Because of the limitations of the pipe or structure tables, for the last few years we were creating separate tables for structures and pipes. Now we have to go to one table showing all of the structure and pipe data.
A structure table wont give me the pipe length between structures, and a pipe table won't give me the structure top elevation. Any ideas for getting all of this data to one table without manually creating it somehow?
Thanks!
c3d 2009
c3d 2012
Im pretty sure you can add pipe datat to a tructure tble and vice verse. In the tabler style add the data desired.
Your Name
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
Your Name
yeah you can, you just cant add pipe length to a structure table or structure top elevation to a pipe table.
I have run into the same problem....
I would either like to add the structure elevation at the pipe start point to the pipe data table, or the pipe length to the structure data table.
Any solution to this yet or am I going to have to make two tables as well?
Cheers
B.
This is a fundamental flaw with C3D that really needs to be addressed. There's all kinds of data in the design elements of Civil 3D, yet most of that data is hidden and inaccessible to the other design elements. What's the point of having a so-called BIM when you can't get the data extracted to work the way you need it? Why can't a regular AutoCAD table be able to access C3D object data similar to how fields work? That in itself would alleviate almost all problems with reports and tables for Civil 3D users. Why is there no relationships between different C3D objects, such as alignments, points, surface, ect.? By that I mean why can't one object reference any data from another object? What we have are a select few data fields that Autodesk has deemed OK to be seen by certain other C3D objects, but not all of the data and not every C3D object.
For instance, It is impossible with Civil 3D to make a storm structure table and storm pipe table to meet TDOTs standard because you can't edit or add rows or columns in a pipe or structure table. The only way to get the tables is to do it "manually", which defeats the entire purpose of having a supposedly intelligent design using the pipe network system. LandXML cannot be used to bridge the difference because pipe network objects are not relatable to other objects, such as alignments or profiles.
Another example is how TDOT requires a point table on the present layout sheet of the control points on that sheet with their number, northing, easting, elevation, station and offset. Since points aren't associated with alignments in any way the built in point table from C3D cannot do this. It has to be manually created. Points and alignments do not talk with each other, which is not very BIM like.
Thats not a bad idea. I'll have to try that one.
Another problem I run into is when I have elliptical pipe. No good way to have both and elliptical and round pipe sizes in the same table, which doesn't seem that uncommon.
Structure Tables > Details of In flow & Details of Out Flow pipes does include both the Connect Pipe Lenghts and Pipe Slope. This should be in 2012 SP2 thru the current release.
It is there, nice, thanks!
Any suggestions for having round and elliptical pipe sizes in the same table?
I am still in a similar situation.
I have a bunch of driveway pipe culverts and each one has a flared end section on each end of the pipe. I want to table these culverts listing the flared end section station and offset and the pipe length. I can do a pipe table but the station and offsets are at the ends of the pipe, not the ends of the flared end sections.....or.....I can do a structure table and get the correct station and offset and list the connected pipe length, but that only gives me one of the flared end section locations, not both of them.
Any ideas after all these years?
yes, it's been a while, and I don't remember when it became available but I have been able to have pipe lengths in a structure table for a while now.
With your structure table I'm not sure why you wouldn't get the other one. It should put the second one in a new row on the table?