POST
|
Ah, that output looks like exactly what I need (and your description of the script, as well)!! Unfortunately, I'm a total python novice (I've taken one GIS course and am using ArcGIS for my master's thesis project, but had no intro to python as part of that course)-- anyone know a good "python for dummies" thread?
... View more
03-15-2016
04:37 PM
|
0
|
1
|
818
|
POST
|
Here's my situation: I have a map with >2000 points. I want to buffer all of these points to a radius of 0.8km and then run other functions to calculate info about those circles. The problem is that the majority of those circles overlap with one or numerous other circles. (And the tools I want to use don't handle overlapping polygons well-- trust me, I've looked into that one thoroughly already.) So what I'm hoping to do is separate out these observations into separate layers that contain non-overlapping polygons, so I can run the needed calculations on each layer separately. - I don't want to select just the overlapping portions of the polygons; I need to be able to export the polygons, complete, into a new layer - Dissolving the polygons into a single layer won't work-- each point is an observation that I need to calculate unique data for - Ideally, I'd like to find a way to select only one of the overlaps-- because, for example, if two circles overlap, exporting them both to a new layer doesn't immediately solve my issue of having overlaps in the new layer (I'd have to do a lot of manual sorting through) The work-around mentioned is that I can buffer the points either before or after sorting them into separate layers. If there is a way to achieve the similar goal (separating out layers so that each contains points that are at least 1.6km distant from each other) that would certainly work as well. Hoping someone has an idea of what I can try?? Thanks!! I am using ArcMap for desktop, 10.x
... View more
03-14-2016
02:11 PM
|
0
|
4
|
4691
|
POST
|
There doesn't seem to be any pattern (that I can find, anyhow) as to which records are being tabulated, and which excluded. Here's a small area of the map with some of the records that did get tabulated, selected from the source layer (the ones unselected weren't necessarily included-- I only went through the first 100 or so records and selected just those that were in the Tab Area 2 output table. But I did think it was a good think to look for, in case, say, only those not overlapping other polygons were being included. That does not appear to be the case, though.) Here's also a snippet of part of the source layer table-- the selected cases are ones that were included in the Tabulate Area 2 output. I'm not seeing any commonality between those selected, or among those excluded. Perhaps most puzzlingly, I'm getting the same number of records in the Tabulate Area 2 output table, even when running the tool with source layers with different #s of records. It's make a bit more sense to me if it was just giving fewer records in the output, but not the identical number both times-- I'd think there was something wrong with how I was selecting the data, the environment settings, etc. The fact that it's limited the output to the same number of cases, both times, leads me to speculate that it must be something in how the tool is functioning...?
... View more
02-29-2016
05:45 PM
|
0
|
1
|
725
|
POST
|
Hoping someone can help me with this one, as I'm at a loss! I'm using the Tabulate Area 2 tool (similar to Tabulate Area, except that it can handle overlapping polygons, of which there are many in my data). I have two shapefile feature classes (EW_buff3 and ES_buff2) that were made by buffering points in my map area. The "class" raster is a statewide land use raster. (In brief, I'm trying to tabulate the amount of each type of land use in each circle of EW_buff3 and ES_buff2). Here's the issue: when I run the tool comparing either EW_buff3 or ES_buff2 to the lower peninsula land use raster, I only get 693 cases in the output table. (EW_buff3 contains 2007 cases, and ES_buff2 contains 3454, so it doesn't seem to be anything about those files that is resulting in the 693-case result.) The geostatistical analysis environment is set to include all coincident points, so it doesn't seem to be flattening the overlapping points into a single layer. I'd just carried out this same function successfully with two other shapefile feature classes (R1_buff and R2_buff) that were created in the same manner as EW_buff3 and ES_buff2, using the same land cover raster, so I know it's not a basic problem with my process (though I will note, that those two feature classes both contain fewer than 693 cases, so if there's something causing an upper limit to the number of cases processed, that issue wouldn't have shown up with them). I've examined the Tabulate Area 2 output table to identify some of the missing cases (seeing with FID numbers aren't listed) and going back to the EW_buff3 and ES_buff2 tables, but there doesn't seem to be anything unique about those records not being tabulated. I'm using ArcGIS 10.3.1 for Desktop. What might I be missing?? I'll check any suggestions you think might be causing this! Thanks!
... View more
02-29-2016
04:53 PM
|
0
|
3
|
3265
|
Online Status |
Offline
|
Date Last Visited |
11-11-2020
02:25 AM
|