Hi all,
I have two meshes of a tunnel at different epochs which have holes in them due to noise or lack of data capture. Creating the profiles is no problem, however when i compute the compare inspection of profile-to-profile the tool is annotating the roof-to-floor in areas rather than roof-to-roof (Image attached). I can obviously remove the annotations with settings but i cant reduce the search radius for compare/inspect.
Any workarounds available or maybe my workflow is at fault..?
MeshMeasure+MeshRef+Neutralaxis ==> create profiles (Image 2)
Move to compare/inspect and use Tunnel inspection + MeshRef as reference, set remove points more than of .2m (Image 3)
3DR Tunnel Profiles compare inspect for tunnel monitor
-
- I have made <0 posts
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 7:04 am
- 4
- Full Name: David Winters
- Company Details: RM Surveys
- Company Position Title: HDS Surveyor
- Country: Australia
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Has thanked: 3 times
3DR Tunnel Profiles compare inspect for tunnel monitor
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- I have made 40-50 posts
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2020 5:20 pm
- 3
- Full Name: Yannick Stenger
- Company Details: HEXAGON
- Company Position Title: Product Manager
- Country: France
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 6 times
Re: 3DR Tunnel Profiles compare inspect for tunnel monitor
Hello David,
You seem to have lots of holes in your 2 meshes and you should try to fill at least the small ones first (select the mesh > Surface Modeling menu > Fill holes > Check the option "select borders shorter than..."). Indeed, there may be issues when there are too many isolated parts during the comparison/inspection step of the profiles.
Can you also confirm that you checked the option "Remove points distant of more than" in the Compare/Inspect step ? It seems so according to the third image of your message so the results are suprising.
If necessary, you can also share the dataset with me and we'll have a look: [email protected]
Thanks!
Yannick
You seem to have lots of holes in your 2 meshes and you should try to fill at least the small ones first (select the mesh > Surface Modeling menu > Fill holes > Check the option "select borders shorter than..."). Indeed, there may be issues when there are too many isolated parts during the comparison/inspection step of the profiles.
Can you also confirm that you checked the option "Remove points distant of more than" in the Compare/Inspect step ? It seems so according to the third image of your message so the results are suprising.
If necessary, you can also share the dataset with me and we'll have a look: [email protected]
Thanks!
Yannick
-
- I have made <0 posts
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 7:04 am
- 4
- Full Name: David Winters
- Company Details: RM Surveys
- Company Position Title: HDS Surveyor
- Country: Australia
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Has thanked: 3 times
Re: 3DR Tunnel Profiles compare inspect for tunnel monitor
Hi Yannick,
Thanks for the feedback. The holes have been filled in to best ability but due to the nature of the tunnel ( Corrugated steel ) not all holes have been filled. Have managed to get passed the issue with a different reporting technique but the tool, If I understand correctly, is not intended for as-built to as-built dataset comparison.
Regards,
David
Thanks for the feedback. The holes have been filled in to best ability but due to the nature of the tunnel ( Corrugated steel ) not all holes have been filled. Have managed to get passed the issue with a different reporting technique but the tool, If I understand correctly, is not intended for as-built to as-built dataset comparison.
Regards,
David
-
- I have made 40-50 posts
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2020 5:20 pm
- 3
- Full Name: Yannick Stenger
- Company Details: HEXAGON
- Company Position Title: Product Manager
- Country: France
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 6 times
Re: 3DR Tunnel Profiles compare inspect for tunnel monitor
Hello David,
Thank you for the updates! Actually, Cross Section Analysis workflow is also appropriate for as-built vs. as-built comparisons.
Another way that you can use for this workflow is:
- analysis: comparison between the 2 meshes
- define the appropriate gradient (over/under for example)
- extract: sections along curve and check the option "create inspected section"
You will have the informed sections you're looking for. The difference with the predefined "Cross section analysis" workflow is that you won't have an automatic report from this workaround, but you can give it a try.
For your information: thanks to your feedbacks, we're currently improving our section/section command to prevent inappropriate results from happening when holes create a group of polylines for each section. This bugfix should be released in a month or so. So again, thank you for your contribution!
Yannick
Thank you for the updates! Actually, Cross Section Analysis workflow is also appropriate for as-built vs. as-built comparisons.
Another way that you can use for this workflow is:
- analysis: comparison between the 2 meshes
- define the appropriate gradient (over/under for example)
- extract: sections along curve and check the option "create inspected section"
You will have the informed sections you're looking for. The difference with the predefined "Cross section analysis" workflow is that you won't have an automatic report from this workaround, but you can give it a try.
For your information: thanks to your feedbacks, we're currently improving our section/section command to prevent inappropriate results from happening when holes create a group of polylines for each section. This bugfix should be released in a month or so. So again, thank you for your contribution!
Yannick