Community
Civil 3D Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Civil 3D Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular AutoCAD Civil 3D topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Best Grading Practices?

10 REPLIES 10
Reply
Message 1 of 11
brent.moses
750 Views, 10 Replies

Best Grading Practices?

Good day,

 

Last year I started employment with a firm needing experienced "Civil 3D" skill sets.  after starting work it quickly becam evident that Ciivil 3D was'nt being used in its intended workflow.  When the company first switched to Civ they only did a three day training session with their software provider, to cover all aspects of the software (way to little IMHO).  Since starting I have been assigned to multiple projects where the grading schemes were a poor mishmash of Civil 3D techniques, which in the end killed the profit in each and everyone of these projects.  Management has now tasked the internal Civil 3D committee with establishing a workflow that precludes the use of modeled surfaces in favor of contour (polyline) derived surfaces.  I am at a loss as to approach this situation, I have on multiple occassions sat down with the management and explained that the results they have seen so far were the result of insufficient training, and the fact a majority of the technicans are implementing Civil 3D as a 2D drafting tool (only using smart alignments and profiles, pipe networks are manually drafted in for both plan and profile..., the list goes on and on...).   I am almost to the point of recommending they switch to vanilla CAD and use Lisp routines to generate their profile since thats all they use it for.

 

 

Any thoughst or suggestion on this situation may have crept up elsewhere and what the resolution may have been in that situation?

10 REPLIES 10
Message 2 of 11
neilyj666
in reply to: brent.moses

3 days training is indeed woefully inadequate - you could easily spend a week getting to grips with various aspects of styles.

Can't offer any real suggestions apart from training and looking at Autodesk University/YouTube for examples of how to approach various tasks.

I would certainly seem that they are not getting value from their Civil 3D investment but as often said the software investment is only a small part as you also need to get the users to buy in to Civil 3D which is a totally different animal from vanilla CAD.

neilyj (No connection with Autodesk other than using the products in the real world)
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.

EESignature


AEC Collection 2024 UKIE (mainly Civil 3D UKIE and IW)
Win 11 Pro x64, 1Tb Primary SSD, 1Tb Secondary SSD
64Gb RAM Intel(R) Xeon(R) W-11855M CPU @ 3.2GHz
NVIDIA RTX A5000 16Gb, Dual 27" Monitor, Dell Inspiron 7760
Message 3 of 11
castled071049
in reply to: brent.moses

This is an age-old battle that we fight all the time. It's hard to argue with just using plain old polylines to indicate contours--versus taking the time to construct a usable, legitimate surface with feature lines and grading objects--from a time consuming (and profitability) standpoint... especially with straight-up site plans with no corridors to speak of. Subdivisions are a different animal because roads dominate the initial design, and corridors beat vanilla polylines hands-down. But site plans require more patience, work, and care, in my opinion.

 

As a designer, I tell my supervisors that I can't create a workable grading plan on a site without using feature lines and grading objects combined into a C3D surface. I don't create surfaces just because I want to, I create them because I need them to show me where the low points are, what the contours look like, what the cut-fill situation is at any given moment, what finish floor elevations will work, what kind of slopes I need to get back to existing ground, what size retaining wall is required, etc., etc. I don't have the ability to visualize these things with vanilla polylines... I need the surface in order to create the grading.

 

In addition, I would agree that more training is needed, and, most importantly, working with feature lines and grading objects daily to get the worker bees up to speed so that profitability returns to the grading portion of the project. 

 

Message 4 of 11
Joe-Bouza
in reply to: brent.moses

I feel your pain.
Thank you

Joseph D. Bouza, P.E. (one of 'THOSE' People)

HP Z210 Workstation
Intel Xeon CPU E31240 @ 3.30 Hz
12 GB Ram


Note: Its all Resistentialism, so keep calm and carry on

64 Bit Win10 OS
Message 5 of 11
Joe-Bouza
in reply to: brent.moses

...hard to argue poly lines vs a model from a profitability standpoint...?

I have a one word argument for that....REVISIONS!

I know what point you were making I just figured I would add to it.
I like to say..." Oh... You're in too much of a hurry to do it quickly 😄👍
Thank you

Joseph D. Bouza, P.E. (one of 'THOSE' People)

HP Z210 Workstation
Intel Xeon CPU E31240 @ 3.30 Hz
12 GB Ram


Note: Its all Resistentialism, so keep calm and carry on

64 Bit Win10 OS
Message 6 of 11
rendarin
in reply to: brent.moses

I've been planning and pushing to have this done here at the office too. I once had an officemate try to start doing site grading of a gasoline station using alignments and assemblies instead of feature lines.

I think the best way would really to break it down into sections. For a few sessions just tackle feature lines and grading tools and the situations where it's better to use these over alignments.

As for your drainage problem, I once taught somebody how to do drainage first prior to roads. I was the one who set up the road profiles and intersections, and it was up to him to get the drainage profiles done.

And I agree with neilyj, just discussing styles and how it's set up could take weeks. That's where much of the load would fall on me (or you in your case) to setup the styles in the office for them to use without thinking. Then when they need something special for a specific project that's when I show them how to manipulate styles.
Message 7 of 11
Neilw_05
in reply to: brent.moses

My approach would be to have a shootout between the contour guys and the C3D gurus. The only way to settle the argument is to demonstrate which approach is most efficient.

Neil Wilson (a.k.a. neilw)
AEC Collection/C3D 2024, LDT 2004, Power Civil v8i SS1
WIN 10 64 PRO

http://www.sec-landmgt.com
Message 8 of 11
volusiajim
in reply to: Joe-Bouza

Revisions? Engineers NEVER change their minds. 🙂
Message 9 of 11
sfore
in reply to: brent.moses

I would first decide if your peer users are self motivated to experiment and learn on their own.  If not, then it's a sink or swim situation for them.  If so, then lend your knowledge when you can.  If they seem to struggle with the same task over and over, make them write down the steps.  They have to know the fundamentals and interface before expanding on their knowledge.  You must relay that to managment in a direct way and then tell them, "the only thing worse than training our staff and having them leave, is not training them and having them stay".

 

If you want to persuade management what additional training could do for the less experienced folks, then do a 30 minute demo to management by taking a surface, do various color analysis, layout a road or ditch with grading using corridors, layout drainage structures, create a volume report and show structure/pipe tables.  Nothing real complex, just something to show them the power of alignments, profiles, grading, volumes, etc...  Management seems impressed when you can show them cut/fill numbers quickly and/or 3d renderings in the object viewer, so adjust your road profile and rebuild your corridor and run the volumes again, then grip the surface and drainage structures to display in the object viewer.  Management also likes to see how civil 3d handles revisions, so make changes with 2 or 3 viewports on screen so they can see for themselves.

 

Message 10 of 11
Neilw_05
in reply to: sfore

I really think there has to be a quantitative assessment that shows management there will be a positive return on investment. Otherwise there will be no buy in. If it can be shown the investment is worthwhile, then a commitment must be made for training, setting up standards and procedures and re-staffing if necessary.

There have been studies done that claim to show a positive Return on Investment, but those studies could be viewed with skepticism. That is why you should do an analysis using your own data, applications and workflows.
Neil Wilson (a.k.a. neilw)
AEC Collection/C3D 2024, LDT 2004, Power Civil v8i SS1
WIN 10 64 PRO

http://www.sec-landmgt.com
Message 11 of 11
Joe-Bouza
in reply to: brent.moses

Did we get any better in 10 years?

I going with yes

Thank you

Joseph D. Bouza, P.E. (one of 'THOSE' People)

HP Z210 Workstation
Intel Xeon CPU E31240 @ 3.30 Hz
12 GB Ram


Note: Its all Resistentialism, so keep calm and carry on

64 Bit Win10 OS

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Rail Community


Autodesk Design & Make Report