AutoCAD Civil 3D

[#1]

Hi Mike:

The grid would be based on CL. At each interval we would label all three
alignment's stationing relative to CL. If the left flowline is longest we
would have something like:

Example: at CL Sta. 12+00, we would have 12+00CL, 13+23 LT, 11+15 RT.

The transition vertical elements; tangents, PVI's and VC, info in the
Profile would be smart to allow labeling of true grades and stations based
on each alignment's true length.

Our roads are designed using the template tools, but we have no way of
outputting the true grades of the transitions. Along these lines it would
also be helpful if there were design tools to see the transition true slopes
during the design process. We also need to see the road cross slope
relationship to make sure we're maintaining our 2%-4% road crown cross slope
criterion when the offset is constrained laterally, as in gutter design.

Fred



"Michael Rogerson" wrote in message
news:A8D7F0AEA04C65A842E40BD8DC465611@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Fred - Sheesh, you guys want everything. Kidding.
>
> Actually, we've had that on our radar for some time. Maybe I need a kick
in
> the head or something, but there were some details about the stationing
from
> offset to offset to CL that I'm a little fuzzy on. I'm sending you a
direct
> email to get some more details.
>
> Thanks!
> Mike
>
> "Fred Ernst" wrote in message
> news:B0AC9A9C16B5F6948F3EE600456C0FE3@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > On each plan and profile sheet we have to show three profiles: FGCL,
left
> > gutter flowline and right gutter flowline. Each has their own stationing
> > because the flowlines are longer and\or shorter than FGCL due to curves
> and
> > transitions.
> >
> > It would be huge if you could get the three into one Profile View. With
> the
> > Profile Data Band sets in Civil 3D you could have a data band for each
> > profile. Each of the three profiles need to be fully annotated (i.e,
> grades,
> > vertical curves, PVI's, etc.)
> >
> > The regulators want to make sure the gutter flowlines are working for
> > drainage puposes. They want to make sure they're not getting too flat
> around
> > curves and through transitions.
> >
> > This would be just huge.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> >
>
>

[#2]

Fred,

Thanks, you've answered it. The labeiling of the true grades and stations
(not the transposed grades) is the critical point, as I though - just wanted
to make sure. As you may know, we have the "Superimpose" profile feature in
LDD, but labeling is only with respect to the CL for which the profile
belongs to. I can relate how tough it must be to label all of the info from
the transposed profile grade lines. Stay tuned.

Mike


"Fred Ernst" wrote in message
news:581776AFCE3C85B7E7D15ED05444D834@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Hi Mike:
>
> The grid would be based on CL. At each interval we would label all three
> alignment's stationing relative to CL. If the left flowline is longest we
> would have something like:
>
> Example: at CL Sta. 12+00, we would have 12+00CL, 13+23 LT, 11+15 RT.
>
> The transition vertical elements; tangents, PVI's and VC, info in the
> Profile would be smart to allow labeling of true grades and stations based
> on each alignment's true length.
>
> Our roads are designed using the template tools, but we have no way of
> outputting the true grades of the transitions. Along these lines it would
> also be helpful if there were design tools to see the transition true
slopes
> during the design process. We also need to see the road cross slope
> relationship to make sure we're maintaining our 2%-4% road crown cross
slope
> criterion when the offset is constrained laterally, as in gutter design.
>
> Fred
>
>
>
> "Michael Rogerson" wrote in
message
> news:A8D7F0AEA04C65A842E40BD8DC465611@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Fred - Sheesh, you guys want everything. Kidding.
> >
> > Actually, we've had that on our radar for some time. Maybe I need a
kick
> in
> > the head or something, but there were some details about the stationing
> from
> > offset to offset to CL that I'm a little fuzzy on. I'm sending you a
> direct
> > email to get some more details.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Mike
> >
> > "Fred Ernst" wrote in message
> > news:B0AC9A9C16B5F6948F3EE600456C0FE3@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > On each plan and profile sheet we have to show three profiles: FGCL,
> left
> > > gutter flowline and right gutter flowline. Each has their own
stationing
> > > because the flowlines are longer and\or shorter than FGCL due to
curves
> > and
> > > transitions.
> > >
> > > It would be huge if you could get the three into one Profile View.
With
> > the
> > > Profile Data Band sets in Civil 3D you could have a data band for each
> > > profile. Each of the three profiles need to be fully annotated (i.e,
> > grades,
> > > vertical curves, PVI's, etc.)
> > >
> > > The regulators want to make sure the gutter flowlines are working for
> > > drainage puposes. They want to make sure they're not getting too flat
> > around
> > > curves and through transitions.
> > >
> > > This would be just huge.
> > >
> > > Fred
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[#3]

Michael,
No we have not had the need to do that. We usually have a CL profile and
work off of that forcing 3dpolys to get desired cross slopes or gutter flow.
None of the local agencies around here require us to show profiles around
the curbline and 3dpolys work great to achieve what we want. After we get
the 3dpolys we just label the critical elevations.

John

"Michael Rogerson" wrote in message
news:C2BEAB95B16B73DFF4162AE9753EFFD5@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Good stuff.
>
> It seems there are so many ways to approach the grading of a cul-de-sac.
> I've seen situations where the CL actually wraps around the end loop, so
> elevations and offsets can be forced from the CL profile but as you
probably
> have experienced, there is always some sort of "manual" grade
determination
> in areas.
>
> In the situation of the CL ending at the center, it seems that it may be
> much more free-form, as you mention, John "warped in every possible way".
I
> assume you've typically worked radially from the CL end - grading out to
the
> curb limits with some min/max grade criteria to determine your points?
>
> Have you ever created an alignment./profile around the curb and set points
> that way?
>
> thanks!
> Mike
>
>
>
> "John Mayo" wrote in message
> news2279403149408B579D9FD4693FEB676@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Ditto here. We do a lot of residential cul-de-sacs that are warped in
> every
> > possible way. They are all done by hand and shown with spot shots
because
> > the high or low points could be anywhere on the curves.
> >
> > John Mayo
> >
> > "James Wedding" wrote in message
> > news:1C54AB7460E4252BD832A92B17E17B9B@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > In our plans, cul-de-sac grading is typically down by showing spot
> shots.
> > We
> > > profile based on center line, stopping at the curb return. Grading is
> done
> > > by hand (sloped 3Dpolys), and shown by points. The station-offset
> paradigm
> > > doesn't work well in cul-de-sacs, so it's not used.
> > >
> > > --
> > > James Wedding, P.E.
> > > IT Manager
> > > Jones & Boyd, Inc.
> > > Dallas, TX
> > > XP/1 on P4-1.6/512
> > > LDT2004+C3D
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[#4]

Mike,

Yes I do know about the feature and it helps for attaching Profiles to
Transitions.

Yes, it's a tremendous amount of work to transpose all that information.
I'll be on standby.

Fred


"Michael Rogerson" wrote in message
news:18C8FDA161100B1BBB6C28BB8625FED0@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Fred,
>
> Thanks, you've answered it. The labeiling of the true grades and stations
> (not the transposed grades) is the critical point, as I though - just
wanted
> to make sure. As you may know, we have the "Superimpose" profile feature
in
> LDD, but labeling is only with respect to the CL for which the profile
> belongs to. I can relate how tough it must be to label all of the info
from
> the transposed profile grade lines. Stay tuned.
>
> Mike
>
>
> "Fred Ernst" wrote in message
> news:581776AFCE3C85B7E7D15ED05444D834@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Hi Mike:
> >
> > The grid would be based on CL. At each interval we would label all three
> > alignment's stationing relative to CL. If the left flowline is longest
we
> > would have something like:
> >
> > Example: at CL Sta. 12+00, we would have 12+00CL, 13+23 LT, 11+15 RT.
> >
> > The transition vertical elements; tangents, PVI's and VC, info in the
> > Profile would be smart to allow labeling of true grades and stations
based
> > on each alignment's true length.
> >
> > Our roads are designed using the template tools, but we have no way of
> > outputting the true grades of the transitions. Along these lines it
would
> > also be helpful if there were design tools to see the transition true
> slopes
> > during the design process. We also need to see the road cross slope
> > relationship to make sure we're maintaining our 2%-4% road crown cross
> slope
> > criterion when the offset is constrained laterally, as in gutter design.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> >
> >
> > "Michael Rogerson" wrote in
> message
> > news:A8D7F0AEA04C65A842E40BD8DC465611@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > Fred - Sheesh, you guys want everything. Kidding.
> > >
> > > Actually, we've had that on our radar for some time. Maybe I need a
> kick
> > in
> > > the head or something, but there were some details about the
stationing
> > from
> > > offset to offset to CL that I'm a little fuzzy on. I'm sending you a
> > direct
> > > email to get some more details.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > "Fred Ernst" wrote in message
> > > news:B0AC9A9C16B5F6948F3EE600456C0FE3@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > > > On each plan and profile sheet we have to show three profiles: FGCL,
> > left
> > > > gutter flowline and right gutter flowline. Each has their own
> stationing
> > > > because the flowlines are longer and\or shorter than FGCL due to
> curves
> > > and
> > > > transitions.
> > > >
> > > > It would be huge if you could get the three into one Profile View.
> With
> > > the
> > > > Profile Data Band sets in Civil 3D you could have a data band for
each
> > > > profile. Each of the three profiles need to be fully annotated (i.e,
> > > grades,
> > > > vertical curves, PVI's, etc.)
> > > >
> > > > The regulators want to make sure the gutter flowlines are working
for
> > > > drainage puposes. They want to make sure they're not getting too
flat
> > > around
> > > > curves and through transitions.
> > > >
> > > > This would be just huge.
> > > >
> > > > Fred
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[#5]

This is a great topic coming from Autodesk. I have seen the routines in
the programs for years but didn't find any usefulness in then with our
designs. Hopefully I can use them in the future.

I have designed Cul-de-sacs using centerline stationing up to the curb
returns at the start of the cul-de-sac then use LT/RT curb stationing to
to a point equal distant from each curb return. I then make my
alignment for the cul-de-sac run through the end of the cul-de-sac to
the length equal to the ending station of the curb stationing. that
reserves the distance in the profile. I create my profile and then trim
my existing ground at the curb return then use a quickview of the curb
returns to insert the natural ground of the LT and RT curb.

for the profile we will usually fake in a vertical curve in at the end
with the center of the VC at the end of the alignment then trim it out
from beyond the end of the alignment. If I end up with split curbs then
I just need to make sure the grade into the end of the alignment is the
negative of the grade of the other curb at the end of the alignment.

We have a document that explains our design for Autocad that I could send.

David Urban, P.E.
Huffcut & Associates
Austin, Texas

Michael Rogerson wrote:

> In Civil 3D, we would like to expand our solution base for Cul-De-Sac
> creation, as well as improve useability. We hope to get are some particular
> common (and not-so-common) configurations for Cul-de-sacs, in regards to the
> horizontal alignment, offsets and, additionally, 3D design details to help
> automate the process.
>
> Preferred examples would be contained in DWF or DWG files. Also, any
> available agency standards and examples would be useful as well. We seek
> this input to continue improving Autodesk Civil 3D.
>
> If you can help, please respond/send examples directly to me at the
> following email address:
>
> mike.rogerson - Add "autodesk.com" at the end of that. If you reply
> directly to me from this post, make sure to remove the SPAM protection from
> my reply address.
>
> Thanks for any help!
>
> Mike
>
> Autodesk, Inc.
> Michael C. Rogerson, PE
> Product Designer - Program Manager
> ISD Civil Engineering Software Development
>
>

[#6]

Thanks David, I got the example - I defintely will have some questions as I
walk throught he procedure, not an easy one - this will also be a great test
to see of the profile features are up to the task.

regards,
Mike


"David Urban, P.E." wrote in message
news7B76CB3EF7C177E9F7CC9FBFD7FB82E@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> This is a great topic coming from Autodesk. I have seen the routines in
> the programs for years but didn't find any usefulness in then with our
> designs. Hopefully I can use them in the future.
>
> I have designed Cul-de-sacs using centerline stationing up to the curb
> returns at the start of the cul-de-sac then use LT/RT curb stationing to
> to a point equal distant from each curb return. I then make my
> alignment for the cul-de-sac run through the end of the cul-de-sac to
> the length equal to the ending station of the curb stationing. that
> reserves the distance in the profile. I create my profile and then trim
> my existing ground at the curb return then use a quickview of the curb
> returns to insert the natural ground of the LT and RT curb.
>
> for the profile we will usually fake in a vertical curve in at the end
> with the center of the VC at the end of the alignment then trim it out
> from beyond the end of the alignment. If I end up with split curbs then
> I just need to make sure the grade into the end of the alignment is the
> negative of the grade of the other curb at the end of the alignment.
>
> We have a document that explains our design for Autocad that I could send.
>
> David Urban, P.E.
> Huffcut & Associates
> Austin, Texas
>
> Michael Rogerson wrote:
>
> > In Civil 3D, we would like to expand our solution base for Cul-De-Sac
> > creation, as well as improve useability. We hope to get are some
particular
> > common (and not-so-common) configurations for Cul-de-sacs, in regards to
the
> > horizontal alignment, offsets and, additionally, 3D design details to
help
> > automate the process.
> >
> > Preferred examples would be contained in DWF or DWG files. Also, any
> > available agency standards and examples would be useful as well. We
seek
> > this input to continue improving Autodesk Civil 3D.
> >
> > If you can help, please respond/send examples directly to me at the
> > following email address:
> >
> > mike.rogerson - Add "autodesk.com" at the end of that. If you reply
> > directly to me from this post, make sure to remove the SPAM protection
from
> > my reply address.
> >
> > Thanks for any help!
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Autodesk, Inc.
> > Michael C. Rogerson, PE
> > Product Designer - Program Manager
> > ISD Civil Engineering Software Development
> >
> >
>

[#7]

Mike,

Our situation is similar to Fred's further down in this thread. We are required to show all 3 profiles. Left curb, CL and Right curb. They all must be fully annotated with actual lengths shown where curbs are not parallel with CL.

Our CL profile actually always continues to the top of curb in the middle of the the large radius (back of cul-de-sac) where all the profiles end at an identical point.

This method provides us the opportunity to control all the warping in the cul-de-sac with individual profiles and provide curb staking onsite.

Hope this helps.
Gene

[#8]

Howdy Gene,

Thanks, understand - a common need seems to be the
ability to first plot, then annotate parallel and non-parallel offsets on the CL
profile (or onto any profile for that matter). 

The annotation of the non-parallel entities as
superimposed on the CL profile needs a few things:

1) Label true grades along the offset (not the
grades as the appear in the CL profile)

2) The abiliy to label stations along the
offset (not the CL stations) on the CL profile.  These stations distances
would be non-linear in the case where an offset was non-parallel, curved or
bent.

From you comments, I'm assuming that for design
development, you would likely work with profiles for the offsets as well as the
centerline.  But, for review and construction drawings, these would often
all be represented on the CL profile?

let me know if I'm not clear here, or
off-base.  Thanks.

Mike

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"gredmon" <
href="mailto:gredmon@hunsaker.com">gredmon@hunsaker.com> wrote in
message
href="news:f19b375.15@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f19b375.15@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

Mike,

Our situation is similar to Fred's further down in this thread. We are
required to show all 3 profiles. Left curb, CL and Right curb. They all must
be fully annotated with actual lengths shown where curbs are not parallel with
CL.

Our CL profile actually always continues to the top of curb in the middle
of the the large radius (back of cul-de-sac) where all the profiles end at an
identical point.

This method provides us the opportunity to control all the warping in the
cul-de-sac with individual profiles and provide curb staking onsite.

Hope this helps.
Gene

[#9]

I 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

[#10]

Hi Michael:

We actually need the ability to design the
transitions (gutter flowline usually) as "independent" alignments and profiles,
but they need to have an intelligent cross slope relationship with CL. We need a
flag or a display where we can see the cross slope left and right of crown
at each CL station. 

Now, people are designing all three profiles, and
"hand checking" the crown cross slopes, which is very tedious and eats profit
margins.

Fred

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:4912A6E0F243A93A15AD41F7EB7A6326@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:4912A6E0F243A93A15AD41F7EB7......

Howdy Gene,

Thanks, understand - a common need seems to be
the ability to first plot, then annotate parallel and non-parallel offsets on
the CL profile (or onto any profile for that matter). 

The annotation of the non-parallel entities as
superimposed on the CL profile needs a few things:

1) Label true grades along the offset (not the
grades as the appear in the CL profile)

2) The abiliy to label stations along the
offset (not the CL stations) on the CL profile.  These stations distances
would be non-linear in the case where an offset was non-parallel, curved or
bent.

From you comments, I'm assuming that for design
development, you would likely work with profiles for the offsets as well as
the centerline.  But, for review and construction drawings, these would
often all be represented on the CL profile?

let me know if I'm not clear here, or
off-base.  Thanks.

Mike

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"gredmon" <
href="mailto:gredmon@hunsaker.com">gredmon@hunsaker.com> wrote in
message
href="news:f19b375.15@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f19b375.15@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

Mike,

Our situation is similar to Fred's further down in this thread. We are
required to show all 3 profiles. Left curb, CL and Right curb. They all must
be fully annotated with actual lengths shown where curbs are not parallel
with CL.

Our CL profile actually always continues to the top of curb in the middle
of the the large radius (back of cul-de-sac) where all the profiles end at
an identical point.

This method provides us the opportunity to control all the warping in the
cul-de-sac with individual profiles and provide curb staking onsite.

Hope this helps.
Gene