Ian Madin

changed the values and re-scanned, but now I cannot select boreholes in the Strat Picker section location tab.

Thanks. Can I change the poutput units after I have set up the database?

I am using UTM coordinates with meters for horizontal and feet for vertical in my borehole database. The borehole manager shows that my stratigraphy and lithology intervals are in feet, and I have entered those values as feet. However, when I use the stratigraphy picker, it converts the values in the table to meters, regardless of whether I check the convert units box in the 2D log design depth menu to feet or meters. The graphic display is correct in both cases. Do I have to convert new values by hand to enter them into the table correctly?

Thanks for all the input. It sound like I really misunderstood the grid handling capabilities of the program. I am working with 100 km2 of 1m lidar DEM, so I will clearly have to downsample dramatically and chop things into blocks. What I really want to do is visualize several hundred boreholes spread out over this area with enough topography behind them to be able to work out relationships. Sounds like I need to use a 30m dem at most.

I am trying to import lidar topography to go with borehole and geologic map data, and am having a problem with very slow visualization. The data was a 50 MB ASC grid (which was dramatically down sampled from the native resolution), and when I view it in a 3D window, simple navigation is so slow as to be unuseable. Is there some way to speed up the 3D redraw? What is the practical limit on grid size?

I am thinking that it will work better with a smaller number of higher quality points, and including structural data with them. If I put in points along a contact, and constrain the model with the ground surface, will I run into problems if there are small differences in the collar elevation and interpolated ground surface? I m worried that the model might truncate the interval of the borehole that includes the contact, and therefore not see the contact. Or does it build the model first and then clip to the ground surface?

I have just run a test with a handful of contacts converted to points/psuedo boreholes, which added about 800 points. Am I going to run into problems if I end up adding tens of thousand such points?

Thanks. I am using Rockworks for the first time, and really appreciate the advice. I am making a fairly detailed and accurate geologic map on a lidar base, so I will have plenty of contacts on multiple horizons to include. I assume there is no way to include strike and dip data directly. I was planning on using the lidar as a topographic surface, but Rockworks choked on a 600,000 cell USGS DEM so I can't imagine how it would handle 1m lidar.

I am trying to combine borehole stratigraphic data with geologic map data. From what I have been able to gather, this is done by creating psuedo boreholes at locations where the map provides stratigraphic data. To convert my contacts, I first converted the polylines to vertex points, then gave each point a collar elevation equal to the ground surface elevation, and then added two stratigraphic intervals. One interval extends from -10 ft to 0 and has the overlying unit, the other goes from 0 to 10 ft and has the underlying unit. Is this the right approach? Is there a simpler way to do it?

Thanks, that did the trick. Tedious to go through and populate the optional field but now I can easily sort.

Is there a way to group boreholes in borehole manager so that you can view subsets of data without having to check and uncheck dozens of boxes in the borehole list. For Example, I have boreholes that include bedrock scattered among many that do not, and I would like to look at the two datasets separately. There are hundreds of boreholes, so toggling between sets by unchecking individual boreholes would be tedious.

I am very new to rockworks and trying to input boreholes with stratigraphic units that I am developing as I go. I would really like to plot multiple strip logs adjacent to each other rather than in their actual geographic locations. Is this possible?