Infraworks animation

[wcac04]

I am using the story board to do an animation along a proposed road (infraworks 2015). For some reason, I can not pick the proposed road when asked. Any ideas?

[ToddRogers-WPM]

You used a design road?

[wcac04]

I used a road that I created. I hope that that is a design road?

Sent from my iPhone

[ToddRogers-WPM · Accepted solution]

You might have possibly used a road that was not a "design" road.  Try using like an arterial road and see if you can do it.

[wcac04]

O

Sorry to be such a pest, but I have created roads and applied the standard styles availble and I am yet to be able to pick any of these roads to do an animation from the design road option of the storyboard. Is there anithing that I am missing? As far as I know, you go to the "Create Conceptual Design Features" menu, and after you click, you pick the icon that says "roads". At this point you select a style and draw your road. There is no option to tell that this new road is a design road is there?

Thanks!

[ToddRogers-WPM]

Are you working with InfraWorks 360? or InfraWorks?

[wcac04]

Infraworks only
Sent from my iPhone

[ToddRogers-WPM]

I don't think you can do design roads without the Road and Highways in 360. 

[JamesMaeding]

well how did the road get there in the first place?

Autodesk should be watching and realizing this split to 360 for road cartoon design is killing momentum they should have let build for a while at least.

My question is, Why not use C3D for this road design? Doesn't it work well enough, or have users shunned it as its so hard to use?

Seriously, when you get to the design stage, you don't need images draped on some surface, you need an environment that reflects real design.

The roads in IW do not allow side slope control (that I know of), so they are cartoons in areas where daylight lines matter.

And if you don't care about the daylight, you didn't need to spend 2 grand more on the 360 version of IW.

[tcorey]

Roads you create with InfraWorks are not considered "Design Roads" and are therefore not navigable using the storyboard tools.

Regarding setting side slopes, InfraWorks 360 allows actual slope values while InfraWorks allows setting a width to daylight as part of the road style. See the column called Group Height Transition Zone Width in the road style editor. It's very intuitively named, yes?

Regarding "Why not use C3D for this road design..." Well, yes, Civil 3D is intended to be used for detailed roadway design. InfraWorks 360 is a great tool for creating preliminary design very quickly and with multiple options (proposals.) Together, the two programs provide a streamlined workflow.

Questions about whether Autodesk should or should not have removed functionality from InfraWorks so it could be incorporated only in InfraWorks 360 should be addressed to Autodesk. We resellers are only the messengers. 😉

Best regards,

Tim

[JamesMaeding]

You can tell I have not tried the 360 product yet, getting there 🙂

The comments on the split to 360 are meant for Adesk, but also to reinforce feelings I bet many users have.

I have no problem paying more for more features, but it was not yet time to do this IMO.

You mentioned "Civil 3D is intended to be used for detailed roadway design". Why the word detailed there?

Why should C3D not also work well for conceptual design?

It actually does work for planning level, but you see what is going on here.

They gave IW a nice 3d interface with grips and plan view editing.

Why does C3D not have that?

The folks desiging these programs are confused geniuses. They can implement anything, but do not get the usage patterns.

Planners and graders design the vertical of things in plan view, with profiles being secondary thoughts.

I like profiles for all phases, but hard core graders must deal with slopes and many things at once so profiles are kind of micro-focus to them.

So we have examples of plan view vertical ediing with feature lines, and IW roads.

Um, what happened to C3D alignments and corridors?

Are those not the obvious things that need plan view vertical editing interfaces?

Autodesk is confused on the foundation of design, and also how data is shared and used.

Kind of cool when you think about it, as what will happen when they do listen to those that are not confused? Lots of money to be made.

[tcorey]

Of course Civil 3D can be used for preliminary/conceptual design. InfraWorks is just faster. I am sure at this point Civil 3D is used for conceptual design by more users, just because so few people really know what InfraWorks can do for them.

Tim

[JamesMaeding]

think about this, why can you not display and edit the same corridor in c3d and IW?

It should not be two data formats, interfaces, and locations.

Autodesk has this theme of objects specific to a program, and their objects are young in areas, missing many things.

In particular, the part based pipe networks are not how civils design things, talk about a gap.

At the same time, they are re-inventing the wheel in IW.

They have to be very careful about the hype of IW, as I beleive it is short lived. Once people learn progs like Unity and ESRI gets their 3d world thing going online, IW will have company.