#1 Some suggestions for improvement von Droniste 15.09.2021 21:43

Hi Jochen,

Here are some new suggestions for improvements:

Levels: level plan mode vs level section mode.
Would it be possible to divide "Level" in 2 columns, levels can be useful for overlaying areas, but the horizontal overlap vs. vertical overlap doesn't follow the same logic (top to bottom vs foreground to background). It would be very helpful to be able to set and filter levels for both types of view (plan vs sections)? maybe Level_Horiz. and Level_Vert.

Filters: when you have numerous spalys, having all that information at one can make make the interpretation difficult (too much info at once)
Here is a couple of extra filters than could be helpful:
- Filters by Station. When you have numerous splays, it can make life easier to
- Filters by Z with +/- range... this would only display splays within a depth range and would allow to focus on specific area. That could help in drawing details.

Elements:
Water: brook and streams should have a dashed option. sometime the water disappear in a narrow passage and it is not possible to survey but we're able to guess a water path... this should be dashed.

Data:
New automated fields: It could interesting to have a columns with calculated path length from entrance, total negative and positive elevation from entrance (i.e. addition of all negative elevation difference between stations and addition of all positive elevation difference between stations along the caver path).
Material filter: Only display rows with Material filled in. That would provide a quick summary/table of the equipment required. This should be displayed with columns Supplementary and the above suggestion

#2 RE: Some suggestions for improvement von CaveRenderPro 28.09.2021 17:23

avatar

Hi Thomas,

thanks for your ideas.

Levels: level plan mode vs level section mode. --> This is not planned. Could you compile Level_Horiz (e.g. 2) and Level_Vert (e.g. 3) into the existing field Level (like 23). Plans could filtered with e.g. "21-29" and sections could filtered with e.g. "13,23,33,43,53"

Filters by Station. When you have numerous splays, it can make life easier to --> because of alphanumeric station names, it sounds complicated, if you want to select more than one station

Filters by Z with +/- range... this would only display splays within a depth range --> Filtering by depth and height (e.g. 100-200) seams a good extension to level, passage, year.

Water: brook and streams should have a dashed option. --> Good idea

New automated fields: It could interesting to have a columns with calculated path length from entrance, total negative and positive elevation from entrance --> I will check, if I could add at least the path length into the status line (right click at station, Information)

Material filter: Only display rows with Material filled in. That would provide a quick summary/table of the equipment required. --> Could you use Excel to filter material/equipement?

Regards

Jochen

#3 RE: Some suggestions for improvement von CaveRenderPro 30.09.2021 18:09

avatar

Mit Release 8.9.0:

- Neue Filterregeln für Messlinienauswahl (Grafik-Messlinien-Filter, Zeichnungen-Messlinien-Filter):
-- Tiefe des Messpunkts in Meter
-- Höhe des Messpunkts in Meter

#4 RE: Some suggestions for improvement von CaveRenderPro 01.10.2021 12:33

avatar

To select stations/splays, with Release 8.9.0 you can filter by id

#5 RE: Some suggestions for improvement von CaveRenderPro 03.10.2021 14:18

avatar

New with Release 8.9.0: dashed water lines

#6 RE: Some suggestions for improvement von CaveRenderPro 08.10.2021 17:40

avatar

New with release 8.10.0:

Calculation of path length between two stations and display in status line (right click at station, Information)

#7 RE: Some suggestions for improvement von Droniste 18.10.2021 13:12

The new depth and height filters work fine, thanks.

A couple of suggestions
- why not having both depth and height as one filter with e.g: 100/-50 ?
- filtering by altitude could be also interesting for multi-caves.

The french translation "profondeur"/"hauteur" sounds a bit awkward to me. "hauteur" isn't clear in this context. I suggest to use the combo "dénivelé négative" for depth / "dénivelés positive" for height and if you merge both depth and height in one filter "dénivelé".

#8 RE: Some suggestions for improvement von Droniste 18.10.2021 13:14

Filter by ID is a good idea.
Would it be possible to add the ID# in the bottom information toolbar?

#9 RE: Some suggestions for improvement von Droniste 18.10.2021 13:15

dashed water lines: great thanks!

#10 RE: Some suggestions for improvement von Droniste 18.10.2021 13:18

Calculation of path length:
Thanks!
Do you think it would be possible to highlight the path calculated? in complex network it can be interesting to see what is actually the calculated path.

Xobor Forum Software © Xobor
Datenschutz