I could be wrong, but I think that you have an error in your algorithm. Your generating the correct line-segments + left-right z-value information, but your coordinates are being right/down-shifted by an interval (I think).
According to the header of your DSAA data, the X-min/max values are 370/640 which means that your boundary coordinates should vary between 355 (between your imposed 0.0 border and the left edge of the data) and 655 at the right hand edge. But the X coordinates for your line segments varies between 385 and 685.
A similar out by one interval error appears in the Y dimension with the range of Y-values 655 thru 955 when (I believe) they should be 625 thru 925.
A little ascii art (scrunched to avoid the OSU PM wrapping:), may make it clearer. The X-370 interval which is part of the original data is not part of the resultant map, but there is a X-670 interval which was not a part of the original data. Similarly for the Y-640 and Y-940 intervals.
DSAA
10 10
370 640
640 910
0.03 1.0
0.5 0.03 0.03 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.03 1.0 0.1 0.1
0.5 0.03 0.03 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.03 1.0 0.1 0.1
0.03 0.03 0.03 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.03 1.0 0.1 0.1
0.1 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 1.0 0.5 0.5
0.03 0.5 0.03 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.03 1.0 0.5 0.5
0.03 0.5 0.03 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.03 1.0 0.5 0.1
0.03 0.5 0.03 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.03 1.0 0.1 0.1
0.03 0.5 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 1.0 0.1 0.1
0.03 0.5 0.03 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.03 0.1 0.1 0.03
0.03 0.5 0.03 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.03 0.1 0.1 0.03
-370- 400 430 460 490 520 550 580 610 640 +670
++
385 415 445 475 505 535 565 595 625 655
+685
-640- | | | | | | | | | |
+ |
655-- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+----
+-+
670 | .5 | .03 .03 | 1.0 1.0 1.0 | .03 | 1.0 | 0.1 0.1
+ |
685-- + + +-----+ + + +
+ +
700 | .5 | .03 .03 | 0.1 | 1.0 1.0 | .03 | 1.0 | 0.1 0.1
+ |
715-- +-----+ + +-----+ + + +
+ +
730 | .03 .03 .03 | 0.1 0.1 | 1.0 | .03 | 1.0 | 0.1 0.1
+ |
745-- +-----+ +-----+-----+-----+ + +-----+----
+-+
760 | .1 | .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 | 1.0 | 0.5 0.5
+ |
775-- +-----+-----+ +-----+-----+-----+ + +
+ +
790 | .03 | .5 | .03 | 1.0 | 0.5 0.5 | .03 | 1.0 | 0.5 0.5
+ |
805-- + + + +-----+-----+ + + + +----
+-+
820 | .03 | .5 | .03 | 0.1 0.1 | 0.5 | .03 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.1
+ |
835-- + + + + +-----+ + +-----+
+ +
850 | .03 | .5 | .03 | 0.1 0.1 0.1 | .03 | 1.0 | 0.1 0.1
+ |
865-- + + + +-----+-----+-----+ + +
+ +
880 | .03 | .5 | .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 | 1.0 | 0.1 0.1
+ |
895-- + + + +-----+-----+-----+ +-----+ +----
+-+
910 | .03 | .5 | .03 | 0.5 0.5 | 0.1 | .03 | 0.1 0.1 | .03
+ |
925-- + + + + + + + +
+ +
+940+ | .03 | .5 | .03 | 0.5 0.5 | 0.1 | .03 | 0.1 0.1 | .03
+ |
955-- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+----
+-+
I think that demonstrates that all the coordinates in the final lines segments have been displaced right and down by 30 units in each dimension.
That aside, plotting out your (uncorrected) line segments assigning a unique character to each provides an interesting picture of the results.
a 0.03/1.00/2 475/655 475/685
b 0.50/0.00/3 385/715 385/655 415/655
c 0.50/0.03/3 415/655 415/715 385/715
d 0.00/0.03/2 385/715 385/745
e 1.00/0.10/5 535/745 535/715 505/715 505/685 475/685
f 1.00/0.03/3 565/655 565/745 535/745
g 1.00/0.10/2 625/655 625/745
h 0.00/0.10/3 685/745 685/655 625/655
i 0.00/0.10/2 385/745 385/775
j 0.03/0.10/3 415/775 415/745 385/745
k 1.00/0.03/3 475/805 475/775 505/775
l 1.00/0.50/2 505/775 505/805
m 0.50/0.00/2 685/745 685/805
n 0.03/0.50/3 565/835 565/775 505/775
o 1.00/0.50/2 625/745 625/835
p 0.50/0.10/4 685/805 655/805 655/835 625/835
q 0.10/0.03/4 565/835 565/865 475/865 475/805
r 0.03/1.00/2 595/655 595/895
s 1.00/0.10/3 625/835 625/895 595/895
t 0.10/0.00/2 685/805 685/895
u 0.03/0.50/2 415/775 415/955
v 0.03/0.50/3 445/955 445/775 415/775
w 0.50/0.03/3 475/955 475/895 535/895
x 0.50/0.10/2 535/895 535/955
z 0.03/0.10/3 565/955 565/895 535/895
A 0.03/0.10/2 595/895 595/955
B 0.03/0.10/3 655/955 655/895 685/895
C 0.03/0.00/3 685/895 685/955 655/955
D 0.03/0.10/2 385/775 415/775
E 0.03/0.00/3 415/955 385/955 385/775
F 0.00/0.50/2 415/955 445/955
G 0.03/0.00/2 415/655 475/655
H 0.00/0.03/2 445/955 475/955
I 0.10/1.00/2 475/805 505/805
J 0.10/0.03/3 535/745 475/745 475/685
K 0.00/0.50/2 475/955 535/955
L 1.00/0.00/2 475/655 565/655
M 0.50/0.10/4 565/835 535/835 535/805 505/805
N 0.00/0.10/2 535/955 565/955
O 0.03/0.00/2 565/655 595/655
P 0.00/0.03/2 565/955 595/955
Q 1.00/0.00/2 595/655 625/655
R 0.00/0.10/2 595/955 655/955
S 0.50/0.10/2 625/745 685/745
gives 370 400 430 460 490 520 550 580 610 640 670
385 415 445 475 505 535 565 595 625 655
+685
640 | | | | | | | | | |
+ |
655--- +bbbbb+GGGGGGGGGGG+LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL+OOOOO+QQQQQ+hhhhhhhhhh
+hh
670 b c a f r g
+ h
685--- b c +eeeeee f r g
+ h
700 b c J e f r g
+ h
715--- +ccccc+ J eeeeeee f r g
+ h
730 d J e f r g
+ h
745--- +jjjjjj JJJJJJJJJJJJ+fffff+ r +SSSSSSSSSS
+S+
760 i j r o
+ m
775--- +DDDDD+vvvvvv kkkkkk+nnnnnnnnnnnn r o
+ m
790 E u v k l n r o
+ m
805--- E u v +IIIII+MMMMMM n r o ppppp
+p+
820 E u v q M n r o p
+ t
835--- E u v q MMMMMM+ r +pppppp
+ t
850 E u v q q r s
+ t
865--- E u v qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq r s
+ t
880 E u v r s
+ t
895--- E u v wwwwwwwwwwww+zzzzzz +ssssss BBBBB
+B+
910 E u v w x z A B
+ C
925--- E u v w x z A B
+ C
940 E u v w x z A B
+ C
955--- EEEEEE+FFFFF+HHHHH+KKKKKKKKKKK+NNNNN+PPPPP+RRRRRRRRRRR+CCCC
+CC
The left-z/right-z + line segment coords is a ... um ... ecclectic way of representing the topology? I assume that the there is some reasoning to do with the subsequent processing that uses the data, but quite why this representation is optimal eludes me:)
Out of interest, how big a volume of data (X-extant/Y-extant) do you normally manage as a single batch? And how long does it take to perform the conversion using FORTRAN?
Examine what is said, not who speaks.
"Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham
"Think for yourself!" - Abigail
| 