Jump to content

jmb123

Member
  • Posts

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by jmb123

  1. Hello Jonathan, Robert, & Peter, I'll look into these issues once I get back to my iBook later today. My hunch is that this is not the source of the problem but it's always worth double checking. I keep coming back to the fact that I didn't seem to have these issues when the model was in VW 10.5.1. On the other hand, I've also added a garage door to the model since 10.5, and it is not displaying properly in VW 11.0.1 either. Thanks, John
  2. Thanks Jonathan, Yes I did select the creation of both the proposed and existing DTM when I exectuted the model command. My intent was to place both the DTM's and the site modifiers all on the same layer. John P.S. Maybe your version 11 manuals will help me get some of my issues sorted out.
  3. Thanks Peter, I checked to make sure that all the doors and windows were in the wall based on the object info palette - they are, and some show up, and others don't. Hmmm? John
  4. Thanks for the feedback Robert. 1. I didn't change any of the classes from the original properties when the symbols/objects are inserted. The assigned class on all of the doors/windows is "none" and I checked to make sure that class is visible. 2. Even though all of the windows/doors are assigned to the same class. The visibility differs in OpenGL - some are visible, and some are not. 3. The only "Style" class that was available was "Glazing 1" (I didn't see a "Style-#" option). Out of curiosity I tried the "Glazing 1" assignment - it made no difference, it remained invisible even though "visible" was selected. What do you think? Thanks again, John
  5. I've come across a problem where windows and doors are visible in plan view, but not visible when rendered in Open GL. For what it's worth some of the same windows and doors objects were displayed with no problem in VW 10.5.1 Any ideas? JMB 600 Mhz 640 Mbyte iBook Mac OS 10.3.5 Industry series 11.0.1
  6. Hello, I'm not having success in getting the cut & fill command to work. I've gone through the steps in the Landmark manual and as best I can tell, I've followed them correctly. I created a seperate file with only the DTM aspects of the design in order to focus on the problem. I used the 2d polygons to 3d contours command to successfully generate both an existing and proposed DTM. I place the site-modifiers (there are several) on the same layer as the DTM, and it successfully modifies the proposed model. When I attempt to run the cut & fill command I get a "miscellanous error" message. What might I be doing wrong? 600 Mhz 640 Mbyte G3 iBook Mac OS 10.3.5 Industry series 11.0.1 Thanks, John Brubacher
  7. jmb123

    Large DTMs

    Robert, OK, I've got to jump in here. First of all, I appreciate the effort you and your staff expend in continuing to improve the product. For example, the improvements made to the Landmark user interface found in Vectorworks 11, are certainly a step forward. I have found the interface easier to understand, and therefore quicker to perform the iterative process required to get a usable DTM. Yet, I continued to have some difficulties so I gave tech support a call. The response I received gave me some insight on how to get the DTM tool to provide more accurate results. I was told that one will experience better results by converting the 2d contours to 3d polygons instead of using 3d loci. This was what I had been experiencing, but I though maybe I was doing something wrong. What I would suggest while the users wait for an improved DTM generating algorithm, is for Nemetschek to be more clear in the supporting documentation about what input methodologies work best with the current algorithm. Specifically in this case, tech support admitted that one would get better results by converting 2d contours to 3d polygons, instead of using 3d loci. For what it's worth I've never been able to get 3d loci to generate anything but a DTM with all sorts of bizarre contours. In addition, based on my conversation with tech support, I've confirmed that a more accurate and robust model can be generated by manually interpolating additional 2d contours as source data for the DTM algorithm. By robust I mean a model that more readily accepts site modifiers without generating bizzare results. Based on some of the other posts, I don't think my experience is unique, and I'm sure others would appreciate some additional clarity from Nemetschek in this regard. Finally I appreciate your efforts to provide perspective on the situation by reminding us that "it's only dirt". Of course what we are really considering here is the accurate placement of dirt, not the dirt itself. Overall, I'm very pleased with VW 11, I think it provides excellent "bang for the buck" and I look forward to experiencing the fruits of your labor - continued improvements to the product. John Brubacher Mac OS 10.3.4
  8. This seems to be somewhat similiar to what I'm attempting. I would like to generate a DTM with accurate cut and fill. I have generated a site model using extrapolated data from a survey. I discovered that using the 2D Polys to 3D Contours method generated acceptable results. In contrast, if I attempted to generate a model using 3D Loci, the results were a mess. Generating the proposed cut model seems to work fine by using the site modifier tool. My quandary is in regards to generating an accurate fill modifier. My intent is to modify the site with fill that is not a flat or sloping pad, but rather a mound of dirt that will eventually be landscaped. Is the best solution to use the site modifier tool to generate a pad with a relatively small area, at the top of the mound, and then use the fence tool to create a polygon that represents the base of the mound? I guess my key question is whether this is the best method to generate an accurate fill calculation? I want to be able to trust the area and volume numbers calculated by the DTM. Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...