Benson Shaw

@zoomer This is rather annoying/confusing use of naming and language. Your scale and other examples show the strange variety. All the international translations of the words and how those might be conflated among users is a potential issue. As a user, I'm not so concerned that any of this will cause errors, although I fall into habits, and therefore may be missing better workflows and efficiencies. But, I do want my beloved Vectorworks to seem "modern" and capable. Writing an essay to explain commands vs tools and not knowing why or how decisions at the engineering level were made, or whether some desire to maintain long outdated legacy played a part makes me seem like a junior member of some secret society - need to know basis. @Bertadesign Hope you get what you want! All these approaches are really great. Thanks @jeff prince and @Kevin McAllister ! Here is a take using a texture photographing a small area of soil in my garden. I swept away (mostly) the wood chips on the surface. Imported it as a resource image, thence to texture. Which is to say, perhaps no need for a distance shot of a large expanse of sandy soil. The 20'x30' example "scene" is shown in 2 ways. On the left find several extrudes with the same texture at different scales and showing different portions of the image. On right is a drape surface of the extrudes with the texture applied and scaled a bit. Wire frame versions also shown. Full image used in the texture is shown at bottom.

Vwx nomenclature can be daunting. Here’s some ‘splainin’: In general, processes accessed via the menus in menu bar (Edit, Modify, Model, etc) are Commands. Items accessed via the various tool palettes (Basic, Attributes, Snaps, 3d, Fasteners, etc) are Tools (eg Select, Reshape, Wall, Deform, Loft, etc). The DTM feature is a command. It has changed names over the many vwx versions since it was introduced (way back - maybe v10 or v12.5?), but the communal memory and some of the dialogs retain and use the various names synonymously: Digital Terrain Model (aka DTM), Terrain, Terrain Model, or the current one - Site Model, or its acronym, SM. Most of these are a mouthful and keystroke heavy. DTM remains popular, if unofficial. That vertical boundary “wall” around the DTM has changed names, too. Earlier it was a “hull”, now it’s a “skirt”. Go figure. -B

Ahhh. Scenery. Terrain model could work, but maybe not best in this situation. If the unevenness will be constructed, eg from lumber or foam, just try a bunch of extrudes sized for the materials available. Add solids and texture the result. Or do a Drape Surface over the whole bunch and apply your texture to the drape. Probably some other ways, too. post back if help needed with these techniques

Welcome to the forum! Here is some info: Vectorworks University has a Free Form Modeling unit with a several lessons/topics on NURBS modeling. Scroll through the course list to select: https://university.vectorworks.net/course/index.php?mycourses=0&search=Vectorworks-Fundamentals&tagfilter[category]=38&tagfilter[type]=0&tagfilter[difficulty]=0&categorysort=default&mycourses=&search=Vectorworks-Fundamentals A web search for "Vectorworks NURBS" yields loads of hits including several videos and links to other vwx NURBs resources. Post some questions here, too, if you have things you are trying to model, or need help with processes or tools. Good luck! -B

Good question. I don’t think so. And that’s annoying. Im a guy who loves everything NURBS, but i also like my source data to be intact. -B

Intended for informal visuals only? Never knew that! Kind of alarming if not widely known. I don’t normally need any cut/fill data so has not been an issue. But thanks for the notice. I will try to elaborate on my understanding of the ways mods affect a terrain mesh: The algorithm for terrain mesh is that the 3d nodes (contour vertices, modifier vertices, stakes, loci) “detect” the nearest nodes sideways, up, and down and connect with a segment. Depending on dispersion, any node might host many segment ends. The goal is create enough of these nearest neighbor connections to make the mesh with triangular faces throughout. No crisscrossing allowed. Also, no connections to same z beyond one nearest neighbor on either side. This sometimes fails, connecting to several nodes at same z, creating flat areas on the terrain - there are some fixes. A pad site modifier cancels the existing terrain nodes it surrounds and edges it intersects. Inboard, it connects its nodes to themselves (eg a rectangular pad will divide into two triangles with a new edge along one diagonal). Outboard, the modifier follows the algorithm to connect to all nearest neighbor nodes eg the corners of a rectangular pad will connect many new edges to the nearby contour nodes. A grade limits modifier, say a poly closely surrounding two pads, “remembers” the unmodified terrain (prior to the pads) and sends itself to that un modified surface. This is essentially a 3d poly, likely with many vertices. It cancels all edges it intersects, then makes new connections. Outboard it recreates any original terrain that was modified by pads. It connects its nodes to the nearby nodes of the contours. Inboard, it cancels effects of nodes of contours and other enclosed source data, but not of the enclosed site mods. The grade limits nodes connect to nearest pad corners. If the pads have separation, new edges are formed from pad to pad across that gap, rather than to the grade limits. Question to vwx folks - Why is it called “grade limits”??? With the s? Maybe Grade Limit? Or Grade Limiter? Or Limit? Or Anything less awkward . . . -B

Hi, Ed! Did you resolve this? I was hoping @Tamsin Slatter or @Tony Kostreski or other with deeper knowlege would jump in here. ??? I think that if the terrain updates and looks OK, then the warnings can be ignored . . . but why put warnings for a non problem ?? So far, my experience is that pads with coincident edges, including the pads built into hardscape modifier objects, maybe even grade limits and other mods, produce the warnings, but not problems. Therefore OK to ignore. I think that only applies if same type of mod - ie Two pads can share an edge, but not a pad and a grade limits. One example of this, I think, is the multiple pads created in a Road object . They seem to share edges with adjacent road panels. Or, maybe these have some micro offset at creation (can anyone verify?) But if mods overlap, then the warnings appear, and other problems can happen such as slow/fail updates, funky surfaces, etc (so, edit to correct any overlaps). Something else unclear to me is whether warnings can be ignored if two pad edges appear coincident in plan, but have different z, or if the these edges are not same slope. Aligned slab with mod has a built in pad object. Slab with retaining edge has also a built in 3d poly (the retaining edge, sort of a variable z Grade Limits), which is slightly offset, maybe about 1mm outboard. I believe two coincident Aligned Slab with Retaining Edge will have overlapping modifiers (unless these objects offset the pads inboard instead of the retaining edge offset outboard???). This might work, but might get too complex and cause immediate or future crashes or freezes. Might screw with the cut/fill calcs and slope analysis??? Better to use the plain modifier version and draw a new grade limits surrounding the colliding slabs. Perhaps a strategy can help avoid warnings or problems: Create hardscape objects but use the plain version, not the modifier version. Apply all the slopes, then extract edges (3d tool set>Extract tool) from the bottom surfaces (makes NURBS), convert to 3d Polys. Assign those polys to the Site>DTM>Modifier class. Add a surrounding Grade Limits. Update the terrain. It will be cut to match the z, slopes, and edges of the hardscapes. Or make pads in advance (touching or slightly offset), surround with a grade limits object, then create the hardscapes to match. Or intermittent - one hardscape is a modifier, adjacent one is not, next adjacent one is modifier type, etc. Some things I try to keep in mind: Vertices in a modifier connect to the nearest terrain mesh nodes or nearest vertices of other modifier objects. Grade limits have the additional property that they automatically send to surface. So outboard, they interrupt the mesh (connect in place). Vertices of modifier objects inside the grade limits connect to each other, or to the vertices on the grade limits - whichever is shortest path. Vectorworks terrain is supposedly incapable of vertical or overhung mesh segments (but I guess shared modifier edges are exception? as long as they do not overlap?) arrrrgh -B

@Biscontin Try the Split tool again. I agree with @markdd and @Ride . Try the Line Trim (3rd) mode with the Split selected option. It leaves the split objects open. They can be closed in the OIP if desired. Anyway, this seems to be what you are describing. -B

Depending on level of detail you want, there may be several options. One way would be to model the terrain (site model, DTM) and apply an image texture. The DTM can be slightly modulated, or as detailed as desired. For instance: The DTM can be more or less flat with a few undulations, and just depend on the texture to display the general idea. Or, to follow the photo, the DTM can have an embankment around the building, and several "shelves" where surrounding terrain is excavated or eroded or compacted to different elevations. Accomplish this with detailed source data (or best guesses) - lots of contours or with lots of stakes or with lots of 3d loci. Or via standard site modifiers or 3d polys drawn, then assigned to the Site>DTM>Modifiers class. Or the newer Edit Surface sculpting modifiers (access in the DTM's Object Palette). Note: these sculpting tools are difficult to undo, so start with a duplicate terrain. The image texture can be made from an overhead image showing an expanse of similar ground. Make your own image (drone? capture from a balcony, or top of an excavated pit, or???) or acquire from other sources. Or, adapt an aerial view of a wide expanse of topography. Might need a bump shader, or some image enhancements prior to import for texture creation. For added detail, model some small rocks and send them to surface. Add some sparse plants. Post back with your progress! Maybe some other ideas out there? Anyone do this before? -B

I'm seeing a slightly different scenario, but still a bit of a mystery. Straight and (most) continuously curved paths offer the scale options. But, if path is several straight segments, eg polyline with intermediate corner vertices, the scale options are gray. If same path is filleted, the scale options are available. Although if the fillets are too small, the EAP may fail, or have funky surfaces. So, a theory: In math, a continuous curve has only a single definition for each point (Search Continuous Curve this for more math info). A single function/formula defines every point along the entire path. A poly with corner points is discontinuous in that each corner point is defined by two formulae - the same location (xyz) has two formulae associated (defining) it - it's the end/start point of two different forumlae . vwx EAP cannot resolve more than one definition for each location in space. except . . . vwx resolves the unscaled corner points via a mitering interpretation. But attempting to scale the miter from two directions produces conflicts. Filleting the corner points often allows the scaled EAP options, but the results can contain overlapping, self intersecting surfaces and volumes. Looks kinda weird, or fails. Just blathering some generalized thoughts. Others may have a better handle on this. -B

Welcome to the forum! Could you please elaborate a bit on the problem. Eg - existing image textures were correctly oriented but now have mysteriosly flipped? All of them? Or - existing image textures are all OK, but new ones are flipped when applied? Or - new source images import flipped into the Resource Manager? Or - All the existing source images in the Resource Manager suddenly flipped. Or - ??? Meanwhile workarounds: Select an object displaying a flipped texture Open the Render tab in the OIP Adjust the rotation value by 90° this will affect the texture orientation only on the selected object Or in the OIP Render tab Expand the Texture button Click the Edit texture or Edit Color Shader for the selected texture Click button to edit the image and apply the flip. This edits the texture definition, so will affect all the instances of this texture in the drawing. Or, similar to above Edit the texture definition in the Resource Manager HTH -B PS: it helps trouble shooting if posts show Operating System and vwx product/version. Add signature via the forum Account Settings menu at upper right corner of forum screen.

@Peter W Flint @unearthed my experience is limited, but i use .shp format between QGIS and vwx. The data and geometry seem to translate perfectly. I depend on the myriad QGIS tutorials because i usually have to learn new QGIS processes, or relearn processes after the long pauses between my uses. Remember to send a donation to QGIS. The international workgroup does amazing things for all of us! -B

That’s great for a few nested closed contours! Similarly, A bunch of intermediates could be simultaneously developed if a single NURBS surface is formed from the whole nest. In Kevin’s step 6 instead of Split, apply the Contour tool (3d tool set, way down near bottom of the list) in Front view. Set the tool spacing/count same as original interval, with start point at the lowest half interval. If the source curves are a combo of open and closed polys it gets more difficult. Separate NURBS surfaces are needed for each “hill” and for any adjacent areas of open polys. Although I think the Contour tool will cut a selection of surfaces. More steps needed if the new contours need to be isolated or altered in some way All of these methods are too cumbersome, I think, especially if many intermediate intervals are desired. Even the interval control in the DTM is rather unsatisfying in current state, and not available in all modules. The desire/wish is a tool or command to automatically develop those 2d intermediates from a selection of polys. A new tool/command? or new mode to the Offset tool? 2d? 3d? Both? Not an unreasonable feature request. -B

Can you offset the source line? Prior to the Create Objects command, So that ctr of fence is placed correctly.

Ideas/ workarounds. None perfect: A. You demonstrate most of the technique in your 2nd screenshot. These contours look like they only need 10 or so vertices to get close. Not a great workflow if you need lots of these: Engage the Polyline Tool>Cubic Spline mode. Pick a start point at area of low curvature. Hover to acquire a snap point on lower contour. Hover again perpendicular (prox) on next contour. Hover near midway between the acquired point to acquire their midpoint. Click to place a vertex at the mid point. Repeat at intervals until returning to start. Maybe 10 vertices? Just get it close. If edits needed, Engage the Reshape Tool>Add vertex mode>Cubic Spline mode. Add new vertices in the poly via same technique. A. Alt If the orig contours are polylines with only a few vertices: Duplicate a contour. Edit with the Reshape tool as above to position the vertices between 2 orig. contours B. Go 3d! Create a Terrain, adjust the minor contour interval. Note: This requires Landmark, Architect, or Designer package. It's not in Fundamentals, or Spotlight. Duplicate the layer with your contours. In the new layer, Delete anything that is not a contour, then: Select all, Modify>Convert>3d Poly (result is a group of 3d polys all at z=0) Ungroup Create a Terrain (aka DTM, aka Site Model). Several ways, but here is one: Select each individual Poly in turn. Adjust z value to match your landscape data or at least increase by some regular interval. Repeat for each 3d poly. Select all 3d polys. AEC menu>Terrain>Create Terrain from Source Data. In the dialog Adjust the Minor contour interval to match your source data. Adjust the Major multiplier to match your source data. Click OK to show your DTM. Set drawing to Top/Plan to display things in 2d. If OK, Select the DTM, in OIP click the Site Model Setting button. Adjust the Minor Contour Interval to 1/2 the original. Adjust Major Contour Multiplier as appropriate. Click OK to review the contours added between the originals . They may be jaggy, but basically in right place. Give it a try. Post back, maybe can be refined. -B