when one creates a retaining wall site modifier in a curved shape that the results can cause severe slow downs and crashes in this file.
    • If you take a look at the second image I attached you'll see countless lines coming from the site model and running behind the retaining wall, this is where I think the issue is
    • If I delete the retaining wall site modifier the file behaves itself, when it's present I have to wait several minutes for the site model to update and for the open GL to render. Even then the open GL looks poor regardless of settings. This has never happened to me on my current computer.
    • When I change the retaining wall shape and reduce the curves, add a new retaining wall site modifier makes for a more stable file. I can conclude that these curves are causing some issues with the site model and making the file un-workable even with a robust computer. Has anyone noticed this limitation before? It's not great for us as we often work with organic shapes.
    • I've attached the file having removed everything but the site model, the wall, retaining wall site modifier and a small pad in front. No modifier conflicts are reported.

    I would love to hear peoples comments on this.

    Thanks for any thoughts you might have.

     

    site model issue.png

    site model issue1.png

    site model issue2.png

    Site model.vwx

  12. 3 minutes ago, Tony Kostreski said:

    Hi @J. Wallace,

     

    Out of curiousity, I wanted to see if this was related to design layer scales—it seems like it is. The larger your Layer Scale is set (i.e. 1"=50'-0"), the less definition you get. See attached image for example of 3 different layer scales of the same landscape area with the same border style settings. I'm curious if this is new to 2019 and if so I can report a bug but in the meantime, I hope this helps! 

     

    -Tony 

    Landscape Area Border Style Settings.png

    Good point @Tony Kostreski it's a bit opposite in my situation. The plant cloud which is working was produced in a 1:96 scale, this distorted version is coming from a layer that is 1:2500.  

×
×
  • Create New...