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: 

Transition between daylight regions

14 REPLIES 14
Reply
Message 1 of 15
tsachi
3302 Views, 14 Replies

Transition between daylight regions

Hello,

I am working on a project where some of the corridors require different daylight slopes. I need to transition between a region with 2:1 slope to a 10:1 slope.

My local civ3d support said something about using grading tools to achive that.

What I understood was that my assemblies should not have any daylight sub-assembly and that i should grade the corridor and than add a transition zone between the different gradings. Did I understand correctly?

 

Is there any way to do it better? (or easier)?

Thanks

14 REPLIES 14
Message 2 of 15
MikeEvansUK
in reply to: tsachi

The best way of doing this would be to design the last string line (Footway or verge etc) and export as dynamic featureline.

 

Next;

Option1 using differing Grading Criteria.

Create a grading with the one slope and explode the projected feature line to a 3dpolyline. Next do the same again for the other slope.

Option 2 (same criteria)

Create a grading using the different slopes leaving a gap where you think the transition is to occur then infill the gap the with transition adjust position accordingly.

 

For option 1 Only: you have more work to do. You will now have two graded lines. Look for the intersection if there is one or locate where you want your transition zone. Break each line and digitise the transition zone with a 3d polyline. Drape elevations from surface and join to originals.

 

Next use Assembly Daylight to right of way and target surface model & feature line, Rebuild and the corridor will have the transition zone within.

 

NB. You can target feature line directly with option 2 and it will be fully dynamic but beware of circular references. Option 1 is not dynamic & will not be correct if profile or alignment adjusts.

 

You cannot mix grading chriteria with transitions. Eg slope to surface & elevation @ slope will not create a transition. Hence the need for two methods or Workarounds.

 

 

Mike Evans

Civil3D 2022 English
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3820 CPU @ 3.60GHz (8 CPUs), ~4.0GHz With 32768MB RAM, AMD FirePro V4900, Dedicated Memory: 984 MB, Shared Memory: 814 MB

Message 3 of 15

Here is the start at another method using a subassembly.

 

In the attached file is a little SA that will take two slope value and then calculate the slope based on the distance it is from the start of the region. It only does a single link from the attachment to a target surface.

 

This doesn't have much error testing in it, and no point/link codes, but could be used as a starting point.

 

Cheers,

 

Peter Funk

Autodesk, Inc.



Peter Funk
Autodesk, Inc.

Message 4 of 15
fcernst
in reply to: tsachi

I use SAC to create my daylight transitions, no Gradings...However:

 

I never tried it before, but below I went ahead quickly created a Grading from a dynamic corridor feature line. It was easy to create transitions. Below I am transitioning the Daylight from 25% on the left, to 10% in the middle, to back again to 25% on the right.

 

There's no exploding anything...

 

Capture.JPG



Fred Ernst, PE
C3D 2024
Ernst Engineering
www.ernstengineering.com
Message 5 of 15
fcernst
in reply to: peterfunkautodesk

Peter,

 

Here is what we need, and this will allow you to get these unstable, drawing crashing, Grading objects eliminated from the product once and for all:

 

1. We need Corridors to be able to use a Feature Line for Baseline control; not limit Baseline control as it currently is where we are required to use always use an Alignment and Profile.

 

2. Add Daylight slope transitioning as an option in the product. It's a basic need and should not have to continually produced as a customization by your customers here.

 

3. Add the Daylight interior corner cleanup routines to the Corridors.

 

 

The Feature line option above will allows us to more easily implement the much more robust Corridor object into our site grading work. We want to use the Feature Line horizontal and vertical Edit routines on our Corridor Baselines.

 

The current requirements of always having to have an Alignment and Profile are much too prohibitive!

 

 

Cheers!

 



Fred Ernst, PE
C3D 2024
Ernst Engineering
www.ernstengineering.com
Message 6 of 15
MikeEvansUK
in reply to: fcernst

I agree Fred but for the moment there is a workaroud in place.

 

"We need Corridors to be able to use a Feature Line for Baseline control; not limit Baseline control as it currently is where we are required to use always use an Alignment and Profile."

 

Create a temp alignment with any old profile. In assembly use an offset & elevation generic link whith a hide link setting. Next add assembly's to this. Create the corridor, target the featureline with the offset&elevation horizontally & vertically and you now have a featureline as a baseline control.

"3. Add the Daylight interior corner cleanup routines to the Corridors." And enable the deletion of any corridor cross section rather than just custom ones"

 

Peter, thanks for the transition subassembly. Was this created in R2013 or 2014?

 

Mike Evans

Civil3D 2022 English
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3820 CPU @ 3.60GHz (8 CPUs), ~4.0GHz With 32768MB RAM, AMD FirePro V4900, Dedicated Memory: 984 MB, Shared Memory: 814 MB

Message 7 of 15
fcernst
in reply to: tsachi

Mike,

 

I want to make it as clear as I possibly can to the Civil 3D team that this is not a successful proposed Workaround. The magenta line below is the Feature line.

 

Please see the two images below:

 

1. The subassembly links do not project perpindicular to the new Feature line that is proposed to be used now as a "Baseline" control.

 

2. The Corridor loses its ability to correctly create material area fills as the Feature line crosses the now to be considered as a  'Dummy' alignment (this of course is the true Baseline control of the Corridor).

 

3. The Corridor loses the ability to correctly connect the Corridor Feature lines as it crosses the actual true Baseline control alignment. This is also a current product defect in the Median Corridor workflow that I pointed out to support, and has been passed on to development.

 

4. The drawing crashes when grip editing the Feature line.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capture2.JPG

 

Capture1.JPG

 

 

11

 

 



Fred Ernst, PE
C3D 2024
Ernst Engineering
www.ernstengineering.com
Message 8 of 15
tsachi
in reply to: fcernst


@fcernst wrote:

I use SAC to create my daylight transitions, no Gradings...However:

 

I never tried it before, but below I went ahead quickly created a Grading from a dynamic corridor feature line. It was easy to create transitions. Below I am transitioning the Daylight from 25% on the left, to 10% in the middle, to back again to 25% on the right.

 

There's no exploding anything...

 

Capture.JPG



Hi,
I have been on vacation the last couple of weeks, so I'm just now looking at the replies for this thread. Can you please elaborate on how you created this transition? Also, what is SAC?
Thanks!

Message 9 of 15
MikeEvansUK
in reply to: fcernst

 

See comments below in blue.

 

 

 

Whilst there are missing functionality we have to make the best of what we have as we're in the hands of the programmers. Workarounds are often haphazard and sometimes produce unwanted effects but frequently we have to employ them to bend the rules.

 

 

 

1. The subassembly links do not project perpendicular to the new Feature line that is proposed to be used now as a "Baseline" control. Not sure why, Try offsetting the featureline to the left or right and using this to create the dummy alignment & profile then they should be Perpendicular. Remember the master Dummy alignment is just there "to change the baseline position from alignment to featureline". Agreed that this is not a Preferred workaround if another method is introduced.

 

 

 

2. The Corridor loses its ability to correctly create material area fills as the Feature line crosses the now to be considered as a  'Dummy' alignment (this of course is the true Baseline control of the Corridor). I have just undertaken this in a sample file (attached) and do not get any problems but I don't know what your assembly is like really. Your image shows links etc being created and material infilled from the master "Dummy" alignment to the Featureline. As you are trying to relocate the baseline you would not want this in the model.

 

 

 

3. The Corridor loses the ability to correctly connect the Corridor Feature lines as it crosses the actual true Baseline control alignment. This is also a current product defect in the Median Corridor workflow that I pointed out to support, and has been passed on to development. I'm not sure what you mean here. I would "Never" create the dummy alignment crossing the featureline but instead running as parallel to it as possible (see Comment #1).

 

 

 

4. The drawing crashes when grip editing the Feature line. I have not had any issues here, in the attached example I have used a featureline and adjusted it without issues. I suspect that the issues arise from elsewhere (featurelines themselves or dynamic rebuild circular references). I wonder if this would be better using a 3DPolyline instead?

 

 

 

The attached file (saved in R2013) has an offset baseline defined from Featureline position and level. Also contains a transitioning Embankment from the Mater dummy alignments superelevation. We could do with a superelevation section purely for daylighting.

 

 

Mike Evans

Civil3D 2022 English
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3820 CPU @ 3.60GHz (8 CPUs), ~4.0GHz With 32768MB RAM, AMD FirePro V4900, Dedicated Memory: 984 MB, Shared Memory: 814 MB

Message 10 of 15
fcernst
in reply to: MikeEvansUK

1. The subassembly links do not project perpendicular to the new Feature line that is proposed to be used now as a "Baseline" control. Not sure why...

 

The magenta is your new proposed "workaround Baseline control by Feature Line". The links do not project perpendicular to it because they will always project perpendicular to the true Baseline control, that is the Alignment.

 

For your workaround to be successful, we would want to be able to hide the true Baseline control Alignment and never have to worry about it again.

 

This doesn't work however due to two issues:

 

1; No perpendicular link projections once we move the new feature line control to a position that is not completely parallel with the true corridor baseline control Alignment.

 

2; Once we cross the true corridor baseline control Alignment, the Corridor links and corridor feature lines behave erratically. This is a documented defect that has been sent on to development.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capture.JPG



Fred Ernst, PE
C3D 2024
Ernst Engineering
www.ernstengineering.com
Message 11 of 15
tsachi
in reply to: fcernst

I settled on editing the grading sections in the section editor. It looks to be the easiest method (at least for me).

Thanks for your help!

Message 12 of 15

Hello Peter,
which version you are using SAC, I could not open it.
thank you.
Lassaad THALJAOUI
Infrastructure Engineer
Autodesk Product professional User
Civil 3D 2016 x64 / Windows 7 64-bit / 16GB RAM
Message 13 of 15
doni49
in reply to: LASSAADTH

 


@LASSAADTH wrote:
Hello Peter,
which version you are using SAC, I could not open it.
thank you.

The better question is what version are YOU using?  If he used a more recent version, you will not be able to open it.  But if you tell what version YOU have, he (or someone else) MAY be willing to reproduce it in your version.  I haven't looked at his example and don't know how difficult it would be to reproduce.

 

FWIW, that's the reason I like to use the OLDEST version I have of SAC when I'm creating an example for uploading -- if the reader is using a newer version, he can open it but so can the person with the older version (at least as far back as MY version).



Don Ireland
Engineering Design Technician




If a reply solves your issue, please remember to click on "Accept as Solution". This will help other users looking to solve a similar issue. Thank you.


Please do not send a PM asking for assistance. That's what the forums are for. This allows everyone to benefit from the question asked and the answers given.

Message 14 of 15
doni49
in reply to: doni49

I had a few min to spare so I went ahead and recreated Peter's solution in SAC 2012.  That's as far back as I have access to.  So hopefully, you're able to use it.

 

Don't forget to rename the file with a pkt extension after you download it.

 

 



Don Ireland
Engineering Design Technician




If a reply solves your issue, please remember to click on "Accept as Solution". This will help other users looking to solve a similar issue. Thank you.


Please do not send a PM asking for assistance. That's what the forums are for. This allows everyone to benefit from the question asked and the answers given.

Message 15 of 15
cbaker
in reply to: peterfunkautodesk

Hi Peter, tried using the varying slope pkt file, but my corridor surface won't follow the actual corridor.  The surface ends up below the corridor.  Any suggestions?  As well, do you have an updated version of this pkt file that has point codes?  I have never used the composer before.

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

Post to forums  

Rail Community


Autodesk Design & Make Report