AutoCAD Civil 3D General Discussion

AutoCAD Civil 3D General Discussion

398 Posts
25 Kudos
Registered: ‎08-27-2007
Post 1 of 3

best practice for layer naming and object layers

869 Views, 2 Replies
10-30-2012 01:44 PM

For years, I've used E- for Existing and P- for Proposed for my layers and/or style names.  For Object Layers, I've used OBJ- with modifiers and set the layers inside the styles to 0.  This works ok, and Civil 3D objects obviously stand out and are easily isolated thru layiso and such, BUT having styles set to 0 presents a problem when dumbing down a drawing to send to another firm.  The C3D Objects that are dumbed down are on layer 0 which isn't good.


We're generating a new template for 2013 and want to gear it towards the National Cad Standards on some level and do away with 0 as the style layer and actually have the style layers set to something other than 0.


My initial thoughts from a simplistic standpoint are:

V- for Survey and Existing features

C- for Proposed features


I understand there's many more designators.  We mainly do Civil and Utility work.


I know V is a designator for Survey but can it cover and should it cover existing features too that aren't surveyed, for example if we receive mapping from someone and want to reassign some layer names?


Is C- strictly for Proposed/Design work?


I'm reviewing a template we're working with someone on and they assigned the layers inside an Existing Surface Style to C-Topo-Majr and C-Topo-Minr.  They assigned the layers inside the Proposed Surface Style to C-Topo-Majr-N and C-Topo-Minr-N.  The only difference is the N for New, between the style layers.  I don't like that. 


Shouldn't the Existing Surface Style layers start with V-?


Just trying to get some feedback on a simplistic approach to Layer naming and keeping with the National Cad Standards on some level.






Valued Mentor
616 Posts
19 Kudos
Registered: ‎10-01-2006
Post 2 of 3

Re: best practice for layer naming and object layers

11-01-2012 01:33 AM in reply to: sfore

We use to use the p- and e- as well but now just use the shipped layer naming I found a document that gives examples of the NCS standards from the us army and posted a link to it in this blog posting.


Getting into layer filters and adding the registry update to import and export them has really helped as well.

You can setup filters for the C-CONT-MNR-E and C-CONT-MJR-P,etc

You can also hide groups of layers at a time by right clicking on the filter name. I like to just turn all the layers off and then turn on the filter groups of civil3d objects i am interested in.

Also do not forget layer states manager.


Justin Ralston
*Expert Elite*
2,293 Posts
418 Kudos
Registered: ‎11-08-2005
Post 3 of 3

Re: best practice for layer naming and object layers

11-01-2012 09:44 AM in reply to: sfore

Part of the commentary in the NCS document talks about how the Discipline designator can be used to describe the category of of the content, or it can describe the "Agent responsible" for creating that content.


After some internal discussion we have chosen to use the second definition.  This means that if I import survey data to a drawing then those point layers would have a V prefix, but if I create layout points then those would have a C prefix.  The same logic applies throughout - if I am working from field data, including Lidar or other similar sources then I am wearing my "surveyors hat" and things go onto V- layers.  If I create the same type of object from a design then I am wearing my "civil hat" and using C- layers.  If I receive design information from an Architect then that should be on A- layers etc.  The point for me is to identify who is responsible for the objects that I see on the screen.


Where it gets tricky is when the designers start getting data from sources other than survey (GIS, old as-builts, etc.)  Another problem is when parts ot the drawing that come from a single source need to be separate, to identify what is to happen to them and when (existing to remain vs. existing to demolish for example.)  NCS does have a R designator which is described as "Data furnished without warrant as to accuracy."  Another option is to use the optional two letter discipline designators to separate things.  A third method is to add the optional status codes to the end of the layer name to identify new work versus future, temporary, etc.


If you really want to build a proper set of CAD standards then I recommend that you spend the money to buy a copy of the NCS.  Sit down and read through the introduction and commentary pages, consider how you would interpret it, pick out the pieces that you want to use and go from there.



Post to the Community

Have questions about Autodesk products? Ask the community.

New Post
Are you interested in helping shape the future of the Autodesk Community? To participate in this brief usability study, please click here. Your time and input is greatly appreciated!