dspearman

It seems to be an issue with origins My workflow import into a new blank file (iff you have an m1 Mac use vw 2021) check using the geoimage tool (seems to work for me) Do not ever do anything with any of the origins in this file reference into the working file (Auto update off, save cache data on). Don’t set geographic settings again check with the geoimage tool (accept the default geo settings). if you do anything to the origins in the working file do NOT update the reference you can now change geographic settings (I use EPGS 26914 in Winnipeg) and use the geolocation tool to set user origin somewhere closer to home (eg the 0,0 point and rotation everyone else is using) I’m sure there are other workflows that are working and more elegant but after spending too much time playing around with this I decided I can live with it.

Look at the drawing default attributes (in the attribute pallet with no other object selected.) If the fill is set to black change it and try again. Also, look at the definition of the active class and see if the fill is black. Also, look at the definition of the class set for the plant tags to use (with the plant selected this can be found in the object info pallet or in the plant definition itself). Again, ensure that the fill is not set to black.

I am assuming that you want the vertical scale to be different than the horizontal scale. If you want to have a profile with an exaggerated vertical scale you need to use the "Site Model Section.." command. It normally lives in the AEC > Terrain > menu. To use it you have to draw a polygon (for the section line) and with that polygon selected run the command. It creates group of lines and is not a 'live' section so you won't see object beyond the section line. The result has the appearance of the 'profile's you see on engineering drawings for roadways and other linear corridors. Other than the vertical exaggeration this command also has the advantage that it can draw a profile with an irregular cut line. Functionality that I don't think exists elsewhere in the program.

Try the 2d polygon tool in the Paint bucket mode This will create a polygon bounded by surrounding lines All lines poly's etc. regardless of selected state.

Landmark has a number of options for importing survey data. For data generated by survey grade GPS units the data has to be converted to UTM. I know on the Leica GPS that I usually rent their is an export on the menu that will allow me to export to a CSV file that VW can import. If you are using handheld gps you may need some middle ware but... you may not get the degree of accuracy you will need from the GPS unit. At any rate the lat and log from the GPS will have to be converted to UTM and you will need a file with the data.

Look for another site model in that file. You should only see that message if their is more than one.

If the class is set to visible in one of the viewports and you export from that sheet layer then, even if the class is set to not visible in the active settings, and even if nothing in that class can be seen in that viewport... object in that class will be exported. If it is not set to visible in any viewport, and it is not set to visible in the active settings, and you choose not to export invisibles, it will not be exported.

I don't know why the system crashes but you have more than one site model in that file. Turn on all layers and all classes, set layer and class options to modify others and do a custom selection for objects with record Site Model attached. If that only turns up one start to look at referenced design layer viewports... It should turn up more than one and you can use the object info pallet to toggle between them. If you only need one then you can delete the other. HTH

The 2d plant rendering is based on the lowest most object in the 2d plant definition. It is not related to class. Number of vertices and types of vertices (if it is a poly) affect the degree of roughness and the rendering time. There is no direct control over the amount of squiggle that I am aware of. Typically I will class the lowest object in the 2d plant definition (usually Plant-Component-Outline) so I can turn the visibility of this object (not the 2d rendering) off. That allows for the object to be different than the visible portions of the plant. That being said the classing is irrelevant to the 2d rendering - it will render whether classed or not, whether the objects visibility is turned off or not. It does not relate to the fill either.

The outlining is around the bottom most object in the 2d plant. If it is going around the wrong 'outline' then edit the plant object 2d, select the correct 'outline' and send to back. It is not related to class. The degree of squiggles is not user controllable but seems to relate to the number and position of vertices on the bottom most object. Black and white only will remove all colour fills but, will not remove gradient fills. This may be the problem you are experiencing.

Check the line-weight setting of the Class that the plant tags are drawn in. Make sure it isn't 0 You might have to regenerate the plants afterwards One way to do this latter is to select all of the plants and toggle marker off and on in the Object Info Pallet.

Hi Ozzie, You might consider next time to create one site model and have a 'snap shot' to show the existing. It's simpler and you don't get the annoying dialog asking where site model a stake should apply to. I find things go much smoother for me if I limit myself to one site model in a file. If you really need two site models keep them in separate files and use design layer view ports to reference them to a third.

Some versions back the DTM underwent a metamorphosis and became the "Site Model Object". This object contains both the existing and the proposed DTM (or Site Model as it is now known). It also contains the source data. So, if you are using a recent version (and you are alfresco - 2008), you can't keep the existing and the proposed on different layers because they are the same object. You do have the option of creating a 'SnapShot' of the Site Model and placing it on a separate layer but this is unrelated to the Cut and Fill calculations and you shouldn't think of the Snapshot as being a different Site Model - as it remains linked to the originating Site Model. It's more like a design layer viewport for Site Models although it as some added capabilities and limitations. With Vw 2009 Site modifiers (such as pads) gained the option of affecting the 'existing' portion of the Site Model. This is a setting in the modifier and you set it using the Object Info Pallet. It will affect the result of a cut and fill as ... if the modifiers are all modifying the 'existing' then there will be no cut and fill. Alfresco is using 2008 so he won't see this. Also with 2009 the cut and fill calculation got a lot more accurate at the expense of speed. With 2009 instead of being calculated everytime the Site Model was updated, it calculates only when the 'Calculate Cut & Fill' Button on the Object Info Pallet is clicked. (Be aware that you have to have the site model selected to see this option. ) Again in 2008 alfresco won't see this. islandmon - you are correct that 'That's how the DTM Procedure was originally set up." but ... it doesn't work that way anymore and hasn't for some time, so if alfredo is using 2008 like he says this doesn't apply. I should also add alfresco, that if you do create two site models - you won't get a cut and fill because to calculate it the site model needs to have both the existing and proposed in the same object. So create an existing site model, add pads and modifiers, update it and you should see a cut and fill, regardless of whether the actual site model is displaying the existing or the proposed...

The file creation dialog allows for importing a class from any file. For many classes at once I have drawn a line in each of the classes and done a cut and paste - then deleted the objects. Why not just import the styles using the resource browser.

Make sure your class settings are not "Active Only" Assuming that this is not the case, I am thinking that your placed plant object has objects internal to it that are classed. (this was probably the active class before you made the change) Try setting the classes to visible one at a time until they show up. That will tell you what the internal class it.

You will have to edit the worksheet to add a column. In the database header rows (there is one of these for each 'type' you will have to set the cell to get the ID data. Look at the format of the adjacent records and the plant record attached to each plant object to see what field you will have to reference. You will have to do this for each database header row.

Take a look at the worksheet included in the 'Plant Objects.vwx' file (that is installed with landmark. It is formatted to separate the plants based upon the 'category' setting from the plant definition.

The LA may have enables a setting that sets the origin to page center when initially importing a DWG with the base information. There are settings that allow the LA to respect the origin when he imports his base info. After that, if the LA doesn't change it - it should be maintained when they export back to DWG.

Assuming that you also have a site model, you can set the 3d option for the hardscape to a 'texture bed'. You will have to set a class for the texture. Regenerate the site model and the 'hardscape' will appear in the rendered 3d view.

The way I do this is to place the plant objects into different classes. I use "Plants-New-Phase 1" and "Plants-New-Phase 2". In the plant schedule set the database header row(s) criteria to limit the reporting to object of "Plants-New-Phase 1" or 2 depending on what is desired.

If you are in Vancouver call Resolve Sofware. They are located in Burnaby and do regular training sessions in Vectorworks. They also write some of the training manuals you can buy.

Pat, I don't think he is actually working in 1:1. I think he is working at scale (in this case 1:500) but entering sizes at their actual value which is what Vw expects him to do. Because he is entering sizes at their real world size he is referring to this as 1:1. In other words, he's got the idea and using the software the way it was intended to use. His use of terminology is a little different than what we expect. So, liberian, continue to set the layer scale to a scale close to what you want to output. Continue to enter the actual real world sizes. and all will be well.

Because screen resolution varies you should not expect to be able to measure the object at a 100 per cent view and have that measurement be meaningful. At least with not some additional math. This is because the 100 per cent view assumes a certain pixel size (72 dpi on the Mac, 96? on Windows) and in modern operating systems the computer only knows how many pixels, not how big they are. At best, the 100 per cent view gives a sense of how big things will print. When all monitors were displaying the same DPI, it was possible to do this and reasonable to expect it to work - no longer. It isn't a Vw limitation it's inherent in the way the computer relates to the monitor. Check the scale by placing a dimension object on the critical points (or use the tape measure tool). This will tell you how big the object is. In your case a dimension on the boundary that is in real 40 m should show it as 40 m (assuming the imported scan has been scaled properly). If not you will have to rescale it. Remember that in Vw we are working in a layer space that has a scale. You might plot the document and measure that but again, this introduces some issues relating to plotting drivers, line width etc. Still its good to make sure that the printing setup is working properly and if so, it should work.

Object of class Site-DTM-Modifiers are still recognized by my copy of Vw 2009. Could their be another issue? Does the modifier lie outside of the Site Models range? Is it not within a fence? Is the Site Model set to see objects on the same layer only? This should be working for you.

Check the Z heights of the layers that you have the floor plans drawn on. If one is for the ground floor an one is for the floor above that they should be different (by the height of a floor.) If they are the same you are going to see one floor superimposed on the other.