Problems when Enscaping little objects

REMINDER! If you encounter any issues with Enscape (e.g. crashes, installation problems) or your subscription please reach out to our dedicated support team directly through the Help Center or by using the Support button as detailed HERE! Thank you for your understanding.
  • Hi there,


    We're creating some Revit MEP families which are small (3-4cm) and the Enscape visualisation, specially in circular elements, is bad.


    In Revit:


    (Dimension is in mm)


    In Revit Raytrace:



    But, in Enscape:


    Enscape treat circles as hexagons.


    Also, it's a nightmare trying to move into Enscape space with objects this little.


    Is there any solution to that? I know most 3D software has options to modify the "poligonisation", but I don't know how to do this in Enscape.


    Thanks!

    • Official Post

    Hi xsb usually Enscape picks up the same exact same geometry from Revit as the raytracer. So there should be no difference in tessellation. Are you sure the detail level of the view you start Enscape with has the same detail level as the view you used for raytracing? If that's the case we'd be happy to have a look at the family file itself if that'd be possible!


    Regarding navigation: There're multiple settings regarding movement speed in the Enscape settings window ("Input" tab). You might want to reduce the Movement Speed as well as Mouse Speed to navigate such small objects. The default settings are optimized to traverse buildings ;) A XBox Controller or Spacemouse might also help for better and smoother camera control.

  • We're creating some Revit MEP families which are small (3-4cm)

    I've seen the same kind of crunch-up in the tighter radi of some of our ironmongery families and other smaller detail elements - but deem it acceptable for the purposes we employ Enscape.


    To add; (as a Revit user first and foremost) and to make myself even more unpopular here - I would question the need for such minutiae in an MEP model - Enscape aside, that kind of detail is superfluous to the purpose of coordination, often counterproductive in documentation and a senseless tax on system resources.

  • Hi xsb usually Enscape picks up the same exact same geometry from Revit as the raytracer. So there should be no difference in tessellation. Are you sure the detail level of the view you start Enscape with has the same detail level as the view you used for raytracing? If that's the case we'd be happy to have a look at the family file itself if that'd be possible!


    Regarding navigation: There're multiple settings regarding movement speed in the Enscape settings window ("Input" tab). You might want to reduce the Movement Speed as well as Mouse Speed to navigate such small objects. The default settings are optimized to traverse buildings ;) A XBox Controller or Spacemouse might also help for better and smoother camera control.

    Hello,


    I think it's a Revit 2015 problem.


    I just make some experiments with the "Sample Architecture Family" table and Enscape 2.2:

    - Revit 2015 - "poligonisation" appears with 1cm-diameter extrusion in Enscape

    - Revit 2016 - "poligonisation" does not appear, extrusion is OK in Enscape


    As Revit 2015 is disappearing, I think it's not a big problem.


    Thank you!

  • I think it's a Revit 2015 problem.

    I hadn't considered that - but can (now) confirm; when I've seen crunchy arcs they've been on 2015 projects - I've never noticed them in projects using later versions.


    EDIT

    actually, "it" still happens in 2017.2.3...


    not a complaint, merely an observation.

  • 138days ain't to old for a resurrection?


    Good.


    Not sure if it's only because I've been trying to eyeball the enhancements of the update, and this was the case before, but the faceted curves aren't limited to small ones either... this table is D1200mm.


    Curious, (knowing the wrapping edge-frame is a revolve) I did a quick study to see if Enscape handles Revit's extrusions, revolves and sweeps differently (it doesn't)


    Then I blew up the table to D50m & 30m tall... and the facets faded away - they're certainly there still, but there are many many more. (it's hard to gauge if said facets are the same length as the ones observed when the table is smaller) so...


    the query: Is it the Enscape export that introduces the facet?

    and (if so)

    the request: could we get a setting to throw in a few more at low arc lengths to get rid of the jaggy edges, please?