Showing breaks in Profiles

[Anonymous]

I believe I have done my due diligence in searching for the best method to tackle a finished ground profile as shown in the attachment.  The attachment was done with LDT.  The only answer with civil3d was to explode a copy of the profile and then break it while displaying labels and the original profile as hidden.

I am interested if there is a better method that does not use wipeouts or funny masking techniques.  Any method that can extract a poly object from the profile would also be nice.  More often than not, we need to trim, break, dis-joint, and custom tweak profiles,  This was super easy with LDT.  There will be a complete finished ground profile for corridors... so any drama with attempting to use the actual data object by chop it with drama is not really required.. .unless someone has an easy way of doing it.  I have yet to run across a fine example of a drafted product that did not use poly linework instead of the direct data.

Am I missing something or is civil3d?

Thanks for any guidance

[Joe-Bouza]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Joe-Bouza wrote:

where is that?

---

So you did understand what I was looking for.  It was on on the right click context menu under the wishful thinking tab.  Then click on the launch pad menu between unsupported and non-existing.   Apparently this feature does not exist for versions 2008-2012.

Not sure why no one would be honest about that and confuse the question.  I guess its solved.  Maybe it will get implemented later on.  It is not a deal breaker for using the software but would make it easier to push a plan out without modeling and sampling the surface back.

Thanks for trying.

---

Confuse the question! Dude I have no idea what you are talking about.

Best of luck finding the easy button.

[Anonymous]

Wow... Thats the ticket!!!!  I have learned soo much from you over the years!  That is exactly what I was looking for! 

Thanks again!!

cbertschy

[Anonymous]

Gave it a try and I ran into a couple of issue.  The first is getting this to work when the break occurs in the middle of a vertical curve.  I can solve this issue by splitting the curve.  However, when I ctrl-pick the entity and I select a noplot layer, it will set the entire profile to the noplot layer.  I tried this with the toolbar, propoerties manager, and quick properties.  Same result.  I am using 2010 and was not sure if this is a function of 2012.  Should I have any of the profile settings set to byblock?

[mcastelli]

Disregard my suggestion.  That video was made using someone else's file.  Looks like they had some polylines sketched underneath the profile.  You cannot ctrl+pick a segment of a profile and place it on a different layer, I just tried it again with my own drawing.

[Joe-Bouza]

I would use different profile styles to control plot no plot

[Joe-Bouza]

than you

[mcastelli · Accepted solution]

OK, the following method isn't as slick as my original suggestion, but this one works 😉

1. Create a closed polyline around the area of the profile you don't want to see

2. Run the CONVERTLINEWORKTOMASKBLOCK command

3. Follow the command prompts and select your closed polyline

4. Choose the option to "Select AEC Objects to Mask" (this will allow you to choose just the layout profile, if left on Automatic, the profile view will be masked as well.)

I know you stated you had played around with masking before, but I wasn't sure if you were using just plain'ol wipeouts or not.  Hope this helps.

[Joe-Bouza]

This has got to be the most confusing, disjointed thread I have ever experienced.

If you are forced to eat an Elephant, don’t complain about it; Take one bite at a time.

[troma]

I too am very confused.

I am trying to read this thread and keep up with the suggestions, not very successfully.

mcastelli, has your first post on this thread got lost or something?  You told us to disregard your first suggestion; I can't find it.  Very strange.

As for CONVERTLINEWORKTOMASKBLOCK command, that sounds cool.  I'm going to give it a try.  How does one come accross commands like this?  They certainly aren't given much publicity.  Although I've been using some plain old wipeouts for pipe network parts in profile view, and I must say they behave much better in 2011 than 2008.  That is, it'really the pipes that are behaving better, not the wipeouts.  In 2008, whenever you updated the data shortcut of the pipes, the parts in profile would come to the front.  So whenever you opened the drawing, it automatically did its update, and messed up the display order.  2011 is much better at holding the display order, while still updating the network.  Pipes to the back, wipeouts on top of them, everything else in front of the wipeouts.

Back to the current discussion; here are a couple of things that don't work 😉  (I've been lurking here and testing some theories of my own)

Someone mentioned the 'Sample from....to' options when creating a profile.  I thought about using that when adding a profile to its view again, or superimposing a profile.  However, you cannot create a break in the profile; that is, having it stop and start agian.

Then I thought of the option to delete a sub-entity within the profile.  How about that?  You can delete a tangent or curve within the profile, and both sides are still considered part of the profile.  I thought I'd got it with that one, but no.  You see,  when you click on the piece of profile to the right of the break (assuming stations from left to right) it says that it is part of the profile, and in fact that whole profile is selected.  But C3D will not add labels to the part that is to the right of the break, until you join it up again by adding a curve or tangent, or by dragging the grips over to join accros the gap.

Anyway.  Just my twopence worth.  I'm gonna be lurking around a bit longer to see if any other ideas pop up.

[Joe-Bouza]

Troma - you may want to go back to my earlier post. You can sample to and from I did and showed the image of the various station ranges.

[jmayo-EE]

I still think the surface hide boundaries are the best option because the linework to make these boundaries typically exists in the drawings and multiple hide boundaries can be added to a surface at once. If one prefers not to edit the original surface a new surface can be made, the surface of interest can be pasted in and boundaries can be added. In this example I would probably have a number of surfaces. One for datum, one for top of pave, one for bottom of pave. Again the linework to make these extra surfaces should already exist in the files to speed the process.

[Joe-Bouza]

I may have to join up with that practice, John. As I begin to realize my method is married to a specific station range, and the number of profiles could get difficult to keep track of.

And it seems I cant convince that the profiles can be sampled by range

[jmayo-EE]

🙂

[Anonymous]

Thanks again Matt!!!     'CONVERTLINEWORKTOMASKBLOCK'  turns out to be the easiest and best way to get the results I was looking for.  The issue with other masking was the draworder and wipeout in regards to the profile grid lines and other objects in paper and model space.  This unkown command will only hide the one AEC object I need which is the proposed profile.

Thanks again!!   For anyone trying to follow along,  The short and skinny is that the command 'CONVERTLINEWORKTOMASKBLOCK'  works perfect for masking a proposed profille that answers my initial question. 

[troma]

Joe—with regard to profiling "From....To": this does not introduce a break in the profile.  To do so you would need to be able to profile from, to and from, to again.  The current options only allow you to control the start and end points, not a break in the middle.

John—using a hide boundary on a surface requires having a surface.  It shouldn't be necessary to have a surface.  What are you suggesting, that we have a design profile, then run a corridor, then add hide boundaries to the corridor surface, then profile that surface and use it for plotting?  It's very convoluted.  Corridors are extremely useful, but we shouldn't have to use them to get a profile to display in a certain way.

The wipeout option unfortunately is the best Autocad C3D can offer.

[Joe-Bouza]

Troma - Please examine the image I attached earlier in this thread. Yes to introduce the break you would have to use to from to from to from etc. But the breaks are there and the object integrity is maintained.

[mcastelli]

troma, I deleted my initial response as I wasn't able to figure out how to edit it.  That's why you can't find it.  Sorry about the confusion.

ctbertschy, glad it worked out for ya!  You'll have to send me a PM though, as I'm not putting a face to screen name, lol

The problem I've found with sampled profiles from a design surface and/or superimposed profiles is that you're left with a profile that does not lend itself to be labeled like your original design profile, since it is made up of lots of little tangents.  Joe and John, I'd be curious to know how you guys deal with the profile labeling in situations like these.

[jmayo-EE]

We only need to label surface profiles like they we layed-out profiles if a surveyed centerline from an existing road needs to be profiled for rehab. We always create a best fit profile with tangents and curves from the sampled surface profile. The surface profile is then hidden or does not plot.

[Joe-Bouza]

I would not label a surface profile, only a layout profile, but that what cb wanted, so a offered a solution

[Jeff_M]

---

@Joe-Bouza wrote:

I would not label a surface profile, only a layout profile, but that what cb wanted, so a offered a solution

---

Interesting, Joe. I kept reading this thread and couldn't figure out why it kept going in the directions it did, because I never once thought the OP was asking about surface profiles. They wanted to show and label the design profiles. However, the OP also said they didn't want any "fancy masking or other trickery" so I never mentioned the ConvertLineworkToMaskBlock(which, btw, in older versions would force the text style for the labels to be different than what the LabelStyle said it should be...not sure if this has been fixed).

It was fun watching all of the responses, but since I got confused about what it was that was wanted and being offered I chose to just be quiet...