Sign in to follow this  
Numbers

Modifying Multi-Numbered Terrain Features - Intersection Characteristics

Recommended Posts

To whom it may concern,

 

The following post is meant to understand the characteristics of how Home Designer Software product handles intersecting rectangular features associated within the "Terrain" feature menu, in any of the 3D views.


Background:
During a learning exercise, there was an attempted to understanding how "Terrain Features" interacted with one another. In an exercise, two 50ft long by 4ft wide rectangular feature were added and placed within a 100 ft by 100ft terrain perimeter.  Each feature, which for the purposes of this posting will be referred to as a channel, was placed perpendicular to one another.  Additionally, each channel overlapped the other.  So, that when it was looked at, it would look like a giant "X".  Then each channel was sunk below ground by 8 ft.  Afterward each channel material selection was changed to give so contracts to the imagine. After reviewing the results, a strange thing was observed.

At the end of one of the two channel, a camera view was placed.  Looking at the intersection, the wall farthest away, and left and right of the channel that was being look down at, was still there.  If the camera view was re-position along the other channel, the same phenomena would occurred.


Reference:
Attached are 2 images.


Question:
Is this as design, or is this a limitation of the program, a bug within the software, a quark of how the software functions, or some other issue?
Additionally, is it possible to remove those three walls where the intersection occur?


Problem:
The 3 walls at the intersection are blocking the user's ability to look down the channel to the other side. Also, if the view is rotated left or right a little, one wall drops off while another takes the place of the location that was just viewed.


Solution Objective:
To obtain a method for looking at each terrain feature without seeing the walls or floor of the other terrain feature, interfering with the image.  


Suggestion:
To-Be-Determine (TBD), awaiting feedback, based on response to posting.
 

 

Thank you.

 

post-5425-0-44051500-1452561905_thumb.jpg

post-5425-0-57750600-1452561915_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is unclear exactly what you want, as an outcome (what do the walls represent in your example?). What do the walls represent or what is your intention?

The results are empiric and speak for themselves. Part of learning how the software works or fails to work can be discovered empirically, the theory as to how they work is contained in your Reference Manual, Users Guide and in various tutorial videos. How the software is programmed by its creators is beyond my purview, I know how to use the software to get a specific result because I have been using and teaching this software to others for over twenty years but that does not mean that I know why it does many things that it does do.

 

DJP 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Potter,
 
Thank you for your feedback.

The walls at the intersection are not suppose to represent anything.  They are not suppose to be there.  It should be two intersecting perpendicular channels, whereby the walls at the intersection get, either automatically or manually removed the view.  As for the material that were used to color each wall, that to had no meaning, other than to give each channel wall its own contrast.

 

Another way to think the problem is, imagine there is a line that is 10 ft long, place a cut at 4 ft and a cut at 7ft, from one of the edges.  Remove all the line between 4 and 7 feet.  What should be left, is what gets displayed.

Similarity to this example, that 4 to 7 foot line is not automatically being removed when using two overlapping terrain features are added.  

 

Attached are two images in a 2D view, one show the intersection with 4 walls crossing in the middle.  The second, shows what it is supposed to look like, without the 4 walls.

 

 

 

The concept of drawing an "X" shape layout using lines, and then converting the overall shape into a polyline, does work.  The shape can be define as a Terrain feature and the whole shape can be sunk into the ground, just as before.  There are no intersecting walls in the middle as before, and the material can be change to whatever material is needed.  The problem with doing this that way is,  if there was a need to change some selection of the wall, in terms of material, you can't just change that particular section, without change the whole outline.   For instance, if there was a need to change all the north side facing walls to a different material, or change material for all the channels that run east west, than you can't do that; not without effect the other walls.

 

The last image is what is produced when using the "line to polyline" method.  Right basic result, but material adjustments ability becomes a problem.

 

Thank you.

post-5425-0-65621900-1452637865_thumb.jpg

post-5425-0-27710000-1452637873_thumb.jpg

post-5425-0-27161000-1452643424_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this