Best Recent Content
This is fantastic! I went back to the drawing that led me to request this feature - it took less than a second to do what took me about 20 minutes of manual plodding. This features works even better than I had imagined and I love the automatic grouping. Just outstanding. My colleagues are also quite delighted.
I really through it a test and gave it about 800Mb worth of LAS point clouds to process. My machine ran full out for about 45 minutes and when it was done, I had my point clouds on to layers based on the feature type (ground, vegetation, structures, etc.) and grouped by the original file. Saved me uncounted hours of work!
I have completed adding a new right-click option to the Control Center allowing you to split a layer into new sub-layers by some attribute value or the feature description, type or name. The new layers are automatically grouped together under a group with the same name as the original layer. I have placed a new build at http://www.globalmapper.com/global_mapper12.zip with the change for you to try. Simply download that file and extract the contents into your existing v12.xx installation folder to give it a try. If you are using the 64-bit v12 version there is a new build at http://www.globalmapper.com/global_mapper12_64bit.zip .
Let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Global Mapper Support
To add to the above. I imported a KMZ which has been exported from Arc using NTv2 OSTN02 and loaded into GM with the original SHP and a KMZ exported from GM.
The SHP and KMZ from GM matched perfectly but the KMZ from ArcGis did not. I assume its because Arc is using a newer projection than GM.
Is there any way to add the newer projection to GM?
Any help would be much appreciated.
We have an open request (GM-9327) to add the EPSG code to the Projection window. It is currently in the queue for Global Mapper 22, but that is not a guarantee that it will be included in that release. I have added your information to the feature request to indicate that another user is interested in this functionality. Thanks for the suggestion.
curves said:I have been experimenting with certain tools to calculate the volume of water in potential dam sites. I have been using the 'pile volume' tool which gives an array of feature information including varied data on volume. when I calculate the volumes using mathematical formula I get a very different answer than that given by the pile volume data.
Is this tool accurate and reliable for this type of calculation? Is anyone using this tool for the same purpose? Can anyone shed some light on why there is so much variation in calculation methods?
My current work flow using Global Mapper involves:
1: Generating the contour map using the DEM and creating an area feature of the reservoir at the desired contour elevation.
2: Select the area feature and initiate the volume command
3: Choose the "Perform multiple calculations over a range of base heights" and enter the lowest and highest elevations within the area (425 to 440 as shown), then press "OK".
4: The results are shown below with the highest "fill volume" highlighted as 13,285,150m3.
5: You can copy to clipboard and paste to MS Excel to generate graphs live below.
6: If you want to have a more direct volume computation, just do step 1 - 2 and choose "Use same base height value for all vertices", enter the desired elevation (440 here) and ensure the value is selected as "above sea level".
7: Voila, the fill volume is same.
I have verified this with the manual method and the volumes are not significantly off.