Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral

Personal Information

  • Location
    United Kingdom

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @parveenkd A checklist of things I try when they don't work: Refresh site model by clicking 'Update' Make sure site model is showing 'proposed' not 'existing' Make sure site model is set to read 'all layers' in site model settings > general > use site modifiers on > 'All Layers' Change texture bed to 3D poly, update model, then change back to texture bed. Sometimes resetting it seems to make it work Make sure the class the texture bed is on or the render settings of your texture bed, has a texture. If there is no texture, just a fill colour or outline colour, it wont show as a texture bed in 3D. Make sure all the layers and classes the texture beds and site model are one, are visible. Texture beds are only visible in 3D when the site model is on. Make sure all of your texture bed is on the site model and not hanging off it. If it goes beyond the boundaries of the site model, it may not work. This is all I can think of for now. Please correct me if anything I have said is incorrect. I hope this helps!
  2. @Benson Shaw I did the same method as you suggested in the end. I was just hoping that there would have been a quicker method as this can be fairly time consuming when you have a lot of classes to go through! But thanks for the help!
  3. Is there a way to do this method whilst retaining the classes the original 3D symbols were on? I have many 3D symbols on many different classes. When I select them with the magic wand tool and convert them to 3D loci, following the method above, they all move onto the same class the original 3D loci was created on. This means I lose important information of what the 3D loci points represent e.g. Spot Heights, Tree Heights, Eave etc. making it complicated / creating inaccuracies when creating a site model.
  4. Thanks @lisagravy and @Tamsin Slatter but I've tried those ideas and it's still not working! It worked yesterday when I opened the file but not today - do you think there is a glitch?
  5. I have this exact same problem - I have looked down the forum and tried everything that people have said but it still doesn't seem to work. Does anyone have anymore suggestions? I'm using Vectorworks Landmark 2020
  6. Thanks for both of your help. @E|FA I have voted on the wishlist and @bgoff I have followed your idea and taken the modified existing model contours and copied them into a new file.
  7. I have added 'Pad' and 'Pad with Retaining Edge' site modifiers to the Existing Site Model. When I try and add a 'Pad with Retaining Edge' site modifier to the Proposed Site Model, warning triangles (Site Modifier Conflicts) come up where the proposed site modifiers overlap the existing site modifiers. I am aware that if site modifiers touch/conflict, results may not be as expected. But how to I overcome this? Is there another way to do it? Can I export the existing, modified site model and then import it in a new file as just 3D loci/contours then when I add a site modifier, there won't be any site modifier conflicts? My ultimate aim is to calculate the cut and fill of the site based on the modified existing site model and the proposed site model. Images: 1. The proposed site modifier is selected with the existing site modifier in red. 2. Show the site modifier conflicts 3. The model in 3D. The proposed site modifier is supposed to create a flat slab at 40.135m, instead, I have part of the terrain cutting through. 4. Shows how the proposed site modifier is working on some parts of the model and other parts it is not. This pad should be at one level. Thanks for your help in advance!
  • Create New...