Community
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<mdriver1> wrote in messageExplanation's
href="news:6133827@discussion.autodesk.com">news:6133827@discussion.autodesk.com...
in order first before proceeding to my questions/ideas: I'm involved in a
volume monitoring project of excavated material and have controlled all grade
stake layout as well. I have a detailed existing surface, generated by me, and
design contours, provided by others, to which I have built a design surface
for DTM field monitoring. I have alignments and profiles in various areas
where slope staking has occured. This concept works great with my Leica
program RoadRunner for the 1205 robot. I also have stakeout points based on a
provided grid that I stake out, occasionaly, for core sampling by another firm
and finally I can go anywhere within the limts of my DTM to set grade stakes
as it makes me and the equipment operator best friends (to be able to give a
grade anywhere he chooses amazes him). This is what I am mainly posting about:
I have noticed that while slope staking the design slope, the catch (or
daylight) stakes fall outside the limits of the design DTM but within a very
reasonable tolerance. No issue here as this very common especially when I have
a field run surface and the design contours were graded to a flown surface. To
my suprise, though, it's very close but it's impossible to match their
daylighting scheme to my field run shots. This is what I would like to have: A
buffer surface of 10' or so outside of the design surface to allow the
checking, staking, etc. once the limits of the design surface are exceeded. In
other words, I want to follow the design catch line but use a 10' or so
portion of my existing surface to allow overrun (or overlap). Follow me? Now,
back to the alignments and profiles for slope staking. That is why I did this
in anticipation of flown versus field difference. I can control the design toe
and catch to my existing ground. This is where ya'll come into play. This is
how I propose to do it and would love any comments on the scenario. Both
surfaces are in the same file by the way. 1-Create a polygon describing the
10' or so limit that follows the distinct design daylight. 2-Copy my existing
surface and rename to something appropriate 3-Apply that polygon as a boundary
4-Copy and name the design surface to something appropriate. 5-Paste those two
surfaces together to form one masterpiece of beautiful proportions . Okay
maybe that's being overly geeked but hey. 6-Convert to my RoadRunner job and
get to work. Oh, I am in the middle of the first phase, of three, monitoring
process and it may be more logical to pick this idea up on the next phase.
Either way I have good procedures and data to work with but would find it more
convenient to be able to go outside of the design surface a little. Thanks,
Mark Driver