Clipping shape from site model

[Tom W.]

1 minute ago, line-weight said:

It's easier to ignore the linework beyond cut plane when it's not a suspended floor with void under!

 

Do you have a screenshot? I can't visualise it or understand why it would be any different to my case i.e. seeing the foundations of the walls behind.

 

Or you mean the section cut goes through a solid ground bearing floor + the suspended floor is beyond?

[line-weight]

4 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

 

Do you have a screenshot? I can't visualise it or understand why it would be any different to my case i.e. seeing the foundations of the walls behind.

 

Or you mean the section cut goes through a solid ground bearing floor + the suspended floor is beyond?

 

Yeah sorry my remark doesn't actually make sense.

 

In fact the way I tend to do it at present is by drawing the ground fill as a 2d polygon in annotations. For me this feels less fiddly than stacking viewports. And it has the advantage that it can block out any linework that would be hidden by the "ground". There is often some slightly messy linework visible through the floor void, which ideally I'd not have there (because it doesn't really aid in understanding the drawings) but can live with.

 

I tend to make that linework grey too.

 

[Tom W.]

4 minutes ago, line-weight said:

In fact the way I tend to do it at present is by drawing the ground fill as a 2d polygon in annotations.

 

Yes I am very comfortable doing this too where the ground levels are known + consistent. But on a sloping site I really want to be taking the ground levels from the model + checking the foundation depths are adequate + where my floor levels are relative to the ground.

[line-weight]

14 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

 

Yes I am very comfortable doing this too where the ground levels are known + consistent. But on a sloping site I really want to be taking the ground levels from the model + checking the foundation depths are adequate + where my floor levels are relative to the ground.

Likewise - which is why I'd like to be able to show just a surface line, taken directly from the site model, in my section vports and then use this line as a guide/check when drawing in the 2d fill. That's why I was interested in the idea if a site model that would just be a kind of surface shell, with holes in where necessary for buildings to sit. Unfortunately I still can't find a way to achieve that.

[Tom W.]

5 minutes ago, line-weight said:

That's why I was interested in the idea if a site model that would just be a kind of surface shell, with holes in where necessary for buildings to sit. Unfortunately I still can't find a way to achieve that.

 

Don't pad with retaining edge modifiers to do this? Just set the pad elevation to the level of the ground under the suspended floor.

[line-weight]

39 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

 

Don't pad with retaining edge modifiers to do this? Just set the pad elevation to the level of the ground under the suspended floor.

They can't (as far as I know) do any kind of undercut so it doesn't work for foundations that step outwards below ground level.

[line-weight]

If section vports could just be told to always draw site model cut plane polygons "behind" all other cut plane geometry....most of these issues would go away.

[line-weight]

So... the problem with just making a "hole" in a site model using a pad modifier is this:

 

You get a hole with vertical sides:

 

And in a section viewport which uses objects "own attributes" for the cut plane this looks something like this, once a building is placed in that hole:

 

 

 

The thick green line is the outline of the cut through the site model.

 

[As an aside - this line's attributes seems to be controlled by "2d site border" in its graphical components settings. Is that what's supposed to happen? And I can't work out what controls its fill]

 

Those vertical sides can't have any kind of undercut, so if you have something like this strip foundation, there is this kind of problem where the green line crosses the foundation:

 

 

If I could simply tell the site model to draw the surface of the ground but nothing for the sides & bottoms of these holes, then this issue would go away - but I don't think that's possible - there doesn't seem to be an individual setting that controls these elements.

 

I was curious to see what happens if I use "components" in the site model. If I use two (each determined by a dedicated class) then this happens.

 

 

I am using a green upper layer and a brown lower one. I noticed that the sides & bottom of the hole seem to take the attributes of that lower layer, so I wondered what would happen if I turned off the class that determines the attributes of that lower layer, and it is this:

 

 

Here is what I now get in section:

 

The unwanted bottom & sides have disappeared and I get a kind of shell surface to the terrain (I can adjust the thickness of this).

 

I can then go ahead and use a 2d polygon in annotations to "fill in" the ground. It would be nice not to have to do this, but it at least works, and I can always "live check" & adjust the ground line if there are changes to the site model.

 

 

 

As can be seen in the screenshots, this change to the "components" approach causes various types of mayhem with mesh triangles appearing where they weren't before (including in top/HSVP views), but my next step is to understand what's controlling that exactly.

 

[Tom W.]

3 minutes ago, line-weight said:

Those vertical sides can't have any kind of undercut, so if you have something like this strip foundation, there is this kind of problem where the green line crosses the foundation:

 

This is why I prefer to use two VPs + stack the building over the top of the DTM.

 

I always have the 'Draw site border' option turned off + place the Site Model in it's own class + this class dictates the appearance of the Site Model in section (pen + fill).

[line-weight]

11 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

I always have the 'Draw site border' option turned off + place the Site Model in it's own class + this class dictates the appearance of the Site Model in section (pen + fill).

 

I have:

(1. temporarily turned off "components" for the site mdoel)

2. Turned off "draw site border" in the site model's settings

3. Set "2d site border" attributed to be <site model class> (as per screenshots below)

4. Put the site model in its own "site model object" class

5. Set the attributes of that "site model object" to have a certain pen and fill

 

But I still get the same: the pen has effect on the section line in my section viewport but the fill colour seems to have no effect (fill simply remains white)

[Tom W.]

Maybe post a file. Your VP is set to use the object attributes right? The DTM object is set to use class attributes rather than object attributes?

 

 

 

[line-weight]

11 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

The DTM object is set to use class attributes rather than object attributes?

 

Not quite sure what setting you mean here?

[Tom W.]

2 minutes ago, line-weight said:

Not quite sure what setting you mean here?

 

In the attributes palette.

[line-weight]

2 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

 

In the attributes palette.

Right, of course.

Had everything set to "by class" except fill.

 

So as far as I can understand, in a section viewport, for the cut plane through a site model object:

- The pen is determined by whatever is set under "2d site border" in the graphic properties of the site model object.

- The fill is determined by whatever fill is set in the attributes of the site model object itself

- Whether or not "draw site border" is ticked in the 2d display settings of the site model has no effect on these settings

- However, unticking "draw site border" stops the pen type chosen for section purposes appearing in plan views of the site model.

 

It doesn't really make sense to me that these two separate things (the outline of the site model in plan, and the outline of the cut plane in section) should share the same attributes and be controlled by the same thing.

 

 

[Tom W.]

1 minute ago, line-weight said:

Right, of course.

Had everything set to "by class" except fill.

 

So as far as I can understand, in a section viewport, for the cut plane through a site model object:

- The pen is determined by whatever is set under "2d site border" in the graphic properties of the site model object.

- The fill is determined by whatever fill is set in the attributes of the site model object itself

- Whether or not "draw site border" is ticked in the 2d display settings of the site model has no effect on these settings

- However, unticking "draw site border" stops the pen type chosen for section purposes appearing in plan views of the site model.

 

It doesn't really make sense to me that these two separate things (the outline of the site model in plan, and the outline of the cut plane in section) should share the same attributes and be controlled by the same thing.

 

 

 

I'm not sure why you're seeing this. For me the Site Model class determines what you see in section, which is what you'd expect because in section you are seeing the 3D object:

 

[line-weight]

1 minute ago, Tom W. said:

For me the Site Model class determines what you see in section, which is what you'd expect because in section you are seeing the 3D object:

Does that remain the case if you go the site model's graphic properties and change the pen colour under "2d site border attributes"? So that this is no longer controlled by <site model class>?

 

 

 

[Tom W.]

In my case '2D Site Border' is assigned to a dedicated class + those class attributes have no bearing on what I see in section. However you're right, I just tried making the '2D Site Border' attributes by object + this impacted on the section VP in the way you describe (pen is affected, fill isn't).

 

When I changed '2D Site Border' back to attributes by class I also had to make the Site Model pen by class in the attributes palette because this seemed to have changed to by object in the process. So definitely something fishy going on but luckily not something that has ever affected me so far because all my settings are by class. 

[line-weight]

7 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

In my case '2D Site Border' is assigned to a dedicated class + those class attributes have no bearing on what I see in section.

If assign it to a dedicated class, and "make all attributes by class" then those attributes are carried through into what I see in section.

 

 

[line-weight]

9 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

I also had to make the Site Model pen by class in the attributes palette because this seemed to have changed to by object in the process

That explains what confused me then!

[line-weight]

16 hours ago, Tom W. said:

In my case '2D Site Border' is assigned to a dedicated class + those class attributes have no bearing on what I see in section. However you're right, I just tried making the '2D Site Border' attributes by object + this impacted on the section VP in the way you describe (pen is affected, fill isn't).

 

When I changed '2D Site Border' back to attributes by class I also had to make the Site Model pen by class in the attributes palette because this seemed to have changed to by object in the process. So definitely something fishy going on but luckily not something that has ever affected me so far because all my settings are by class. 

 

Another question for @Matt Panzer I think.... is this a bug?

[line-weight]

Just now, line-weight said:

 

Another question for @Matt Panzer I think: is this a bug?

 

[Matt Panzer]

On 12/17/2024 at 5:21 PM, line-weight said:

Another question for @Matt Panzer I think.... is this a bug?

 

That sure sounds like a bug.

The best I can say is to submit a bug so the right people can take a look at this.

[line-weight]

1 hour ago, Matt Panzer said:

 

That sure sounds like a bug.

The best I can say is to submit a bug so the right people can take a look at this.

Have submitted.