Timeline for How to identify overlapping polygons
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 23, 2016 at 14:32 | history | edited | Richard Fairhurst | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Jun 22, 2016 at 19:06 | comment | added | Richard Fairhurst | I still think you need Esri to trouble shoot the negative buffer issue and reproduce it, since there should not be a need for a work around and my suggestion should work. Since iy works as expected for me, I would never make use of an added selection choice for this even if it existed, since I have more cotrol using these settings. Test other data on your side, before you write that script. I would consider your install potentially corrupt if you can't reliably use a negative buffer ever. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 18:54 | comment | added | Tom | Thanks, Richard. The repair geometry didn't change my results. It's not that hard to work around this and chain together a few simple operations in a script; but that's kind of the point: it's so simple that a built-in Arc tool should already do it. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 18:49 | vote | accept | Tom | ||
| Oct 31, 2016 at 15:31 | |||||
| Jun 22, 2016 at 18:27 | comment | added | Richard Fairhurst | Perhaps run the Check Geometry and/or Repair Geometry tools on both feature classes. You may have to contact Esri support and send them your data to see if they can reproduce the behavior you are reporting for the negative buffer, because so far I have not observed that behavior with my own data. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 18:21 | comment | added | Tom | Yep. They're all projected and in the same coordinate system as the data frame. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 18:19 | comment | added | Richard Fairhurst | Also, verify that your data frame is set to match the coordinate system of your layers. So far in my experiments with the snapped data that I have, I have only gotten good results when I use negative buffers as small as -0.007 feet. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 18:12 | history | edited | Richard Fairhurst | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added illustration.
|
| Jun 22, 2016 at 17:56 | comment | added | Richard Fairhurst | Is this data in a Projected Coordinate System and both feature classes are using the same coordinate system? Or is this data in a Geographic Coordinate System or the feature classes have different projections. Based on the fact they are snapped I assume both feature classes are in the same coordinate system. What kind of data is this. Is it in SDE, a file geodatabase, shapefiles, etc.? Anyway, I have had success with negative buffers using my data, so I am not sure what might be occurring with your data. So I will have to do some experiments to see if I can reproduce what you described.. | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 17:33 | comment | added | Tom | I recently started using a small negative buffer, but there are issues with that as well; I can't decipher a pattern in ESRI's interpretation of the threshold used. E.g., even with a precision of 0.001 meters in both datasets, setting a -3 foot search distance on the intersect still selects these outside polygons (and of course, these polygons were created by snapping to the edge/vertex of the green feature, so there is nowhere close to a 3 foot overlap). | |
| Jun 22, 2016 at 17:23 | history | edited | Richard Fairhurst | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 216 characters in body
|
| Jun 22, 2016 at 17:16 | history | answered | Richard Fairhurst | CC BY-SA 3.0 |