After playing with pressure pipes in C3D 2013 and in C3D 2015 I still haven’t found a use for the tool. Has anyone established a work flow for actually using this tool in C3D. Below is a list of shortcomings that has prevented me from using the tool:
This is just a list that I came up with in about 10 minutes. Has anyone been able to create a construction plan set using this tool? If so do you mind sharing how.
I have yet to use them in a Production environment but because it's a relatively new feature users would like it customized & set up at our company.
I spent some time a while ago looking into customizing parts etc.
Due to the lack of feedback I received on customization of Pressure Pipes it seems like they may not be getting much use yet.
Many of the shortcomings on your list are accurate based on my findings with the 2014 release. Can't comment on 2015 as I don't have it installed yet.
The only Pressure Pipes Catalog I'm aware of for purchase is this one offered by ATG Services.
Simply found this via Google search when I was looking into it and know nothing about the product.
Here's my recent post on the topic and my thought process but I kind of got stuck when I couldn't find a decent means to blend any of these parts from one incomplete catalog to the next (I'm talking just for consistency in the included) DIP parts. Once I dug into it I realized there needs to be a lot of blending between items offered in Mechanical vs. Push-on etc. to accommodate our current workflow. Then the PVC and HDPE etc. need to be created as well.
If there was a way to blend portions of the SQlite parts files it would save a lot of setup time.
Thanks for the reply Jay_B
From the minimal responses I am guessing most people are in the same boat I am in.
I was hoping that this post would help me see the use for pressure pipe objects in C3D, but as for now, I think I am going to put this tool back on the shelf and wait for another release.
Every release I rush to check and see if this is something we can justify implementing and every realease my mind is blown by how terribly supported this feature is.
I have found this parts package, It had just about everything I needed. Plus, they told me they are working on over 5000 additional parts to add within the next year or so. They were awesome to work with.
These parts look great for modeling, but they won’t be useful for creating a paper plan set. This is where the discontinuity exists in pressure pipe networks.....getting from a great looking model to a set of plans that can be taken into the field.
Please expand on the "not ready for paper plans". Would like to see what you are thinking there. As far as pressure pipes go, I believe they are ONLY good for paper plans and actually work very well with styles and labels. That is if it is all set up properly. Most firms I see using it are only using it for plan production, not even profile or anything more.
There are a few items in my original post, but here is an outline of some items could think of off the top if my head:
1. Scaling fittings. At a typical plan scale 1"=20' a fitting will look like a drop of ink from the printer. This is not very useful to a contractor reading the plans.
2. Creating fitting clusters. How do you annotate a cluster of fittings? Usually I use the station/offset of one of the fittings and then build the cluster off of that location. All fittings are grouped into the single leader with one location.
3. Restrain delineation. How do you delineate a wedge style mechanical glad (restraining) vs a standard mechanical gland. What about PVC C900 bell restrains?
I am not saying these items can't be accomplished; however, that’s what my original post was about........."How do we make a real set of construction plans that are to industry standards and very professional looking." I haven’t seen or been able or figure out how this can be accomplished.
All about object and label styles. Not saying 100% of things can be exactly how you want it or how you have done it before. But it can be very productive. IF you want, you could send me a DWG and I could lay it out and label it how you want. Just to give it a shot.
I have used pressure pipes extensively to create 8 water line system (including fire line in use of hydrant) one project (may 2014)
had to make my own catalog to fit my industry standard and it had to be metric
we already had blocks made so we just made content file and then typed in all the value into the catalog (pain staking process)
took 30 hr to make a catalog with sizes 4" to 12" pipe, reducers, tee, reducing tee, elbows (45, 22.5, 90), gate valve and 2 types of hydrant
1. our plan views look find since everything is too scale so yes small part appears as smudge in zoomed out scale (so we just create detail view, if needed) otherwise the labels do the work for identification
2. yes had to create out own took 30 hrs was one time expense and have used same catalog on 6 projects and growing, added new fitting as need with each new project (created weld neck flanges for the last project)
3. we do a table for fitting with coordinates (table also used for ordering materials
4. swapping parts suck.. not like regular network.. hoping that had it fixed in 2015.. but alas not yet.
5. yes this sucks too you end either deleting whole line (re draw) or just end with break in between which messes up the pipe table
other good feature when you output to navis work for review you can actually see the right model component and right meta data
so as of now we use it better than what we did before (made items in the regular network and used blocks to display them in plan view.. so not possible to create navis work file for review and the 3d content was not there and the metadata was not correct
We have used pressure networks for several projects now.
You are correct in the shortcomings listed.
We made concessions in some of those areas until the feature is better developed.
There is a good AU class that was taught in 2013 about adding parts to the parts catalogs.
If you can work with some of the shortcomings, it does have some pretty good uses.
1. Being able to dynamically tie an alignment to the network is helpful. (easy to break link so be careful)
2. I use pressure networks for my existing crossing utilities (gas, water, elec, etc) and then I'm able to show in profile views easily.
3. Tables help with QTO. (still needs help for presentation purposes)
Is it completely there yet? No, but I'm cautiously optimistic that it will get better.