Jump to content

Anders Blomberg

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


90 Excellent


Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Landscape architect
  • Homepage
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,628 profile views
  1. @jpccrodrigues Did you try to relocate the internal origin close to the geometry rather than moving the geometry to the origin? Setting an internal origin allows you to keep the georefed origin, it's how I set up all my models, otherwise I run into all sorts of weird issues.
  2. Thank's! I'll give it a try. I'm using Sublime because a programmer friend recommended it but haven't looked at other solutions yet. Might try PyCharm as well!
  3. I’ve taken up a Python class to try and do some scripting for VW on my own. So I’m very much a total rookie in this. I use Sublime as IDE on my mac and want to use the intelli-sense for VW as described here. But I can’t figure out how make us of the file File:Vs.zip so that Sublime picks it up, anyone here that could point me in the right direction?
  4. Thanks for confirming! I’ll wait for the next update then.
  5. I'm building a network and am trying to use a "atan"-node. It seems however that whatever I try I can't get a proper output from the node. I tried feeding it with both int, real and dim numbers, but always get the same error, as shown below. I brought in a math friend and he believes there might be an error in the code, specifically a part called bComplex, but we don't know how to edit the node so we couldn't try our hypothesis. Anyone know if there is a bug in the atan node or if I'm missing something? @Marissa Farrell perhaps?
  6. I seem to always struggle with georeferencing no matter how much I work with it 🙂 This time around the fault might actually be within VW 23 though but I just wanted to check with the forum first. I start out with 2 copies of the same file, both set up with the same/correct georeferencing settings. I have received a georeferenced DWG that I've imported into one of the files to create a shuttle file. The imported geometry sits right where it's supposed. The other file is intended as the master file, so I create a viewport for the shuttle file. This time around the geometry is way way of location, roughly by half a globe. Did the same thing in 2022 and here the geometry sits in the right location in both files. I know 23 has some GIS/referencing updates, so maybe my workflow is incorrect? I attach some screenshots and the two files. NBK NY = shuttle, Björkhaga = master. Might I call upon @Katarina Ollikainen for some help again? Björkhaga.vwx NBK NY.vwx
  7. Nice, I believe the triangulation of DTMs are simplified in 2023, might be the reason. I'll give it a go later.
  8. @Samuel Derenboim Great stuff! Thanks for letting us know. I will try this out as soon as I get a chance. Currently I'm transitioning these types of drawings to the new Graphic Legend tool, looks to be one of the really great features of 2023. As the tool still uses the same way to fetch data it would be hugely helpful if I could make this work as you describe. I actually picked up a Python course just to try and learn how to do this as I figured an IF statement might work but never understood how 🙂
  9. Inspiring stuff! Will this go into production as a product? Storm water management is often a big issue in my projects and regulations are really tightening up in this area in Sweden.
  10. Really hoping for the new grading options to be the game changers I've been told they will be! Looks promising!
  11. Dug up this from the past and the subtraction has been working nicely but all of a sudden stopped. @Benson Shaw, would you mind having a look at the attached file and see if you get the same issue? Subtract issue.vwx
  12. Agreed on the need for this. Did you come to a solution @NFULL?
  13. @Nikolay Zhelyazkov Works like a charm for me, thanks for remembering this thread and getting back to us! Now if I could only click the component instead of defining it in the tag definition, a wish for the future.
  14. @markdd Beyond wonderful! This'll ease up my life a great deal! Did not realise changing units from document units (meters) to Meters specifically would allow for a second option with precision to be accessed. Exactly what I was hoping for. This solved the shoulder issue as well!
  15. Ah, this leads me to another issue I never managed to resolve. Be it because of me or the software. I want to model with a precision of 0.001 m. But I want the majority of my dimensions and stakes to show a precision of 0.01 m. Details are typically shown with a precision of 1 mm. That's just what my standard dictates, can't do anything about that. So I really hope I'm missing something here but it seems that the precision of stakes and dimensions are controlled from the global document Units setting, rather than an individual Dimension/Stake style/setting, which would seem more normal to me. So for this reason I have my units setup as shown below. Not ideal as I'm missing that mm precision in normal modelling, but it's seems the only way for me to show values as needed on my sheets. Please tell me I'm doing something wrong here 🙂
  • Create New...