radius2

[JacobGjesdahl]

Hello,

I'm now putting everything in model form to run it for lots of points.  I realized that each point would take something like 7 hours to run, which is way too long, so I tried to get it to just run for the surrounding 500 feet (I might do it larger if it doesn't take too long to do).  However, it keeps running the viewshed unconstrained by distance.  I looked at the help here: http://forums.esri.com/Thread.asp?c=93&f=995&t=165469  and projected both the point and the raster to 1m UTMs and put them in a new project as well as changing RADIUS2 to -500 and it still didn't work.  Does anyone have any idea what might be going on?

Thanks,
Jacob

[JeffreySwain]

What happens if you change the value?  Can you see the radius being recognized at all?  What about if you run it outside of the model will it work correctly? Also if you are desiring the surrounding 500 feet, you might need to change since you have meters in the data frame.

[JacobGjesdahl]

I'm afraid neither changing values nor running the viewshed outside of model builder worked.  It seems the viewshed takes no account of the radius.  Do you have any other ideas?

Thanks,
Jacob

[EricRice]

Can you show us the layer properties of the two inputs, in particular their projection and extent information?  What were your steps to project the data to UTM?  It might help if you clarify what you mean when you say, "viewshed takes no account of the radius".  Viewshed doesn't clip the output by the radius value.  Everything outside the value should be returned as non visible, but you're still going to get the full extent returned to you.  Now if you're seeing 'visible' cells beyond the radius 2 value, then there is something gone awry or there is still a unit mix up somewhere.

Best,
Eric

[JacobGjesdahl]

Attached are pictures of the properties and one of the projects.  I guess it's possible that the radius is working and the area outside the radius is just showing up as not visible, but that wouldn't explain why it takes just as long to run.

Thanks,
Jacob

[JeffVan_Etten]

Jacob

How complex is the surface you are working with? I have found that if the surface is 1m resolution as opposed to 10m resolution can take a lot longer to complete. Even with limiting the radius with the parameter RADIUS2. Might be worth testing it on a resampled surface that has a bigger pixel to see if that returns your results faster.

Also you could try making the surface that you want to visualise smaller so that has a less information to read in.

Another thing to try is also add the field RADIUS1 and set this to 0.  I always add both parameters just to ensure that the tool does not get muddled up!

Good luck
Jeff