Re: [Therion] XVI output misaligned (rotated) from original TopoDroid sketches

[Paul Rowe]

Hi Bruce,
No, it's not magnetic declination. There is a fixed station in the survey
for the entrance, and for this lat/long the declination is 20.5 degrees.

You can see an example here, with the green splay generated from the
TopoDroid sketch and the grey splay coming from the exported XVI layer:
[image: image.png]

The XVI difference is -1.1 degrees. That's about the difference between
true north and grid north at this location on the NZGD2000 maps. I have
tried exporting using 'north grid' and 'north true' but that hasn't made a
difference.

Not sure if anyone has tried generating an XVI and putting it under the
TopoDroid sketch to compare them?

Cheers,
Paul




On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 at 08:19, Bruce Mutton  wrote:

> Hi Paul
>
> The misalignment is not matching the magnetic declination by any chance?
>
> Or the difference between a manual declination setting in either
> application and an automatically calculated declination based on a cs
> setting?
>
>
>
> I have not used TopoDroid since it was able to export sketches, so not
> much help, and have forgotten much of what I did know anyway.
>
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> *From:* Therion  *On Behalf Of *Paul Rowe
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 20 April 2021 10:43
> *To:* List for Therion users 
> *Subject:* [Therion] XVI output misaligned (rotated) from original
> TopoDroid sketches
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm just trying out TopoDroid for the first time as the source for scraps
> in Therion. I can view the th2 scraps in Therion and can see the stations
> and splays.
>
>
>
> However, if I then output to XVI and add the XVI as a background image in
> Therion, the XVI is misaligned. The scale is correct and I just manually
> move the background XVI image to line up with one of the stations in the
> scrap. The XVI layer is rotated slightly (1 or 2 degrees) and then doesn't
> line up across the rest of the sketch imported from TopoDroid.
>
>
>
> Has anyone run into this? I thought it might be a difference between true
> north and grid north, but exporting to XVI with north set to true or grid
> doesn't fix the issue.
>
>
>
> The XVI layer isn't strictly necessary as the stations and splays are
> already visible in the TopoDroid sketch output. It does make me worry that
> there's some underlying problem though that I need to fix.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul Rowe
> ___
> Therion mailing list
> Therion@speleo.sk
> https://mailman.speleo.sk/listinfo/therion
>
___
Therion mailing list
Therion@speleo.sk
https://mailman.speleo.sk/listinfo/therion

[Therion] XVI output misaligned (rotated) from original TopoDroid sketches

[Bruce Mutton]

Hi Paul

The misalignment is not matching the magnetic declination by any chance?

Or the difference between a manual declination setting in either application 
and an automatically calculated declination based on a cs setting?

 

I have not used TopoDroid since it was able to export sketches, so not much 
help, and have forgotten much of what I did know anyway.

 

Bruce

 

From: Therion  On Behalf Of Paul Rowe
Sent: Tuesday, 20 April 2021 10:43
To: List for Therion users 
Subject: [Therion] XVI output misaligned (rotated) from original TopoDroid 
sketches

 

Hi,

I'm just trying out TopoDroid for the first time as the source for scraps in 
Therion. I can view the th2 scraps in Therion and can see the stations and 
splays.

 

However, if I then output to XVI and add the XVI as a background image in 
Therion, the XVI is misaligned. The scale is correct and I just manually move 
the background XVI image to line up with one of the stations in the scrap. The 
XVI layer is rotated slightly (1 or 2 degrees) and then doesn't line up across 
the rest of the sketch imported from TopoDroid.

 

Has anyone run into this? I thought it might be a difference between true north 
and grid north, but exporting to XVI with north set to true or grid doesn't fix 
the issue.

 

The XVI layer isn't strictly necessary as the stations and splays are already 
visible in the TopoDroid sketch output. It does make me worry that there's some 
underlying problem though that I need to fix.

 

Thanks,

Paul Rowe

___
Therion mailing list
Therion@speleo.sk
https://mailman.speleo.sk/listinfo/therion

Re: [Therion] Need help producing scraps.kml without white blobs

[Bruce Mutton]

Hi Michael

As Tarquin mentioned, I have found that stopping the walls on both sides of the 
passage in a single scrap will upset kml generation.

Maybe pictures are clearer.

In the scenarios pictured below you need to create separate scraps each side of 
the gap.  So in your example there should be at least three plan scraps.

Personally I prefer much shorter scraps, I find 250 m to be very long, but 
other than making debugging a little harder, excessive scrap length/size should 
not be a cause of your problems.

 



 



 

Bruce

 

From: Therion  On Behalf Of Michael Ross
Sent: Tuesday, 20 April 2021 22:58
To: 'List for Therion users' 
Subject: Re: [Therion] Need help producing scraps.kml without white blobs

 

Dear Stacho, Bruce, Martin,

 

Thanks for your replies.

The low hanging fruits have been picked already long time ago:

Yellow ticks checked, outline parms checked, passage fills are displayed 
correctly in PDF.

 

Perhaps it displays differently in GoogleEarth compared to other GIS? (Have not 
yet used OpenGIS or ArcGIS).

 

I think, Stacho is closest to a potential cause.

 

It appears to me that the code path for kml generation is different from the 
codepath for PDF generation

and follows different heuristics.

 

For example, kml generation seems to be agnostic of "outline" parameters and 
direction of yellow sticks.

 

I produced subsections by selecting small maps for the output, the behaviour is 
the same, i.e., no scalability / interdependency problem.

I attach one of the scraps and the resulting map in kml.

 

I cannot easily extract a data sample for replay by you, 

but I'm happy to provide the complete data to anyone who is willing to dive 
into this problem.

 

As already said, a post-processing hint (replacing colours in the kml) would 
also help.

 

Cheers, Michael.

 

 

Von: Therion [mailto:therion-boun...@speleo.sk] Im Auftrag von Stacho Mudrak
Gesendet: Montag, 19. April 2021 19:25
Cc: List for Therion users mailto:therion@speleo.sk> >
Betreff: Re: [Therion] Need help producing scraps.kml without white blobs

 

Hi Michael,

 

I have found one issue with the current version of Google Earth - it was 
ignoring (not filling) polygons, where the last point was not equal to the 
first point.

 

It is fixed in 

 18eca78, but I am not sure, it if will fix your issues.

 

S.

 

 

On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 16:44, Stacho Mudrak mailto:li...@group-s.sk> > wrote:

Hi Michael,

 

it looks to me like it is some kind of inner/outer ring problem. Are you able 
to isolate and post some minimal sample, where this problem happens? It would 
help a lot.

 

Thanks, S.

 

On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 16:26, Michael Ross mailto:knollesim...@t-online.de> > wrote:

Hello there,

I "own" a fairly large dataset of a maze cave.
Producing PDF output works well,
but when producing kml using

  export map -projection plan  -output Scraps.kml

I get large white blobs where there should be transparency. See attachment.

First assumption was that Therion needs some help by marking certain walls 
"outline in".
But that didn't help.

Then I tried redrawing the walls of the affected passages to get long lines of 
walls rather than 
concatenated short sections of walls, assuming that would help Therion to 
better understand.
Didn't help.

Anyone had this problem so far?

If there is a way to post-process the kml file to remove the white areas, that 
would also help.

Or any other hint to systematically track this down.

Kind Regards,
Michael


___
Therion mailing list
Therion@speleo.sk  
https://mailman.speleo.sk/listinfo/therion

___
Therion mailing list
Therion@speleo.sk
https://mailman.speleo.sk/listinfo/therion

Re: [Therion] Need help producing scraps.kml without white blobs

[Martin Sluka via Therion]

> 20. 4. 2021 v 12:58, Michael Ross :
> 
> Yellow ticks checked, outline parms checked, passage fills are displayed 
> correctly in PDF.

This is not correct example of section line:



It should be in this way:



Martin___
Therion mailing list
Therion@speleo.sk
https://mailman.speleo.sk/listinfo/therion

Re: [Therion] Need help producing scraps.kml without white blobs

[Tarquin Wilton-Jones via Therion]

Hi Michael,

> but I'm happy to provide the complete data to anyone who is willing to
> dive into this problem.

Certainly I would be happy to help dissecting a survey to work out
what's going wrong. So do share if you are comfortable doing so.

One thing I immediately notice with your survey is that you seem to
expect a scrap to have two outlines, which is not permitted. Near the
southern end - where I see a white overlap in Google Earth due to the
underlying passage - you end one passage, then start a new one on the
far side of the pitch, without starting a new scrap. This happens at the
junction in the north as well.

If you were hoping to have two separate outlines there, then you need
separate scraps. If not, then you are going to get a weird overlap
anyway with the passage above and below both showing at the same time.

In the middle of the scrap, your "-outline in" oxbow also is incomplete
(the part that appears as a huge chamber in KML). Close off the open
passage end with a wall, set to "-outline in -visibility off". I don't
know if that will fix it, but it might.

Further north, you start a passage inside the other passage, which
causes another overlap. That may be correct if the passage does indeed
pop out part way inside the outer wall of the other passage. But if you
want to avoid that overlap, join the scrap walls to each other so that
the passages do not overlap.

The northern-most junction is a mess of overlaps, because you have ended
the passage with it open at each side passage, and none of them extend
through the junction in between. This is not unique to KML. If you
render your cave with a background colour in PDF, you will see the same
problem. One passage needs to "own" the junction. Meaning it must have
an outline that extends fully around the junction (or you can use
horrendous joins and have passages each owning parts of the junction).
Use invisible borders with "-outline out" if you need to, in order to
extend one of the passages through the junction so that it owns the
passage. This particular situation is covered very nicely in Footleg's
tutorial:
http://wscc.darkgem.com/footleg/therion/Therion%20Tutorial%2015thMar2016.pdf
Lesson 9

Does this help fix the problems you are seeing?

Cheers,

Tarquin
___
Therion mailing list
Therion@speleo.sk
https://mailman.speleo.sk/listinfo/therion