• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Bridge cables

JonPatch

JonPatch

Resource contributor
Messages
443
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
Folks, I know that FSDS used to allow a "line" which worked quite well for suspension bridge cables: they were visible at a distance and close by with reasonably little flickering, always keeping the same visible diameter.

How can I achieve the same effect in gmax? I find that 3-sided cylinders are subject to flickering and variable visibility.

Jon
 
Jon,

Why not use gMax lines? Simply draw your cables much like a path. Check off the Display Mesh then play with the other settings till you get the desired effect. These lines are much like a cylinder when converted to an editable mesh. The thickness determines the diameter of the cable, number of Sides is the number of sides in a cylinder, Angle is the rotation around the core of the cable and the Interpolation Steps, the number of cross-sections between each point you click. Simple two point lines set at 0.083' thickness, with 3 sides and 0 angle as well as 0 interpolation works well for antenna wires on aircraft. Just remember, the more points, sides, and interpolation, the more faces.

Lou
 
Another option would be to use the line_ prefix for your material name, this would give lines similar to the ones in FSDS. But these don't always look good either :).
 
Hey Lou, I'd dabbled with lines a bit but they disappeared in gmax when I converted to mesh. Obviously I should dabble some more, thanks.

Thanks for the tip, Arno, I'll give that a shot if I don't get what I want from the line object type.

Jon
 
Last edited:
Yup, Lou, I'm missing something. I used the parameters you suggested for the line, and as soon as I convert to mesh I can longer see it in gmax although I can use the object list to select it.

Further, if I try to export it, I get: "Error in exporter: Mismatch between # vertices (2) and # normals (0) in part Line01". Ignoring bad normals still results in an error.

And to be clear, will the result be a line (like an FSDS line) in FS9? Or a three-sided cylinder?

Arno, if I want to use the line_ material prefix, what type of object would I apply that to?

Thanks for your help, guys.

Jon
 
Hi Jon,

JonPatch said:
Arno, if I want to use the line_ material prefix, what type of object would I apply that to?
Click to expand...

It's a long time ago that I used such lines, but if I remember correct I used it on a normal box and then all edges became lines.
 
Oddly enough when I do it, the box still appears as a box, and lines don't appear at all. I've named the material: LINE_ and it's a black 128x128x8bit texture. I tried the box both as a "box" and as an editable mesh. I can only try the line as a line, if I try to collapse it makemdl chokes on it as noted.

I'm doing something wrong . . .

JOn
 
I usually follow this rule:

1- draw a path (a simple line, polyline or a curve)
2- extrude a triangle (not a circle or a square) along this path (LOFT)

It works, at least for me. :yikes:

Hi, Claudio
 
Last edited:
Thanks for jumping in Claudio. Here's what I've tried:

- a simple box (both as box and an editable poly)
- a line
- I created a .04m radius 3-sided Ngon, converted to editable poly, extruded the face 120m
- I created a .04m radius 3-sided Ngon, and lofted this along a straight path for 120m

All of which created nasty flickering lines that only look like lines at a very short distance. The box at least should look like a wireframe, so I don't think this has anything to do with the line.

I also ensured my texture was a DXT1 with no alpha. :laughing: :banghead: :rotfl: :yikes:

Jon
 
Jon,

I think you are making things more complicated than they need to be. Perhaps this will help.

Cables.zip

There are 4 lines in the file. You can see how I have set the parameters for the lines in the Modify panel. No lofting, no extruding, and no materials just geometry. The curved one has been cloned twice and then offset to the side -15' and 15'. These were then converted to editable meshes and only these were exported.

cables.jpg


Lou
 
Hi Jon,

JonPatch said:
Oddly enough when I do it, the box still appears as a box, and lines don't appear at all. I've named the material: LINE_ and it's a black 128x128x8bit texture. I tried the box both as a "box" and as an editable mesh. I can only try the line as a line, if I try to collapse it makemdl chokes on it as noted.
Click to expand...

In case you still want to try this approach as well. I think the problem could be that you use a texture. The lines can't have textures, only a color.
 
Hi Guys,

Bingo, Arno, that was the problem. I had assigned a texture to the material in my habitual way without thinking about it.

Is there MS documentation that tells us this? The only info I have on LINE_ is the single sentence in the makemdl sdk.

So in summary, what appears will work is a 1-dimensional line, as a primitive, with a material name applied that begins with LINE_ and no texture assigned.

EDIT: well, that doesn't quite work yet. Yes, if I use a material name preceded by LINE_ without a texture I can see the three lines of a three-sided cylinder, but the flicker is intense. I tried radii from 0.01 to .4m and it changed the nature of the flicker, but it was still awful.

The example I'm working from is David Christian's Alex Fraser Bridge, where he used EOD. That is exactly what I want to duplicate, and since EOD could do it, I would hope Gmax could as well. The lines there are clearly one-dimensional, flickering is extremely minimal.

EDIT again: I have been able to create the effect, so it can be done.
This is what I want to achieve. These "lines" were created with planes. When a LINE_ material is assigned FS9 shows only the diagonal of a plane, as a line. Very difficult to place though, as the diagonal is not visible in gmax. And the planes have to overlap so visibility for editing is very difficult.

Since the lines remain the same size on the screen, as the viewer moves away they merge and make a solid surface, which in this case I prefer to flickering.

Now, there must be an easier way!
cables_in_the_air.jpg



Jon
 
Last edited:
In experimenting with lines and shapes (such as railings), I have found that transparent textures can do a better job - both up close and far away.
Is this true in all cases, or are there limitations? For example, if the ratio of empty space to lines is too high, does it take up too much processing time to test and not draw the empty space?
Just curious, :confused:
Phil
 
Last edited:
Hi Phil,

I use transparent textures on planes for modelling steel girders to vastly reduce poly count on bridges, as I'm sure many folks do. They suffer from the "jaggies" and do not work well with thin lines. I don't know about the performance issue you raise; I'd always assumed that transparent space was fine, and particularly on railings, most of it is transparent.

Jon
 
Last edited:
Hi Jon,
Good point. I hadn't noticed the jaggies. Perhaps I had my display set for anti-aliasing at the time (which takes more computing horsepower than some users are willing to spare).
For my models, I have been using 3d railings for the virtual cockpit (where detail is most important); lines for the closeup higher-detailed exterior view (to reduce computing time); and low poly 3d railings for more distant views (to get the right "fade out").
Very time-consuming.
Phil
p.s. Great discussion. I learned a lot.
 
Hi Phil,

I have AAx4 and the jaggies can still be a problem, but an acceptable compromise. But for railings or any object that has only horizontal or vertical edges transparent textures rock.

Jon
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top