Jump to content

Petri

Member
  • Posts

    2,011
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Petri

  1. Petri

    Large DTMs

    It is indeed. It is called 'real world data.' VW 9 cannot even create a DTM of less than 3000 points (after segmenting and filtering the data.) However, as usual, results are very inconsistent as some segments are OK. A couple of years ago I had to resort to asking an AutoCAD user to help with a DTM. I can't remember the complexity, but it was too much for VW. With a $200 DTM add-on my friend generated the TIN as a matter of seconds, including slope analysis (which VW is supposed to do, but does not.) Conclusion: VW's DTM is for small and simple projects and makes unrealistic assumptions of the source data (ref to inconsistency.) This would be fine, if it would be made clear to prospective buyers. The unreliability (reported by several users), however, is so severe that the whole product is hardly of merchantable quality.
  2. Petri

    Large DTMs

    No, it is not a DTM but either a digitzed paper map or one generated from stereo aerial photos, probably latter. Topgraphic maps are not created via DTM, so your condescending, canned reply is fundamentally flawed and you are seriously misinformed. There IS no actual data set, so this is the real world. And even if there were, in the real world there is no hope for anyone to gain access to original data held by Government cartographic agencies - if you think otherwise, you live in a dream. As comes to filtering, as I already explained, I have tried that, coming down to 2700 points in one section, but still can't get the DTM generated. I would not call 2700 points a large data set.
  3. Petri

    Large DTMs

    This is going to be interesting - VW 9 could not model the data even as 10 separate sections.
  4. Petri

    Large DTMs

    It is quite obvious that VW 9 cannot create a DTM of my current data set, with 8700 3D polygons and 164000 vertices, but how about VW 11?
  5. Firstly, one should use extrusions only when walls won't work. (I assume the arc is in plan.) Secondly, zero-thickness objects seldom make sense, except in pure visualisations. Finally, the behaviour is a 'feature' so to speak. An arc with a fill becomes a slice of pie and so does an extrusion created with a no-fill arc and then filled. Solutions: 1. Use walls. 2. Create a polyline with a thickness: - copy the arc to clipboard - reduce its radius - paste in place - send to back - select both arcs and say 'Clip surface' (the larger arc becomes a polyline) - delete the smaller arc 3. Instead of fill, use texture. 4. Convert the extruded arc into a mesh. quote: Shouldnt the arc just be... the arc itself? And not include geometry related only to its creation?Not in VW. For extrusions, sweeps, roofs and floors, the original 2D geometry is kept 'inside' the resulting 3D object. The benefit from user's point of view is that the shape can be edited by saying 'Edit group.' The above applies also to 3D solids: you can enter a solid and change its components & their relationships. You will in future learn to appreciate this.
  6. Now as comes to the various rotated rectangle PIOs, including the one I wrote for my own use, far superior (well, of course - he hee) to those at VectorDepot and also to the one Julian Carr offers, one has to keep in mind that in SOME ways they are pseudo-rectangles and not eg. recognised as rectangles OR polygons in reports. They also interact with walls as any PIO or symbol (ie. get sucked in.) So, by and large, they are a workaround and an aberration. But useful.
  7. Petri

    HP DesignJet 120

    quote: Originally posted by Ricardo: Petri I?ve read in previous posts that the now discontinued designjet 120/120nr could not produce good quality black CAD lines in normal paper, what can you tell us about the 130nr? is it as noisy as the 120? thanks Ricardo Black lines seem OK to me on normal bond paper. I have no idea how noisy the 120 is, but the 130 is quite quiet except for a click for each stripe. Does not bother me.
  8. Petri

    HP DesignJet 120

    quote: Originally posted by LarryAZ: Petri, Are you using Verson 11 with your 130nr? And what verson of OSX are you running? Thanks, Larry Sorry to have been away... VW 9 and also VW 11 Viewer (in fact, to test the configuration) with OS X 10.3.3 & 10.3.4. Ahh, yes: also with OS 9.2.2, (The plotter comes with an OS 9 driver - non-PS, fully functional! Fancy THAT!) [ 06-18-2004, 11:05 AM: Message edited by: Petri ]
  9. Use 'Reshape' tool. It can be a bit fiddly to get an edge moved in the correct ange (ie. 'parallel'), but with correct constraits, doable. I don't think you will see a fundamental change in the situation any time soon, as the behaviour of rectangles is very deep in the fundamental layers of VW's graphics engine (in fact, in the operating system.)
  10. quote: Originally posted by Katie: For your purpses Andy, the split tool can achieve what you want to do, but with an extra step. VW 11 has the extra step eliminated. Pardon me for saying this, but - first NNA takes some very useful functionality out and essentially ruins a tool - then we are offered at least partial reinstatement as a part of an expensive upgrade. Clever marketing...
  11. Strange. When I copy & paste from Word, I get perfectly editable text.
  12. With Workspace Editor, you can add a keyboard shortcut to the command. [ 06-06-2004, 07:19 PM: Message edited by: Petri ]
  13. I don't understand this discussion. When I copy and paste text from Word, I even get fonts correctly so I'm not quite sure why one would want to do it as PICT - unless it is a table or very complex tab-formatting. And then, a text-only PICT is, AFAK, not a bitmap image: letters stay as letters (well, on the Mac at least) and have full resolution - and the file size does not get inflated. Am I missing something?
  14. Petri

    HP DesignJet 120

    We just got the HP 130nr yesterday. To my delight (and almost surprise), the software is OK at least with OS X - there is also an OS 9 version, but I have not tested it yet. So, Kevin - you may need to reconsider your general opinion... (and yes, I know exactly how bad the 455CA is!) Whether one needs roll feed is a somewhat complex matter: if you almost always print on one medium OR if you have long print runs (either drawings or copies), roll feed is definitely better, but if every other print is different OR you don't print much, the benefits are less significant. Location of the printer also matters - if it is next to your workstation (as it would be without network connection!), sheet feed is not too bad.
  15. There is a tiny chance that the points are in a sensible sequence. No harm done it you try this script: PROCEDURE JoinTheDots; VAR obHd : HANDLE; x1, y1, x2, y2 : REAL; BEGIN obHd := LACTLAYER; GETLOCPT(obHd, x1, y1); WHILE obHd <> NIL DO BEGIN obHd := PREVOBJ(obHd); GETLOCPT(obHd, x2, y2); MOVETO(x1, y1); LINETO(x2, y2); x1 := x2; y1 := y2; END; END; RUN(JoinTheDots);
  16. I think the above only applies to parametric objects (PIOs) - tools and menu commands pretty much work as palette scripts. (And at least in VW 9, some ONLY work as palette scripts...) This is not perhaps an orthodox method, but it works for me as comes to PIOs: I use constants in place of parameters, with the same names they will eventually have. When I'm close, I create the PIO, but the script only consists of a single $INCLUDE, so I can edit the script with BBEdit. (You may need to clear the cache with the NNA script for the purpose; can't remember how it was/is distributed...) I've tried to use $DEBUG, but I guess I'm not quite clever enough to really utilise it, so I just have to do everything by trial and error... I don't want to sound patronising, but do try to use subroutines (procedures and functions) instead of spaghetti code. The examples are pretty good guidance in this respect. I wish I had realised this 10 years ago!
  17. There may be a very simple solution: change the scale of the layer. Have you checked the measurements of the imported survey? The survey is very likely to be done in 1:1 scale, but with what units, that you have to ask. AutoCAD does not have scales at all in modelspace (and no explicit units anywhere); theoretically (and sometimes in practice) it is possible to draw in paperspace by scaling everything you draw as you would be on tracing paper, but this is not common practice.
  18. Jaws PDF Creator is a workaround - and at USD/E 75, not too expensive. Of course it is a hassle to create the PDFs, but then again, you only really need this for drawings you issue and having a copy is not a bad idea. (Well, that's how I rationalised it...)
  19. Damian, I'm not sure if I can follow your solution - but the thing is that VW cannot possibly know that some objects should be kept at a particular location in relation to page when you change scale. If you would scale in page setup, things would be different. If VW 11 does not fix this for you, remind me to give you a couple of relevant tools when we meet next time - they'll make it reasonably easy to keep all sheet layers at 1:1 scale. Cheers, Petri
  20. Carmelhill, Your class tool works: I finally tested it. The layer tool should also work as it looks to be OK. The tool does not at present 'stay on' - you need another loop for the functionality you seem to want.
  21. For those who happen to be working on Macs it would be quite possible to set up a FileMaker Pro database for selecting and placing plants. Only on the Mac, however, because then FileMaker and VW would have a common language - AppleScript. No, at this stage I won't volunteer my services - all in all it is not quite simple to do as a generic system that would suit everyone and paying customers for VW add-ons are hard to come by. The plant database of LandMark 9 is also in a FileMaker file - don't know what the situation is currently. Never looked at it as I have my own plant database system, but adding a couple of modules to it for project-specific sets and plant/symbol mapping plus the AppleScript part would be quite possible. So, you are in doubt? Well, I did write a FileMaker Pro solution for defining paint colours as VW 10+ gradients. Free from VectorDepot, if someone wants to explore the concept.
  22. How about adding 'RUN' to both? No, I did not test, but the code seems to be OK in other respects. Or do you get syntax errors? However, eg. for just hiding classes the procedure could be simplified to work on a selected object (ie. the standard object-verb syntax) and shortened to HIDECLASS(GETCLASS(FSACTLAYER)); which is what I use when I sort out imported AutoCAD drawings with 300+ classes and don't need any fancy and time-consuming dialogs. (Yes, it is one line only, no procedure name, no 'Run'.) Anyway, on VectorDepot there are already several competing & complementing class management tool kits ( including some of mine which focus on the more esoteric CAD management aspects). I believe there are tools for the purpose of the above scripts.
  23. Exploding should no longer be needed, however, turning off layers does not, AFAIK, make any difference unless you say WBLOCK. I don't know what ArchiCAD does in its AutoCAD export, but if it exports everything as blocks with attributes, 4-5 minutes is not a long time for import. Could ArchiCAD create XREFs? Highly unlikely, but you could try binding anyway. [ 05-17-2004, 05:44 AM: Message edited by: Petri ]
  24. When you 'show database headers', you have buttons for sorting and summarising. Instructions are in the manual.
  25. quote: Originally posted by abrodin@alaska.net: I successfully created a DTM using 3D loci at the triangulated points imported from autocad, 166 points. It doesn't have as much detail as I would like. Considering how all DTM programs work (=TIN, triangulated irregular nodes), that 166 is likely to be all the actual, surveyed data there is and the level of detail cannot be increased. Everything between the points is done by interpolation; if you compare your contours with AutoCAD contours, they are likely to be identical, take or leave a few centimetres.
×
×
  • Create New...