elch Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 Hello everyone, Is there any debugging procedure for a DGM? I have a set of modifiers, pads and grade limits, tried to adress most modifier conflicts, but there are still strange things happening in the resulting topography. For one proposed countours do odd zig-zags in unexpected places, which cannot be deleted using the "modify proposed contours" mode. It is possible to delete the extra vertices, but they just bounce right back. Also, straight and curved roads create overlapping pads which then result in modifier conflicts. Is there a way to connect them properly? Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee Mike Lamb Posted January 28, 2020 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted January 28, 2020 Hi elch, what version of Vectorworks are you using? Would you mind attaching your file here so I can take a look? Mike Quote Link to comment
elch Posted January 28, 2020 Author Share Posted January 28, 2020 Hi Mike, The file might be too big to attach (50 MB). So I created a Dropbox-link for you to download from: https://www.dropbox.com/s/yv6gfp7kks4pl0h/p80III_modell_200128.vwx.zip?dl=0 Quote Link to comment
elch Posted February 7, 2020 Author Share Posted February 7, 2020 @Mike Lamb @bgoff any ideas? No solutions? Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee Mike Lamb Posted February 7, 2020 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted February 7, 2020 @elch I think the site modifier of the roadway is causing this. I can go in and edit the contours, but they get overridden by the roadway modifiers after you exit the edit mode. I guess one workaround would be to uncheck the "use site modifiers" checkbox on the roadway, or have the site model ignore the elch-weg layer for site modifiers. I'll write up a bug for this. 1 Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee Mike Lamb Posted February 11, 2020 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted February 11, 2020 @elch Just heard back from the development team, I'm pasting their response below. I'll also attach their files. Notice that: There is a set of adjacent Roadway (Straight) and Roadway (Curved) objects as an attempt to model a complex roadway consisting of straight and curved sections. Actually, the Roadway (Straight) and (Curved) objects are not suitable for modeling such complex poly roadways as it is hard to vertically align the separate objects/road segments (as every separate roadway object could be sloped differently). As a result, the site model recognizes modifiers conflicts exactly where the separate roadway objects align to each other. In such cases, it is preferable to use the Roadway (Poly) object which models continuous roadway along a polyline and overcomes the vertical alignment issues. The Site model collects modifiers from a custom set of layers (see "modifs_from_custom_set_of_layers.png”) which includes the "modifiers” design layer. This means that all modifiers from the "modifiers” layer will be recognized and collected by the site model no matter this layer is set invisible. Notice that there are modifiers from the "modifiers” layer which overlap some of the Roadway objects, i.e. they conflict with some of the modifiers that comes from the roadways. Please see the attached "Research_Conflicts_Reasons_1.png" which illustrates why the site model recognizes conflicts between the modifiers it collects. I have prepared a fixed version of the file (see the attached "p80III_modell_fixed_v2019.vwx") where: The set of Roadway (Straight) and (Curved) objects are replaced by two Roadway (Poly) objects (they follow the same path and model the same geometry). Some of the 3D modifier polygons in the "modifiers" layer are slightly reshaped (using the Reshape tool) so they don't overlap any of the roadways. p80III_modell_fixed_v2019.vwx 2 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.