seems to still be present in 2012.
Autodesk, this is basics, for this to be broke still is a major letdown.
Can anyone confirm if this has or has not been fixed?
internal protected virtual unsafe Human() : mostlyHarmless
I'm just here for the Shelties
C3D2013 .NET API for the AddPVI() method of the ProfilePVICollection:
Exceptions:
System.ArgumentException: Thrown when the value of the new PVI station is less than the start station or greater than the end station of the profile's parent alignment.
Pretty evident they don't want us doing that when creating the profile.
I don't know what to say on this. This is a step back from LDT.
Some major confusion at Autodesk about what is important.
internal protected virtual unsafe Human() : mostlyHarmless
I'm just here for the Shelties
nice, thanks for verifying.
frustrating.
internal protected virtual unsafe Human() : mostlyHarmless
I'm just here for the Shelties
this is hilarious, I had forgotten about it, but checked my .net tools that manipulate c3d objects and found this statement:
bool trimmed = ceProf.TrimToStaLimits(alg.StartingStation, alg.EndingStation);
So it seems my tools have been trimming the profiles for years now, and still are for 2014.
That function is a bool, because I use that to warn the user it was trimmed.
We don't care much though, about C3D funkiness, as Autodesk sucessfully motivated us to write our own alignment and profile program that works on AutoCad and BricsCad. Soon I will be exporting C3D surfaces to text file and using ceometric surface library to handle surface use. The Autodesk monopoly is splipping fast.
internal protected virtual unsafe Human() : mostlyHarmless
I'm just here for the Shelties
The work around I've been using recently is to add an alignment segment to the begining/ending of an alignment, make the change, and then delete the alignment segment. It sucks, but gets the job done without crashing the program. Seems like all that needs to be done is delete a line of code from the API that is doing the check, test, and compile. Definitely seems like a programmed limitation that doesn't need to be there. I'd be really surprised if it took more then 2 days to make the change for this.
I guess that works when you have the alignment as parent, not a data-ref.
In my case, I do, but if I used c3d in production, we would never put our profiles in the horizontal design base.
With all this Caltrans hoopla, you would think its super common to have highways that start in the middle of a vertical curve.
It would seem an embarrasing thing to tell users they must make overlapping alignments in order to get the VC at end of existing, and beginning of proposed.
That kind of duplication is not liked by designers, especially when you have a highway split up into segments, and each company has a definate start/stop on their segment.
But the caltrans issues have not even started from what I have seen. This darn web DG inteface keeps me from watching posts like I used to though.
internal protected virtual unsafe Human() : mostlyHarmless
I'm just here for the Shelties
Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.