When clipping point features with point features, only the coincident points are written to the output, as shown in the graphic below. When the Input Features are points, the Clip Features can be points, lines, or polygons. When clipping line features with line features, only the coincident lines or line segments are written to the output, as shown in the graphic below. When the Input Features are lines, the Clip Features can be lines or polygons. When the Input Features are polygons, the Clip Features must also be polygons. This is particularly useful for creating a new feature class-also referred to as study area or area of interest (AOI)-that contains a geographic subset of the features in another, larger feature class. Use this tool to cut out a piece of one feature class using one or more of the features in another feature class as a cookie cutter. The input features would be your Polygon features that you want to have the many holes and the clip feature would be he Polygon feature that has the shapes of those holes.Įxtracts input features that overlay the clip features. One useful thing to note is that you do not need the 3D Analyst tools to use the “Calculate Geometry” method, so maybe what you lose in the accuracy you gain in your pocket.I would suggest you use the Clip tool in ArcGIS. Volume calculation isn’t 100% accurate, as you will have to use the old fashioned “area x height” method, but having something in the ball park is better than nothing, or at least it is better than exploding the multipatch into all its rudimentary parts, calculating the volumes based on area x height, and then summing it all together. Now you are ready to go! I thought that using a multipatch within ArcGIS Desktop would provide me with inconsistent results or less accuracy, but how wrong could I be? Comparing heights calculated from using the Min Z and Max Z tools provides the exact same results as those obtained directly from the surface and lidar data, so where ArcGIS Pro couldn’t fill this data (I had inconsistency with Google Earth models), using this method would get it spot-on every time. This enables the tool to use the data frame coordinate system for applying the information. Instead, change your data frame to a projected coordinate system (applying correct transformation). If, as above, you are using a geodesic coordinate system, it will tell you a lot of the tools are disabled but, don’t go re-projecting any data. Underneath the option for “Field Calculator” you will see the geometry option. Not used it before? Open ArcGIS Desktop, open your attribute table, and right-click on a field. This involved going back to good old ArcGIS Desktop.įirst thing to note is that you need to be using a projected coordinate system to enable the “Calculate Geometry” tool. So, I had to find an alternate way of calculating missing heights and volumes where this issue was occurring. There are tools to overcome these problems, like the “Enclose multipatch” tool that will average the triangles until the multipatch is enclosed-but more often than not, for complex buildings it will simplify it too much. The reason behind this has something to do with requiring an ENCLOSED multipatch.įrom a technical viewpoint, I can understand why, as without polygon limits, how can you calculate the volume? Some would say that the process should take into account the ground to enclose the multipatch, but which datum is that? How do you know that there aren’t any small slithers that cannot be estimated? I thought I’d look at adding volumes for models from SketchUp and Google Earth, but to my surprise they failed. The problem occurred when I went to use more complex data. Using the 3D Analyst “Add Z information” tool, I’ve been able to iterate through whole cities and automatically add height, volume, perimeters, and even roof slopes. For simple extruded footprint data, it has worked really well. Recently I’ve been working with calculating volumes of buildings that are multipatch data. This post is meant to help those who are using the software on a regular basis but finding issues with using the fields with multipatch data. Let’s be clear: this isn’t a stab at the all-new, singing and dancing Esri software.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |