• Industries
  • Products
  • Buy
  • Services & Support
  • Communities
  • Discussion Groups

    AutoCAD Civil 3D

    Reply
    Distinguished Contributor
    Posts: 154
    Registered: ‎10-13-2009

    MapCheck Analysis - Legal Description Closure

    840 Views, 10 Replies
    02-10-2012 01:58 PM

    Civil3d 2012

     

    We are looking at the best practice for checking closures on over 100 legal description, each requires a closure report.  I am familiar with the Mapcheck routine that requires all lines and curves to be labeled but find this to be an excessive amount of work.  I mean why would we want to label the lines when there is no need to...besides the software need to have it.  In LDD we cogo up a legal description, make it a pline and go through the analsis/figure menu and voila' a mapcheck report is created.  In civil3d we seem to be forced to label the lines first and then you have to manually pick each of them.  This is excessive and overly cumbersome.

     

    We have even tried toggling the command line window in the map check analysis and hand entering the bearing and distance for each side.  While this works the brg and distance input is different i.e. you have to type N45-45-23 W then mouse down to the distance input and enter the distance.  We quickly canned that method due to the data entry procedure.

     

    Parcels won't work because nothing ever created based on a metes and bounds legal, with the excpetion of a square or rectangle, will close flat.

     

    There has to be a better way!

    Please use plain text.
    *Expert Elite*
    Posts: 3,115
    Registered: ‎07-22-2003

    Re: MapCheck Analysis - Legal Description Closure

    02-10-2012 02:02 PM in reply to: mikehathaway2942

    This is precisely why we added SPPARCELINVERSE to the SincpacC3D.

    Jeff_M, also a frequent Swamper
    Please use plain text.
    Distinguished Contributor
    Posts: 154
    Registered: ‎10-13-2009

    Re: MapCheck Analysis - Legal Description Closure

    02-10-2012 02:09 PM in reply to: Jeff_M

    Well....once we can fit your software into our budget we'll definitely be picking it up.  Until then....

    Please use plain text.
    Distinguished Mentor
    Posts: 754
    Registered: ‎09-01-2004

    Re: MapCheck Analysis - Legal Description Closure

    02-10-2012 02:53 PM in reply to: mikehathaway2942

    If they are defined as parcels you can use the Parcel Map Check Report.

    Jeff Paulsen
    Civil 3D 2012 SP3 | Win 7 64-bit SP1
    Xeon E5-1620 @ 3.60GHz, 16GB Ram | NVidia Quadro 600
    Please use plain text.
    Distinguished Contributor
    Posts: 154
    Registered: ‎10-13-2009

    Re: MapCheck Analysis - Legal Description Closure

    02-10-2012 03:02 PM in reply to: JeffPaulsen

    Thanks Jeff, but parcels must close. (Unless you know some way around that)  All legal descriptions have a mis-closure, therefore parcels will not work.

    Please use plain text.
    Distinguished Mentor
    Posts: 754
    Registered: ‎09-01-2004

    Re: MapCheck Analysis - Legal Description Closure

    02-10-2012 03:07 PM in reply to: mikehathaway2942

    Yeah your right; that will not work for legal descriptions.

    Jeff Paulsen
    Civil 3D 2012 SP3 | Win 7 64-bit SP1
    Xeon E5-1620 @ 3.60GHz, 16GB Ram | NVidia Quadro 600
    Please use plain text.
    Employee
    Posts: 635
    Registered: ‎08-25-2009

    Re: MapCheck Analysis - Legal Description Closure

    02-10-2012 04:00 PM in reply to: mikehathaway2942

    If the lots are defined as polylines, have you tried the COGOEditor in Civil 3D? One of the features is to load a traverse from a polyline. If you define the POB and POC at the start of the polyline and run the analysis button you should get your closeure report. If you want to balance the polyline you can do that as well.

     

    It is also a nice tool for adding the lots from the legals.

     

    Cheers,

     

    Peter Funk

    Autodesk, Inc.



    Peter Funk
    Autodesk, Inc.

    Please use plain text.
    Distinguished Contributor
    Posts: 154
    Registered: ‎10-13-2009

    Re: MapCheck Analysis - Legal Description Closure

    02-10-2012 04:07 PM in reply to: peterfunkautodesk

    Yes, Peter we have tried that.  On my CPU it works ok but on the other CPU in the office the error of closure is always infinite and 0.0000 even if the error is 0.02 or 0.0049.  Must be a setting somewhere for that? Any ideas?

    Please use plain text.
    Mentor
    bcsurvey
    Posts: 222
    Registered: ‎04-29-2008

    Re: MapCheck Analysis - Legal Description Closure

    12-03-2012 07:09 AM in reply to: mikehathaway2942

    I'm casting my line into a different post, hoping for a bite.  I apologize for the redundancy.

     

    Was this problem ever resolved?  I too am searching for the best way to generate closure reports and/or traverse adjustments.  So far, I've found that the adjustment through mapcheck (right click on mapcheck item in input view, choose adjust) gives the best adjustment (i.e. it actually shows all necessary data).  I can't get the cogo editor adjustment report to show any x, y, or z deltas as anything but 0.0000, but I'd like the report output style it displays - it's easy for those unfamiliar with adjustment data to understand.   So specifically:

     

    1) Has anyone come across (or perhaps designed) a C3D-style report for a mapcheck output (not parcel mapcheck) so that I don't have to paste into Word and customize text size and font?

     

    2) What's the trick for showing adjustment data through  the cogo editor?

     

    Thanks!

    Civil 3D 2012
    Windows 7 Enterprise SP1
    Dell Precision T3400
    (Q9550 @ 2.83 GHz)
    4GB RAM
    Nvidia Quadro FX 3700
    Please use plain text.
    Employee
    Posts: 635
    Registered: ‎08-25-2009

    Re: MapCheck Analysis - Legal Description Closure

    12-03-2012 07:37 AM in reply to: bcsurvey

    Save and post a traverse from the COGO editor and we'll take a look at it.

     

    Regards,

     

    Peter Funk

    Autodesk, Inc.



    Peter Funk
    Autodesk, Inc.

    Please use plain text.