hollister design Studio Posted November 11, 2022 Share Posted November 11, 2022 Background: I tend to start my site models with topo data downloaded from my local assessors office or site surveys done by a local surveyor. I then place architecture and other "known" objects at the correct locations on this fresh site model. After that I go out with my laser and survey the site using these known locations to place them all correctly. At this point I also do grid elevations at a 10 or 20 foot grid, running elevations along driveways, and other hardscape elements that I know are going to stay where they are throughout the landscape design process. I tend to use stakes and 3D polylines on my DTM-modifier Class as my normal site modifiers as I find these the easiest to recreate actual on site conditions well also ending up with nice smooth transitions in the second model. Question: After I've got my base model and all my new stakes and polylines working together I have a pretty accurate surveyed set model ready to be modified for the project. Is there a way to consolidate all this information into a new site model? Note: I've tried to "edit proposed contours" and then copy all the polylines to pasting them in a new blank file... But this just seems to crash VW every time I try - leaving me hoping I saved before I tried something so destructive. Quote Link to comment
Tom W. Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 20 hours ago, hollister design Studio said: After I've got my base model and all my new stakes and polylines working together I have a pretty accurate surveyed set model ready to be modified for the project. Is there a way to consolidate all this information into a new site model? You can do this: In 'General' settings for the site model reduce the minor contour interval to something very small like 10mm. Go to Top View + change the ‘3D Style’ setting for the site model to ‘3D Contours’. Ungroup the site model to convert it into 3D Polygons. Use these 3D Polygons as the source data for creating a new site model (setting the contour interval to 10mm in step 1 means you're generating as much terrain detail as poss). The problem with doing this is that your original site model might have 3D Loci as the source data but your new site model now has 3D contour source data which I think is less desirable. 1 Quote Link to comment
Jeff Prince Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 21 hours ago, hollister design Studio said: Is there a way to consolidate all this information into a new site model? What is the desired outcome here? In other words why? Are you putting all of this existing information in the “existing site model data” and then doing your new work on the proposed? If so, I’m wondering what the problem is. If not, I have to ask why. Quote Link to comment
hollister design Studio Posted November 14, 2022 Author Share Posted November 14, 2022 Jeff, I use 3D polygons as site modifiers... I don't think you can designate existing or proposed for those. I've tried stakes and grades to use as modifiers, but after @Tamsin Slatter did that video on how easy, accurate, and editable 3Dpolygons on the DTM class are to really shape a land... I almost exclusively use 3Dpolygons. But that leaves me with no "existing" modifiers. So i was hoping I could collapse everything to a base state and then start to modify from there. Also, when I used to use existing/proposed Contours or Pads - since the proposed site modifiers would overlap the existing, I would end up with so many "modifier conflicts" and all those yellow exclamation points... Which seemed bad. Quote Link to comment
hollister design Studio Posted November 14, 2022 Author Share Posted November 14, 2022 On 11/12/2022 at 8:47 AM, Tom W. said: 3D contour source data which I think is less desirable. As someone who only uses contour source data, why is this? Should I be converting my source contours into Loci? My local GIS data is all contours And even the way I input when I do my own surveys (with my laser, a pen and some paper), I note my point elevations and then draw contours to fit the survey data. Quote Link to comment
Tom W. Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 4 minutes ago, hollister design Studio said: As someone who only uses contour source data, why is this? Should I be converting my source contours into Loci? My local GIS data is all contours And even the way I input when I do my own surveys (with my laser, a pen and some paper), I note my point elevations and then draw contours to fit the survey data. I only meant that I've found source data in contour form less satisfactory when it comes to editing it (via Recreate From Source Data). All my topo surveys have come to me in 3D Loci form + I like the fact you can go back into the source data + tweak/remove/add individual loci if necessary to edit the model. When I've carried out the create-a-new-existing-site-model method described above this has converted my 3D Loci into a dense web of 3D Polygons which I've found then a lot harder to edit if I've needed to. The site models I've seen here on the forum created from contours look great: a lot smoother + more natural looking that what I often end up with from a load of random 3D Loci based on where the survey guy's decided to place his pole... hence the need to go into the source data + do some fiddling... 1 Quote Link to comment
Popular Post Jeff Prince Posted November 14, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted November 14, 2022 3 hours ago, hollister design Studio said: As someone who only uses contour source data, why is this? Points give you move control, contours have to be interpolated. Contours are already an interpolation of spot elevations, so you are interpolating interpolations and likely introducing error and large data for VWX to chew through. 3 hours ago, hollister design Studio said: Also, when I used to use existing/proposed Contours or Pads - since the proposed site modifiers would overlap the existing, I would end up with so many "modifier conflicts" and all those yellow exclamation points... Which seemed bad. That is not true in my experience. Existing and Proposed are tracked separately and can overlap without issue. 3 hours ago, hollister design Studio said: So i was hoping I could collapse everything to a base state and then start to modify from there. Easy.... 1. switch to a 3d view (very important) 2. select your site model and ungroup it. 3. Grab the resulting mesh, convert it to 3D Polys 4. Grab the resulting group, create site model from source data. There, you have effectively created an exact TIN of your existing conditions w/o the complexity associated with keeping the site modifiers. There are other ways to do it, but this is the most accurate. 7 Quote Link to comment
Tom W. Posted November 15, 2022 Share Posted November 15, 2022 16 hours ago, jeff prince said: 3. Grab the resulting mesh, convert it to 3D Polys This is a very good tip Jeff thank you. And you can then run '3D Polys to 3D Loci...' of course to land up where you started again: a site model built from 3D Loci. That's going in the manual... 2 Quote Link to comment
hollister design Studio Posted November 15, 2022 Author Share Posted November 15, 2022 @Tom W. Ok I'm trying to run with this... But I can't find '3D Polys to 3D Loci...' I've looked in modify/convert, drafting adds, and 3D power pack... Quote Link to comment
rDesign Posted November 15, 2022 Share Posted November 15, 2022 Depending on your Workspace, the ‘3D Polygons to 3D Loci’ command is located under: Architect: AEC > Survey Input Landmark: Landmark > Survey Input 2 Quote Link to comment
Jeff Prince Posted November 15, 2022 Share Posted November 15, 2022 3 hours ago, Tom W. said: This is a very good tip Jeff thank you. And you can then run '3D Polys to 3D Loci...' of course to land up where you started again: a site model built from 3D Loci. That's going in the manual... just keep in mind, the TIN is probably more accurate. 1 Quote Link to comment
Boh Posted November 15, 2022 Share Posted November 15, 2022 On 11/15/2022 at 6:33 AM, hollister design Studio said: Jeff, I use 3D polygons as site modifiers... I don't think you can designate existing or proposed for those. I also use 3d polygons for site modifiers. Partly because I'm using vw Architect which doesn't have all the tools vw Landscape does. But also because I've found the site modifier tools I do have available hard to get to grips with. To distinguish between existing vs proposed modifiers I place the 3d polys modifying the extg model inside the dtm as site model data. That leaves all the remaining 3d poly modifiers acting on the proposed dtm. What I also do, which I've found useful is once I have fully modelled my extg dtm, is duplicate it and use the duplicate for the proposed dtm. I like to keep an extg dtm set aside as a reference. 4 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.