style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
"gredmon" <I
href="mailto:gredmon@hunsaker.com">gredmon@hunsaker.com> wrote in
message
href="news:f19b375.17@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f19b375.17@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
know this is no easy task, but its what we have to do.
As far as the 3 lines of the profile. You mention design development and
construction drawings. Right now there is no difference. We use a custom app
built on LDT to design all 3 lines of the profile simultaniously (each line
gets its own horiz. alignment) then produce a single profile that shows all 3
lines separated vertically by a 100 grid. This profile gets externally
referenced into our construction drawings for plots that are used for plan
check and construction staking.
If I understand what your suggesting is that 3 different profiles could be
used to develop the design and then brought together as a representation on a
single (CL) profile for construction drawings should work. In theory...
Let me know if I miss understood.
Gene
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
"Michael Rogerson" <
href="mailto:michael.rogersonSPAM_NOT@autodesk.com">michael.rogersonSPAM_NOT@autodesk.com>
wrote in message
href="news:A203A3CDA3A5486F98C3962431FFAB71@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:A203A3CDA3A5486F98C3962431F......
Gene, Fred, Drew - Good stuff.
As Drew pointed out, the offsets will most
often be "skewed" when represented on the centerline profile, as the true
length along the offsets is not the same as the lengths represented on the CL
profile.
So, I can say this - that things like vertical
curves may need to be represented as a series of chord segements (the
resolution of which should be user-controlled). Labeling offsets should
be able to reference cardinal points (like grade breaks on the offset, as well
as offset VC start/end HP/LP, etc.)
Fred - the notion of labelling the true grade
from CL to offset is quite understood, especially when you mention profit
margins! - only one assumption to clarify - you would want the grade
measured perpedicular from the CL out to the offset? Of course, if all
of this were creating a surface, the normal to the surface from a point on the
CL might be of more interest.
Gene - the question that comes to mind from your
repsonse is if you expect to be able to edit the "skewed"
representation of the offset profile when it's shown on the CL profile.
This leads to all sorts of other things like how you would exepect it to
behave, etc. Hence my question - I was assuming that you were working on
the Offset profiles independantly, while only showing the representation of
them on the CL profile (not editing then there). Thoughts?
thanks again!
Mike
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
"gredmon" <I
href="mailto:gredmon@hunsaker.com">gredmon@hunsaker.com> wrote in
message
href="news:f19b375.17@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f19b375.17@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
know this is no easy task, but its what we have to do.
As far as the 3 lines of the profile. You mention design development and
construction drawings. Right now there is no difference. We use a custom app
built on LDT to design all 3 lines of the profile simultaniously (each line
gets its own horiz. alignment) then produce a single profile that shows all
3 lines separated vertically by a 100 grid. This profile gets externally
referenced into our construction drawings for plots that are used for plan
check and construction staking.
If I understand what your suggesting is that 3 different profiles could
be used to develop the design and then brought together as a representation
on a single (CL) profile for construction drawings should work. In theory...
Let me know if I miss understood.
Gene