Hardscape limitations?

[DSmith2300]

Please forgive my newbie questions. I'm trying to learn DTM and it's baking my noodle.

1. Can a complex 2D polyline like this be used to create a hardscape? 

2. I say 'hardscape' because it seems that offers the 'draping' functionality.   This polyline below was retraced from an engineer's 3D model (including TIN) but I cannot seem to understand the settings to make it sit back into the pre-designed contours where it should be.  (this is for a distanced photomontage so it doesn't have to be super accurate)

 

I also have 2 other tracings for 'Verge' and 'Block Interiors'. I'll need to do sidewalks next, God help me.  If I can get this one to work.

 

The original ACAD .dwg has the road strings, kerbs etc all following the new shaping of the site, but they are a mess. Unjoined, thousands of unnessary vertices etc. etc. so I thought I'd just retrace the big stuff in 2D.   I just haven't understood how to get it back into the landscape. The pink 'road' below in the DTM was generated by VW from the 3D polygons.

May I should just attempt to re-colour the pink into black and call it good.

In fact maybe I should just forget the whole DTM stuff and do it all in Photoshop...

 

MANY thanks for any advice.

Edited June 21, 2024 by DSmith2300
forgot to say thanks.

[Poot]

Yes, the hardscape can be draped onto the surface. You would simply right click that shape, create objects from shapes, hardscape -(edit properties after creation, or through the Object Info Palette)

In the hardscape settings, in the Draw 3d panel, you can choose the draped option in the lower configuration dialog box. This doesn't work if you have also chosen the 'slab' options for 3d type, as slabs don't drape.


You should also be able to convert your object directly into a road, and then have it follow the surface...(send stations to surface), and that way have curbs more easily. Similar process to use the 'create objects from shapes', using the 'roadway custom kerb' option. Keep the original shapes when you create it, as it might create a road surface that fills all the holes of your shape, but you can send the newly created roadway to back *ctrl+b* and then clip the surface with the original geometry to cut the holes out *modify, clip surface, or right click, clip surface*

Edited June 21, 2024 by Poot

[DSmith2300]

Thanks Poot!

I'll keep trying.

 

Was wondering if my DTM from "Invalid Data / overlapping polys" is also causing issues. That's a whole 'nother headache.

Thanks!

[DSmith2300]

Poot,

Thanks for those suggestions, but none of that seems to work.

The thing doesn't drape, no matter what.  The pathway or roadway options insist on set widths and then says it recurves back onto itself and refuses to do it anyway.

The Texture Bed option just disappears the polyline and it cannot be selected or changed any further except by undoing until it becomes visible again and not a texture bed.  Sending to surface as a simple polyline caused VW to crash... again.   LIterally the 10th time today at least.

 

 

So frustrating, unintuitive, limited and poorly explained in the official literature. 

It seems that if you want a very simple, FLAT, lego-like, boxy modeling in a tiny area, then this is just the job. 

 

So much for VW's DTM.

Sigh...

Back to Sketchup / Lumion / Photoshop.

 

 

[Tom W.]

@DSmith2300 is your Site Model set up to 'talk' to the Design Layer that the Hardscape is on? Check your 'Use Site Modifiers on' settings in the General pane of the Site Model Settings.

[DSmith2300]

Sounds interesting.

Thanks.

 

EDIT: Yes it's set for 'on all layers'. I assume it was set that way on all my previous attempts too because I haven't touched it.

 

Still not working. 

In hardscape settings:

3D Type: none.

Configuration: 'Draped' 

The other Configuration tab in the settings has 'path' or "Boundary'.  I tried 'path' and it REALLY didn't like that. 

 

'Send to Surface' makes it touch the site model on the topmost corner.

 

 

 

I also thought while I went out for a walk there, maybe I just need to  spend even more time re-drawing the roads one by one using the roadway setting in their various widths using single polylines.  Probaby have to forget any flared junctions if a previous post criticising that lack of functionality is still valid.

Edited June 21, 2024 by DSmith2300
another thought

[DSmith2300]

ANOTHER 2 HOURS LATER:

 

NOPE. 

New site models. New polylines.

Trying every box and setting under the sun.

 

DOES.

NOT.

WORK.

I'm seriously depressed about life as it is, and software that refuses to do what it's supposed to do makes it even harder.

My boss is going to fxxxing kill me for wasting so much time trying to do what is supposed to be simple task.

It's  9pm on a Friday night and I've spent all day since 9am trying to get site modelling to work.   I guess I'll just eat all those hours because I cannot put them on my timesheet.

 

I'm not sure what the psychological mindset behind VW is, but it is NOT streamlined, remotely intuitive or even vaguely user-oriented. 

Obscure functions hidden away or perhaps entirely hinging on a tickbox that know one knows about, is not good software. 

 

Far out.

I've tried to attach the file but even that's failed due to some server error ("-200" it said). it's only 40mb. 

 

You may or may not see me on Monday at this rate.

 

Edited June 21, 2024 by DSmith2300

[VIRTUALENVIRONS]

3 minutes ago, DSmith2300 said:

I'm seriously depressed about life as it is,

I always go down to the local bar at this point.  It doesn't help the work, but I feel a lot better.  Cheaper than a Shrink.

 

Question, is the image below something like what you are trying to do.  If so, this was done using the "Project" tools.  This is all 3D geometry.

 

 

[Tom W.]

1 hour ago, DSmith2300 said:

ANOTHER 2 HOURS LATER:

 

NOPE. 

New site models. New polylines.

Trying every box and setting under the sun.

 

DOES.

NOT.

WORK.

I'm seriously depressed about life as it is, and software that refuses to do what it's supposed to do makes it even harder.

My boss is going to fxxxing kill me for wasting so much time trying to do what is supposed to be simple task.

It's  9pm on a Friday night and I've spent all day since 9am trying to get site modelling to work.   I guess I'll just eat all those hours because I cannot put them on my timesheet.

 

I'm not sure what the psychological mindset behind VW is, but it is NOT streamlined, remotely intuitive or even vaguely user-oriented. 

Obscure functions hidden away or perhaps entirely hinging on a tickbox that know one knows about, is not good software. 

 

Far out.

I've tried to attach the file but even that's failed due to some server error ("-200" it said). it's only 40mb. 

 

You may or may not see me on Monday at this rate.

 

 

Copy + paste the site model into a new blank file. Create a simple rectangular Hardscape + see if you can get that to work in Drape mode (remember to update the site model). If it does, then at least you know it's not you doing something wrong + there's something particular about the complex-roadway Hardscape that is a problem + you can start to investigate what it is about that Hardscape VW doesn't like... I have no idea whether a Hardscape with such a complex shape might cause problems or not but someone else might.

 

And try posting the file again as there are plenty of people who would be happy to help you get to the bottom of this.

[Jeff Prince]

It’s pretty hard to help someone when they:

1. Do not provide the file

2. Blame the software instead of their lack of training.  Yeah, VWX is tough to learn like all of the other softwares like it, deal with it.

3. Fail to use the search function here on the forum to see several examples of this same situation explained in detail.

Post the file and I bet the source of your sorrow will be identified in minutes.  It’s almost always something simple.

[bcd]

its a good puzzle alright.

can you send over the raw survey data and you tracing in 2 separate files?

 

[DSmith2300]

Apologies for last nights exhausted gloom.

I have some serious frustration limits when it comes to stuff like this.

 

I've tried several new blank files and simple rectangles to drape.

 

The TIN I import is flagged as 'invalid' because of the overlapping triangles, yet VW still makes a model from it. I've tried making loci from the polys but VW just crashes every time so I gave up on that.  I've got ACAD LT also but apart from 'OVERKILL' that can't do much to help. I've tried simplifying the TIN polys in VW but nothing happens. Even when I take a 6th of the TIN to lessen the load.

Yeah I'll admit I'm diving straight into it all and expecting to figure it out fast. 

 

As I previously said, the file fails to upload. And again this morning.

Here's a wetransfer link good for three days. https://we.tl/t-EoZrA18Jg8

 

Thanks for any help or advice you can give!

 

 

Edited June 22, 2024 by DSmith2300

[DSmith2300]

Update: I'm downloading a trial of CIVIL3D so I can export XYZ point data from the ACAD TIN I was given. 

Perhaps cleaner data for the terrain model might help.   

If that doesn't help I'll look at making the roads individually as generated from single poly lines.

[tsw]

A cleaner site model would probably help make it less fussy. However, I was able to get the hardscape to drape on your site model by simplifying the polyline. I'd guess there were colinear vertices imported from AutoCAD that were causing it to fail. I also had to check the correct site modifiers layer in the file I downloaded (not sure if it got unchecked when importing), so you might double check that in your site model settings.

 

Here's the link to the file. I'll make another post with the steps I took to clean up/simplify the polyline: https://we.tl/t-0hwm5VVurM

[tsw]

Here are the steps I used to get it to drape properly:

1. Double check that the appropriate site modifier layers are checked in Site Model Settings:
2. Right click on your Hardscape object and choose Edit Path
3. With the path selected, click Modify > Drafting Aids > Simplify Polys... (I used a value of 5 for Minimum Distance)
4. That simplifies the outer poly, but you'll need to simplify the inner shapes too, so go to Modify > Edit Polyline
5. With the inner polys selected, run Simplify Polys... as before
6. Exit the path and the Hardscape should drape.

[DSmith2300]

Thanks TSW!

I'll dive back into it and see if I understand. Especially the extended range of site modifiers in your screen shot which I don't think I saw before..

 

 

I've been trying all day (a Saturday) to create data for a cleaner site model but failing.

CIVIL 3D turns out to be like Autocad but even less fun to deal with. This is why I'm not an engineer or coder. 

I found a cool LISP routine that will produce x,y,z points from the 3D faces, but it freaked out on the whole site so I tried to run it in sections.

Then it mysteriously stopped producing points after 1/3 of the site, not matter what I did. 

It runs, but doesn't produce points, even in new drawings or after restarts.

 

I dunno. I'm just cursed when it comes to technology. My mind doesn't work in the unexplained restricted corridors the software demands. 

I've just given up on it and will delete the free trial of C3D altogether, as trying to get it to do the simple task of spitting out XYZ points from the 3d faces is just too much.

 

I'll also just whimp-out and ask for a different file with points (not 3d faces), from the engineer on Monday.

I feel like failure for not figuring out a work-around.

Sigh...

All learning.  I keep trying to tell myself that.  All learning...

 

EDIT: @tsw 

I followed your steps including simplifying the hardscape polylines and it finally lay down where it was supposed to. 

What an obscure set of steps to have to do!  Many thanks for that trick, I'll keep in in mind next time.  The value of '5' kinda mangled the road cuves, but VW crashed again soon afterwards, so I'll have to retry anyway. I'll see what other number I can get away with. 

 

Cheers

 

 

 

Edited June 22, 2024 by DSmith2300

[Jeff Prince]

You'll have better luck with this model if you eliminate the duplicate TIN data, delete the erroneous work floating at the bottom of your site model, get rid of the stuff that is far from the site (probably a hardscape definition created in  3d view, I suspect the Verge of the road), and use Hardscapes in the None/Texture Beds configuration instead of the Slabs/Draped if you want faster performance and do not need to see their thickness.

 

If you actually need hardscapes with thickness, you should rebuild this site with clean data.  It shouldn't matter if it is a TIN or Points so long as you do not have duplicate data or errors in it.  Each of those TIN vertices becomes a hardscape point too, which really slows things down.

 

Here's a video of the offending geometry at the bottom of your model and what can be done with hardscapes in the none/texture bed configuration once things are cleaned up.

 

Site modeling is exponentially harder when you start with bad data.

 

 

 

[tsw]

Great tips from Jeff on cleaning up your site model. Since the TIN data is essentially a complete mesh, I got similar results by entering Recreate from Source Data mode and deleting everything EXCEPT the 3D polys in the class "3DTIN-tin SUPER FS". (Select all by class and invert the selection, or lock that class temporarily and select everything else, etc.) Then there were just a couple errant polys in one corner I had to manually delete that are causing a weird bump in the model.

 

[Benson Shaw]

@DSmith2300  Another thing to watch for is distance from drawing origin.  The xy geometry in this site is centered at about 20Km/130Km. This great remove can cause performance, render and other problems.  Hate to throw another set of workflow issues at you, but moving the geometry so it centers near 0,0 helps. But messes with locational data when exchanging files with collaborators.  Or, add Georeferencing to the list of more things to learn about Vectorworks and site work.  But don't despair. Lots of help here and with the online help/university, and other sources.  It can be done!

 

-B

[Tom W.]

10 minutes ago, Benson Shaw said:

moving the geometry so it centers near 0,0 helps. But messes with locational data when exchanging files with collaborators

 

Or you can use the Geolocate Tool or the 'Center Drawing on Internal Origin' command to 'move' the internal origin so that the drawing geometry is within the 5km safe working zone (of the internal origin).

[Benson Shaw]

@Tom W. or others - The locational info of the Center Drawing feature remains a mystery to me, therefore I almost never use it. For my benefit and @DSmith2300, if a file from other software is imported, say for collaboration, and geometry appears at great distance.  . . When the Center Drawing on Internal Origin command is applied, the geometry appears to relocate near the drawing 0,0. At least that is what OIP and screen rulers show. But what is the effect on locational information in export to source file format (eg dwg)? Would the geometry manifest at the expected location? 

 

thanks. 
-B

[Tom W.]

4 hours ago, Benson Shaw said:

@Tom W. or others - The locational info of the Center Drawing feature remains a mystery to me, therefore I almost never use it. For my benefit and @DSmith2300, if a file from other software is imported, say for collaboration, and geometry appears at great distance.  . . When the Center Drawing on Internal Origin command is applied, the geometry appears to relocate near the drawing 0,0. At least that is what OIP and screen rulers show. But what is the effect on locational information in export to source file format (eg dwg)? Would the geometry manifest at the expected location? 

 

thanks. 
-B

 

When you run Center Drawing on Internal Origin it should move the drawing geometry + the User Origin (i.e. the rulers) together, so the geometry will shift to a new position over the Internal Origin (blue cross hairs) + the User Origin/rulers will move with it meaning the coordinates of the geometry (relative to the User Origin/rulers) will remain unchanged. However using this method I have noticed that the Geoimage (if you're using one) does not move as well.

 

If you instead use the Geoimage Tool (to 'move' the Internal Origin) the Geoimage does move but the User Origin does not, so you then need to run the 'Set User Origin to match the Georeferencing coordinate system' command to move the User Origin back to where you want it (assuming you're using a coordinate system).

 

I am not doing this kind of thing that often as I have a Georeferenced template file set up which I use on 99% of my projects + never have to change the position of the Internal Origin as most of my work is within the safe working zone. But when I have had to move it after the fact (or correctly speaking, move the drawing closer to it), the above is what I have found. Be glad to be corrected by others or have it explained better.

[DSmith2300]

Thanks all.

As I probably explained badly; that this was the file I got from the engineer and I couldn't do much about it.

Next time I'll ask for a layer of purely points only.

 

I tried to clean the damn triangles as best as I could but with ACAD LT I have limited options.

It's ALL overlapping.  I tried everything I could think of to make it NOT like that. 

What's the equivalent of EXPLODE and OVERKILL in VW to clean it up? And BTW 'EXPLODE' won't do anything with 3d faces even in full ACAD AFAIK.

 

 

Good video from JP for highlighting garbage under the model. I wonder If I caused that?  

And yes the last rogue area was me getting something finally lie down and 'drape' even if looking frustratingly ugly. 

 

OK lesson learned: Ensure input model data as stripped to bone as possible, clean it every which way but loose, and maybe don't ask for a TIN, points only.

 

Thanks again.

 

Still depressed but at least I've learned a bit about VW. 

 

 

[DSmith2300]

No idea what the hell that is.  Thanks though, good catch.

[DSmith2300]

Quote

r, add Georeferencing to the list of more things to learn about Vectorworks and site work.

Benson: Yes georeferencing was why I just left the file alone after importing data, but probably should've changed the UO.

It's got to go into another file by a colleague who's done some pointcloud work on an adjacent site.