Working with Multiple EG Surfaces

[Sinc]

How do people work with multiple EG surfaces? For example, we often go out and topo an area, then topo the exact same area after dirtwork is done.

When we import data into a Survey Database, all Survey Figures get thrown into one giant bucket. And since Figure names tend to be all the same (for example, there may be 100 different TOP figures in each survey), it is basically impossible to use the "Create Breaklines" feature for adding the right breaklines to the right surface.

We've started creating multiple Survey Databases for each project, one for every different EG survey we do, but this strikes us as being fundamentally wrong... Or is it OK? Are we just supposed to use lots of different Survey Databases in each project, each with a seperate copy of our Control Points? Or should we be doing something else entirely?

[Anonymous]

One way to achieve this is to adopt a figure naming convention that will
have some shorthand date tag as part of the figure name.

You can sort figures by name before selecting them for the breaklines and
use just the required ones.

Rad


wrote in message news:5418150@discussion.autodesk.com...
How do people work with multiple EG surfaces? For example, we often go out
and topo an area, then topo the exact same area after dirtwork is done.

When we import data into a Survey Database, all Survey Figures get thrown
into one giant bucket. And since Figure names tend to be all the same (for
example, there may be 100 different TOP figures in each survey), it is
basically impossible to use the "Create Breaklines" feature for adding the
right breaklines to the right surface.

We've started creating multiple Survey Databases for each project, one for
every different EG survey we do, but this strikes us as being fundamentally
wrong... Or is it OK? Are we just supposed to use lots of different Survey
Databases in each project, each with a seperate copy of our Control Points?
Or should we be doing something else entirely?

[Sinc]

That sounds like a terribly ugly solution, but I'll keep it in mind. If we run into issues with multiple survey databases, we might have to fall back on it. Thanks.

As of right now, we'll probably just continue the (also terribly ugly) solution of having multiple Survey Databases for each project. As it is, our field guys already have to type all the notes manually, because our data collectors do not see them in the figure library. This is particularly obnoxious for them, since our data collectors do not have alphanumeric keypads (only phone-style input). If they also have to type some sort of special code as part of EVERY figure name, that will be much more annoying for them. And it would also be annoying for me in the office, being forced to go through that list and check or uncheck figures individually in order to create Breaklines. On our larger topos, this can mean hundreds of figures.

I'm thinking this might be OK. So far, having multiple survey databases seems to be messy. but doesn't seem to cause a problem (we aren't currently using the Vault, so we don't need to worry about confusing the Vault).

We're actually wondering if we're going to be using the Survey Database functionality much at all. We probably will eventually, but that whole set of functionality is superfluous to our desire to transition from LDD to C3D.

As surveyors, there is a TON of other stuff we need a LOT more, and it's missing from C3D. So far, we've been singularly unimpressed with C3D's support for surveyors. The whole Equpiment Database, raw file reduction, etc. is all stuff that is handled by our data collectors and their software. We can see that we'll eventually have a lot more power and flexibility doing that stuff in C3D, but it's something we really don't need in order to do our work. And outside of the Survey Database, C3D seems to have practically NO support for surveyors. There's some ways to generate points from Corridors (which is useful), some minor "generate points from figures" commands (not very useful), and that's basically it. Extremely disappointing.

[Anonymous]

Hi,

When you import a field book, it is actually imported into a Survey Network,
which you as the user provide a name for.

Survey network names of YYYYMMDD would be easy to create to take advantage
of Rad's advice. You could go a little further and make network names like

YYYYMMDD FieldbookName SurveyorName etc if it suited.

As I had most of the code I need to do this from another project is was
quite easy to create the attached program. (Assuming the NG file upload
actually works you can get it here. Otherwise you can get my email address
from the CADApps web site and I'll then send the program directly)

To keep the coding effort minimal, the program is premised on the first 4
characters of the Network name being numeric and the user running it
immediately after importing the fieldbook where upon all figures whose names
don't start with a 4 digit number will have the selected Network name added
as a prefix.

To use the program, unzip it such that the DVB file is on the AutoCAD search
path.
Use CUIlOAD to load the menu - it has a single Icon toolbar.

From there what happens should be reasonably obvious, but I suggest you test
it on a Testing Survey Database till you are happy with it.

Lastly the code is open, so it you want to change anything, it is not hard
to do so.

--

Laurie Comerford
CADApps
www.cadapps.com.au
www.civil3Dtools.com


wrote in message news:5419163@discussion.autodesk.com...
That sounds like a terribly ugly solution, but I'll keep it in mind. If we
run into issues with multiple survey databases, we might have to fall back
on it. Thanks.

As of right now, we'll probably just continue the (also terribly ugly)
solution of having multiple Survey Databases for each project. As it is,
our field guys already have to type all the notes manually, because our data
collectors do not see them in the figure library. This is particularly
obnoxious for them, since our data collectors do not have alphanumeric
keypads (only phone-style input). If they also have to type some sort of
special code as part of EVERY figure name, that will be much more annoying
for them. And it would also be annoying for me in the office, being forced
to go through that list and check or uncheck figures individually in order
to create Breaklines. On our larger topos, this can mean hundreds of
figures.

I'm thinking this might be OK. So far, having multiple survey databases
seems to be messy. but doesn't seem to cause a problem (we aren't currently
using the Vault, so we don't need to worry about confusing the Vault).

We're actually wondering if we're going to be using the Survey Database
functionality much at all. We probably will eventually, but that whole set
of functionality is superfluous to our desire to transition from LDD to C3D.

As surveyors, there is a TON of other stuff we need a LOT more, and it's
missing from C3D. So far, we've been singularly unimpressed with C3D's
support for surveyors. The whole Equpiment Database, raw file reduction,
etc. is all stuff that is handled by our data collectors and their software.
We can see that we'll eventually have a lot more power and flexibility doing
that stuff in C3D, but it's something we really don't need in order to do
our work. And outside of the Survey Database, C3D seems to have practically
NO support for surveyors. There's some ways to generate points from
Corridors (which is useful), some minor "generate points from figures"
commands (not very useful), and that's basically it. Extremely
disappointing.

[Sinc]

Great, thanks!

if we have any troubles with multiple survey databases, we'll try it. It basically seems to work. The only problem is that when running the "Create Breaklines" command from the figures, each unwanted figure has to be deselected individually. When the dialog box comes up asking which breaklines to add to the surface, all breaklines are selected by default, and there's no way to deselect a whole bunch of them at once. When there's hundreds of figures in there, deselecting them one at a time is a real pain. So it's easier to use multiple survey databases, so long as we have no problems created by that.

So far, things seem OK, because we don't really want to use the Survey Database functionality at this time. Maybe at some point in the future, but not right now. We use other software to reduce our data and generate the FBK, and basically only use the Survey Database as a way to get the points and linework into C3D.

[Anonymous]

Hi,

I don't have a convenient file with lots of figures, but following the
processes in the Tutorial I could select large number of contiguous figures
using the normal hold shift key down while selecting process.

Provided the list displays in alphabetical order, you could select all and
turn them all off, then select the contiguous group and turn them on.

Whether or not a figure is to be seen as a breakline, is merely a logic
toggle setting in the database and it is very easy to change.

If you care to write some rules for turning the toggle on and off to suit
your needs I'll see what I can do. One thought would be to use 2
multi-select list boxes - one for breakline figures and one for non
breakline with an ability to switch figures between them.

I could readily modify the code of the program you have to turn all off, and
then turn on the ones currently being processed

--

Laurie Comerford
CADApps
www.cadapps.com.au
www.civil3Dtools.com

wrote in message news:5420687@discussion.autodesk.com...
Great, thanks!

if we have any troubles with multiple survey databases, we'll try it. It
basically seems to work. The only problem is that when running the "Create
Breaklines" command from the figures, each unwanted figure has to be
deselected individually. When the dialog box comes up asking which
breaklines to add to the surface, all breaklines are selected by default,
and there's no way to deselect a whole bunch of them at once. When there's
hundreds of figures in there, deselecting them one at a time is a real pain.
So it's easier to use multiple survey databases, so long as we have no
problems created by that.

So far, things seem OK, because we don't really want to use the Survey
Database functionality at this time. Maybe at some point in the future, but
not right now. We use other software to reduce our data and generate the
FBK, and basically only use the Survey Database as a way to get the points
and linework into C3D.

[Sinc]

Oh, I think I see what you are saying.

I was trying to run the "Create Breaklines" command, and deselect a whole bunch of them in there. That's the part I couldn't do.

But it seems you are saying to, instead, edit the Figures, so that only the ones I want to insert at this time have "Breakline" checked. That seems to work, which means your routine will work. Thanks.

Boy, this is a horribly obtuse way of working. I hope this gets improved soon. Some parts of Civil-3D are REALLY not ready for prime-time.

[Anonymous]

Hi,

The working method envisaged by the programmers was that you assigned
whether on not a 'Figure' was intended to be a Breakline in the field. Once
you do that, the work flow is entirey logical and easy.

You have a somewhat different situation in that you want Figures to be
Breaklines initially, but then don't want them to be breaklines.


--

Regards,


Laurie Comerford
CADApps Australia
www.cadapps.com.au
www.civil3Dtools.com
wrote in message news:5421614@discussion.autodesk.com...
Oh, I think I see what you are saying.

I was trying to run the "Create Breaklines" command, and deselect a whole
bunch of them in there. That's the part I couldn't do.

But it seems you are saying to, instead, edit the Figures, so that only the
ones I want to insert at this time have "Breakline" checked. That seems to
work, which means your routine will work. Thanks.

Boy, this is a horribly obtuse way of working. I hope this gets improved
soon. Some parts of Civil-3D are REALLY not ready for prime-time.

[Sinc]

No, the issue is that I want to be able to build two different EG surfaces from survey data in the same project. I want breaklines to stay breaklines, I just need to be able to control which surface the breaklines get added to.

The developers evidently didn't envision that situation, which strikes me as a major design flaw, since it happens a lot. Witness my example, where we go out and topo a piece of land before dirt work, then topo the same piece of land after dirtwork.

Don't get me wrong - we love a lot of things in C3D. But Autodesk seems to have approached everything from an engineer's point of view, leaving surveyors largely to fend for themselves for certain things...

[Anonymous]

Hi,

Let me rephrase what I was alluding to.

You want to be able to easily select which breaklines are added to a model.

As I see it one way is to switch to figures such that the ones you want are
breaklines and the ones you want aren't.

Then you can add "all" breaklines to a model.

Then switch them all on again.

--

Laurie Comerford
CADApps
www.cadapps.com.au
www.civil3Dtools.com

wrote in message news:5422977@discussion.autodesk.com...
No, the issue is that I want to be able to build two different EG surfaces
from survey data in the same project. I want breaklines to stay breaklines,
I just need to be able to control which surface the breaklines get added to.

The developers evidently didn't envision that situation, which strikes me as
a major design flaw, since it happens a lot. Witness my example, where we
go out and topo a piece of land before dirt work, then topo the same piece
of land after dirtwork.

Don't get me wrong - we love a lot of things in C3D. But Autodesk seems to
have approached everything from an engineer's point of view, leaving
surveyors largely to fend for themselves for certain things...

[Sinc]

Well, yeah... Isn't that what we've been doing? Isn't that why you wrote that thing that changes the names based on Survey Network, so that we could discern which figures came from which network?

But this whole approach is basically flawed. Not every survey figure collected in the field is a breakline. So we REALLY don't want to be changing that property of survey figures, just to get things added to a surface. We can do it, but it's really ugly, from a conceptual point of view, and is not at all user-friendly.

We can get by, and your figure-renaming routine may come in very handy, but it would be FAR better if Autodesk fixed this issue.

[Anonymous]

Hi,

Unfortunately I can't remember when adding figures to a DTM was easy in
terms of selecting lots of figures from a larger number of figures.

Hence, I guess I'm psychologically adjusted to the failure of Autodesk to
make it easy.

You are quite right - Autodesk should make it easier.

--

Laurie Comerford
CADApps
www.cadapps.com.au
www.civil3Dtools.com
wrote in message news:5424614@discussion.autodesk.com...
Well, yeah... Isn't that what we've been doing? Isn't that why you wrote
that thing that changes the names based on Survey Network, so that we could
discern which figures came from which network?

But this whole approach is basically flawed. Not every survey figure
collected in the field is a breakline. So we REALLY don't want to be
changing that property of survey figures, just to get things added to a
surface. We can do it, but it's really ugly, from a conceptual point of
view, and is not at all user-friendly.

We can get by, and your figure-renaming routine may come in very handy, but
it would be FAR better if Autodesk fixed this issue.