Hi,
Following are the polygons i used to run triangulation. In order to run it,
i had to increase tolerance to 3.7. Data has some attached polygons.
However, for different data with attached polygons, triangulation executed
with very less tolerance (0.001).
POLYGON ((540499.45 182736.05, 540500 182734.45, 540501 182731.75, 540500
182731.4, 540499.05 182731.1, 540500 182728.3, 540500.2 182727.65,
540501.15 182727.45, 540500.45 182723.65, 540500 182723.65, 540499.95
182723.65, 540492.95 182724.8, 540492.75 182723.4, 540499.05 182722.6,
540498.7 182720.05, 540495.35 182720.15, 540492.35 182718.9, 540488.6
182719.55, 540489.2 182723.35, 540490.05 182727.95, 540493.5 182730.1,
540492.25 182733.65, 540499.45 182736.05))
POLYGON ((540429.14 182733.57, 540426.14 182742.85, 540430.78 182744.35,
540433.78 182735.07, 540433.71 182735.05, 540429.14 182733.57))
POLYGON ((540450.88 182745.69, 540452.37 182741.08, 540447.72 182739.58,
540444.72 182748.85, 540449.37 182750.35, 540450.88 182745.69))
POLYGON ((540426.14 182742.85, 540429.14 182733.57, 540429.07 182733.55,
540424.49 182732.07, 540421.49 182741.35, 540426.14 182742.85))
POLYGON ((540440.08 182747.35, 540443.07 182738.07, 540438.43 182736.57,
540435.43 182745.85, 540440.08 182747.35))
POLYGON ((540443.07 182738.07, 540440.08 182747.35, 540444.72 182748.85,
540447.72 182739.58, 540443.07 182738.07))
POLYGON ((540435.43 182745.85, 540438.43 182736.57, 540438.36 182736.55,
540433.78 182735.07, 540430.78 182744.35, 540435.43 182745.85))
POLYGON ((540492.25 182733.65, 540490.95 182737.25, 540486.8 182736.45,
540485.1 182738, 540492.55 182746.6, 540495.8 182743.75, 540495 182742.85,
540496.1 182739.7, 540497.95 182740.35, 540499.45 182736.05, 540492.25
182733.65))
POLYGON ((540478.8 182748, 540475.2 182749.5, 540473.05 182746.25, 540468.3
182745.7, 540468.2 182746, 540465.85 182745.9, 540465.65 182749.45,
540462.95 182749.25, 540462.8 182752.65, 540464.25 182752.75, 540464.05
182755.85, 540467.65 182756.05, 540467.8 182752.7, 540469.7 182752.85,
540469.2 182757.05, 540472.3 182757.4, 540473.35 182757.55, 540473.5
182756.4, 540476.65 182755.05, 540477.45 182756.85, 540481.65 182755.05,
540478.8 182748))
POLYGON ((540436.7 182709.2, 540436.25 182710.85, 540435.6 182710.7,
540434.1 182716.2, 540455.2 182722, 540457.9 182712.2, 540461.05 182700.85,
540450.1 182697.85, 540448.7 182703, 540443.6 182701.55, 540441.2 182710.4,
540436.7 182709.2))
POLYGON ((540482.7 182740.65, 540482.5 182740.5, 540481.15 182742.25,
540482.3 182746.5, 540478.8 182748, 540481.65 182755.05, 540485.75
182753.25, 540484.95 182751.35, 540488.1 182750.05, 540488.95 182750.75,
540491.4 182747.55, 540491.6 182747.25, 540482.7 182740.65))
POLYGON ((540482.05 182804.5, 540481.35 182808.15, 540483.4 182808.7,
540498.25 182812.9, 540499.1 182808.9, 540485.4 182806.2, 540485.4
182805.2, 540484.1 182804.9, 540482.05 182804.5))
POLYGON ((540500 182693.55, 540501.9 182693.1, 540503 182697.8, 540508.4
182696.55, 540505.1 182682.4, 540500 182683.55, 540497.2 182684.2,
540498.35 182689.25, 540497 182689.6, 540498 182694, 540500 182693.55))
POLYGON ((540503.7 182699.05, 540500 182698.55, 540485.3 182696.55,
540483.15 182712.5, 540489.45 182713.35, 540491.05 182714.65, 540500
182715.95, 540509.5 182717.25, 540510.05 182711.65, 540511.3 182700.05,
540503.7 182699.05))
POLYGON ((540505.3 182768.3, 540500 182767.4, 540495.7 182766.6, 540495.35
182768.85, 540493.3 182768.55, 540492.9 182771.1, 540500 182772.45,
540504.65 182773.35, 540505.3 182768.3))
POLYGON ((540495.7 182766.6, 540500 182767.4, 540505.3 182768.3, 540505.95
182763.25, 540500 182762.15, 540498.8 182761.9, 540498.5 182764.2, 540495.6
182763.75, 540495.55 182764.2, 540493 182763.85, 540492.7 182766.05,
540495.7 182766.6))
POLYGON ((540504.05 182777.65, 540500 182776.85, 540492.3 182775.4,
540491.95 182777.95, 540494 182778.2, 540493.8 182780.25, 540500 182781.5,
540503.45 182782.25, 540504.05 182777.65))
POLYGON ((540504.65 182773.35, 540500 182772.45, 540492.9 182771.1,
540489.4 182770.5, 540483.5 182769.6, 540483.5 182769.65, 540483.25
182773.95, 540492.3 182775.4, 540500 182776.85, 540504.05 182777.65,
540504.65 182773.35))
POLYGON ((540503.45 182782.25, 540500 182781.5, 540493.8 182780.25,
540491.65 182780.05, 540491.25 182782.65, 540493.3 182782.95, 540493.05
182785, 540500 182786.15, 540502.8 182786.6, 540503.45 182782.25))
POLYGON ((540502.8 182786.6, 540500 182786.15, 540493.05 182785, 540488.3
182784.2, 540488.05 182785.65, 540489.15 182785.85, 540488.55 182789.1,
540489.7 182789.25, 540492.5 182789.6, 540500 182790.9, 540502.1 182791.35,
540502.8 182786.6))
POLYGON ((540500.7 182800.35, 540500 182800.15, 540491.15 182798.6,
540488.4 182798.1, 540486.25 182797.85, 540483.85 182797.5, 540483.1
182801.75, 540488.2 182802.65, 540490.4 182803.1, 540492.75 182803.55,
540500 182804.95, 540500.7 182800.35))
POLYGON ((540405.08 182772.25, 540394.81 182769.75, 540391.27 182784.27,
540413.69 182789.72, 540414.07 182788.17, 540417.22 182775.21, 540406.82
182772.67, 540405.08 182772.25))
POLYGON ((540420.29 182791.33, 540442.81 182796.8, 540446.35 182782.29,
540435.98 182779.77, 540434.23 182779.34, 540423.83 182776.81, 540420.67
182789.78, 540420.29 182791.33))
POLYGON ((540499.1 182808.9, 540500 182804.95, 540492.75 182803.55,
540492.55 182804.95, 540484.3 182803.6, 540484.1 182804.9, 540485.4
182805.2, 540485.4 182806.2, 540499.1 182808.9))
Brian.
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <[email protected]
> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is method of applying constraints (setting tolerance) similar in
> ConformingDelaunayTriangulator Class to DelaunayTriangulationBuilder class?
>
> Brian.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Yes, changing the tolerance affects the topology seriously. I tested this
>> class with different data sets. What is weird is for some data sets, it
>> works for a very small tolerance and for some not. Any alternative for this?
>>
>> Cheers, Brian.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:21 AM, <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Send Jts-topo-suite-user mailing list submissions to
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jts-topo-suite-user
>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>> than "Re: Contents of Jts-topo-suite-user digest..."
>>>
>>>
>>> Today's Topics:
>>>
>>> 1. Polygon difference (Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe)
>>> 2. Re: Polygon difference (Martin Davis)
>>> 3. extract inserted envelopes from strtree (andrea antonello)
>>> 4. Fwd: Polygon offset (Martin Davis)
>>> 5. DelaunayTriangulationBuilder snapping tolerance
>>> (Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe)
>>> 6. Point to polygon distance in specified directions
>>> (Michael Bedward)
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 1
>>> Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 13:41:50 +0000
>>> From: Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <[email protected]>
>>> Subject: [Jts-topo-suite-user] Polygon difference
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Message-ID:
>>> <
>>> caema-4gameevhzub-vmtdbnxiaqhrpzqb5quf08tdq9gt1u...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>> I have a small rectangles inside a bigger one with one side almost
>>> touching
>>> that of bigger rectangle. I need to get the difference which should be
>>> another rectangle wiith JTS difference() method. Once obtained the
>>> difference, output is not exactly a rectangle because
>>> vertices of the touching edge of smaller rectangle do not exist on the
>>> larger rectangle. Is there any possibility to clean the geometries so
>>> that
>>> the two touching lines will collapse and
>>> create new segments along that line with correct noding. I tried using
>>> GeometrySnapper class with computeOverlaySnapTolerance() method. But it
>>> did not work. Is there any other method to deal with this in JTS?
>>>
>>> Cheers, Brian
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 07:11:04 -0800
>>> From: Martin Davis <[email protected]>
>>> Subject: Re: [Jts-topo-suite-user] Polygon difference
>>> Cc: "[email protected]"
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> Message-ID:
>>> <
>>> cak2ens1vj8knq2txwbg+-no-0exrvzurbbeotrr0bqedez2...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>> Would be helpful to see the WKT for this case and perhaps the expected
>>> output.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 5:41 AM, Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > I have a small rectangles inside a bigger one with one side almost
>>> > touching that of bigger rectangle. I need to get the difference which
>>> > should be another rectangle wiith JTS difference() method. Once
>>> obtained
>>> > the difference, output is not exactly a rectangle because
>>> > vertices of the touching edge of smaller rectangle do not exist on the
>>> > larger rectangle. Is there any possibility to clean the geometries so
>>> that
>>> > the two touching lines will collapse and
>>> > create new segments along that line with correct noding. I tried using
>>> > GeometrySnapper class with computeOverlaySnapTolerance() method. But
>>> it
>>> > did not work. Is there any other method to deal with this in JTS?
>>> >
>>> > Cheers, Brian
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
>>> > organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
>>> > affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into
>>> your
>>> > Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of
>>> AppDynamics
>>> > Pro!
>>> >
>>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Jts-topo-suite-user mailing list
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jts-topo-suite-user
>>> >
>>> >
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 3
>>> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 14:59:12 +0100
>>> From: andrea antonello <[email protected]>
>>> Subject: [Jts-topo-suite-user] extract inserted envelopes from strtree
>>> To: "[email protected]"
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> Message-ID:
>>> <
>>> cacck5jpeq5najqu97b09vlpxjg8toaa2pn+wcrgpepo95tg...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>> I am trying to understand if there is a way to get the list of envelopes
>>> that were used to insert items in a STRtree, but while I see a way to get
>>> the itemstree I can't find one to get the itemBoundables list.
>>>
>>> Any idea?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Andrea
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 4
>>> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:29:01 -0800
>>> From: Martin Davis <[email protected]>
>>> Subject: [Jts-topo-suite-user] Fwd: Polygon offset
>>> To: "[email protected]"
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> Message-ID:
>>> <CAK2ens0maXAt2huOznTNKvZkdqGu81cR=
>>> [email protected]>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>> Brian, please send these questions to the JTS list so all can share.
>>>
>>> Yes, setQuadrantSegments is irrelevant if JOIN_MITRE is used.
>>>
>>> For an explanation of mitre limit see the Javadoc:
>>>
>>> http://tsusiatsoftware.net/jts/javadoc/com/vividsolutions/jts/operation/buffer/BufferParameters.html#setMitreLimit(double)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <
>>> [email protected]
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi Martin,
>>> >
>>> > In the code i sent for setting parameters in buffering, i suppose
>>> BufP.setQuadrantSegments(1)
>>> > does not make any sense for Join_Meter style . What is meant by
>>> setting a
>>> > value to Default_Meter_Limit? Will it be more the value, more pointing
>>> at
>>> > corners??
>>> >
>>> > Cheers, Brian
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <
>>> > [email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Here is the method and the polygon i used with a +- 20 m distance.
>>> >>
>>> >> public static Geometry bufferPlusMinus (Geometry g, double dst1,
>>> double
>>> >> dst2)
>>> >> {
>>> >> BufferParameters BufP = new BufferParameters();
>>> >> BufP.setEndCapStyle(3);
>>> >> BufP.setJoinStyle(2);
>>> >> BufP.setQuadrantSegments(1);
>>> >> BufferBuilder Buffb = new BufferBuilder(BufP);
>>> >> Geometry BuffG = Buffb.buffer(g, dst1);
>>> >> Geometry fp = Buffb.buffer(BuffG, dst2);
>>> >> return fp;
>>> >> }
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> POLYGON ((852.0508353104653 79.66036245972747, 785.3441701464214
>>> >> -13.474425749638762, 721.4579830330817 -14.427950930434887,
>>> >> 718.7632379569188 10.092344825531626, 718.535947988926
>>> 20.8108253483052,
>>> >> 739.5010955848701 12.351204388538228, 734.8751753004104
>>> 4.721699044367739,
>>> >> 776.4081693414112 6.153871252678144, 785.3441701464214
>>> 12.270754131856343,
>>> >> 831.0856877145211 70.0973126791213, 814.1664457949871
>>> 71.5685511069069,
>>> >> 803.8677768004884 81.49941049445935, 852.0508353104653
>>> 79.66036245972747))
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 5
>>> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 22:50:56 +0000
>>> From: Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <[email protected]>
>>> Subject: [Jts-topo-suite-user] DelaunayTriangulationBuilder snapping
>>> tolerance
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Message-ID:
>>> <
>>> caema-4irrhwbrq9zcjufabe_owixi_sbkc7s4q+f1bi+bsv...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I use DelaunayTriangulationBuilder class to run triangulation between
>>> polygons and lines (about 2500 geometries) with lines used as constraint
>>> edges. Initially i set the tolerance to a smaller value (0.001). For this
>>> value, triangulation does not run. However, when i increased it to 3.1,
>>> the
>>> triangulation executed. This tolerance is for snapping according to JTS
>>> API. I need to know what happens when the tolerance is increased. Will it
>>> affect triangulation result? According to API, i suppose it is not, but
>>> to
>>> deal with robustness issues. Further clarification is appreciated.
>>>
>>> Cheers, Brian
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 6
>>> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 11:21:19 +1100
>>> From: Michael Bedward <[email protected]>
>>> Subject: [Jts-topo-suite-user] Point to polygon distance in specified
>>> directions
>>> To: "[email protected]"
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Trent Penman <[email protected]>
>>> Message-ID:
>>> <
>>> cacjvtdou4jseh+sxl-otmrdybbku_eb-8w-cv7a+9e84aft...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>>
>>> Hi Martin,
>>>
>>> The following is a general algorithm query rather than a specific JTS
>>> question - hope that's ok.
>>>
>>> I have a set of polygons which represent urban areas within a
>>> fire-prone landscape. There are about 5000 polygons varying widely in
>>> area, spatial extent, number of vertices and boundary complexity.
>>>
>>> I have the task of creating a regular grid of sample points within the
>>> surrounding landscape and, for each point, determining the distance to
>>> the nearest polygon within each of eight compass segments (ie. N to
>>> NE, NE to E...). The results only need to be expressed as categorized
>>> values based on a small number of distance cut-points.
>>>
>>> I've been trying to nut out something other than a brute force
>>> approach to this without much success so far. One of the possibly less
>>> brutish approaches I've thought of involves the following:
>>>
>>> 1. Split up the urban polygons by intersecting them with a regular
>>> lattice, create PreparedGeometry objects for the resulting parts and
>>> put them into an STRtree.
>>>
>>> 2. Construct a sampling template made up of polygons representing the
>>> compass segments, each split according to the distance cut-points
>>> (looking a bit like a dart board), possibly using a custom
>>> CoordinateSequence to have vertex coordinates calculated on the fly
>>> based on the centre coordinate.
>>>
>>> 3. For each sample point location:
>>> For each compass segment:
>>> For inner to outer segment part:
>>> Query the spatial index with the segment part envelope
>>> and, if any urban polygons are returned, test for
>>> intersection.
>>>
>>> I'm sure there must be a better way. Any suggestions or comments will
>>> be gratefully accepted.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
>>> organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
>>> affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into
>>> your
>>> Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of
>>> AppDynamics Pro!
>>>
>>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Jts-topo-suite-user mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jts-topo-suite-user
>>>
>>>
>>> End of Jts-topo-suite-user Digest, Vol 48, Issue 1
>>> **************************************************
>>>
>>
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK
Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base.
Download it for free now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Jts-topo-suite-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jts-topo-suite-user
