Pipe run defaults

[randyspear6624]

Two questions regarding pipe runs...

1) I have default pressure networks created in our template. The parts lists are set correctly and the layers are set correctly but if I create a pipe run by path, C3D defaults to the parts list defined in the command settings, not the parts list defined in the network properties. However, if I create from object, it does use the correct parts list as defined in the networks properties. 

How do I get the pipe run by path command to use the correct parts list?

2) Is there any way to control the pipe run alignment layer? It's currently using the current layer and although my pipe runs alignments are set to a no plot style, I'd like them to be on the specific utility layer. This request isn't as crucial as question 1.

TIA

Civil 3D 2022.2.5

[RobertEVs]

[randyspear6624]

I understand that's how to set the default. I want it to use the parts list as set in the network properties.

[Cadguru42]

My recommendation is to never use pipe runs for pressure networks. It's just too buggy and lacks basic features. You can't even make a vertical bend in a profile view with a pipe run. Your catalog and parts list MUST contain every fitting needed before creation or it won't work. It adds tons of overhead because it creates an alignment & profile for each run, even if you don't need profile views of them. The naming scheme for these runs also becomes a pain to manage when you have a lot of them. It also can add strange twists for horizontal fittings that makes it harder to fix. Sometimes it's just easier to delete the fitting and redo it, but if they're part of a pipe run you have to break the pipe run, manually add the part, then add the run again. That doesn't always work, either. I've had it duplicate alignment & profiles when that was done.

It's more work overall to use the pipe runs than to just do it the "old" manual parts based way, which the purpose of pipe runs was supposed to solve. 

[RobertEVs]

I get that and felt the same way from the start. After using them for a few years I humbly disagree. The biggest benefit I see is the profiling lowering's or as I like to call them (crossings). I can create a quick override design profile and tell my parts to follow it in profile. Using the CTC project suite, I can tell my profile view to look out a set distance from reference alignment and draw all PP and/or gravity pipes in the view. Label them all on the fly, add and remove PI's etc etc. 

"Your catalog and parts list MUST contain every fitting needed before creation or it won't work"

That's not the case. I can add a fitting to my part list, say a crossing of 6"x8" after and add it in as a part in the network that is already created.

"...can add strange twists for horizontal fittings that makes it harder to fix"

Typically, from a rouge PI in your alignment if you are creating network from object. You MUST make sure that anywhere you have a pipe run that the reference surface (FG) is outside the extents of your run.

I understand your frustration but hang in there and work with it.

You just might change your recommendation stance.

[Cadguru42]

I'm working on a 12 mile 48" water transmission main. We aren't using pressure runs because they are so buggy. Unless Autodesk fixes it (will probably never happen) we will never use them. 

Did Autodesk add the ability to do a vertical 90 bend with a pressure run? If not, no point in using them.

[randyspear6624]

Yeah, we decided as an organization not to use them for actual pressure network design as well.

I use pipe runs to model and share private utilities like gas and comms. I don't use any fittings in my pipe runs.