Yes there is opinion involved which is why I referenced the post to our workflow. We are not designing long symmetrical walls that you would typically find in transportation projects. QTO isn't going to do this and surfaces may make sense to me in our workflow if the design was constantly changing or I was running through a number of cost estimates. IMO tracing a simple pline is faster and easier to work with for our workflow. The design will not change often enough to warrant a dynamic calc.
I use corridors often for these walls using the two profiles mentioned above and one assembly. The corridor is used to harvest feature lines for a surface and 5 min's would be a long time to build one of the wall corridors I have done recently.
In our workflow the profile is required on plans for local contruction in some towns. Engineering drawings and calcs are required for walls over 3.5'-4'. Many contractors around here also bid/price these walls by face area.
We use surfaces and since I know the "slope" of the wall, we have a "slope legend" that reports the 3d area of a specified slope. That gives us the square footage of the wall.
I can elaborate if you are interested.
Do you mean simply a surface straight from the top, front of the wall to the bottom front? Built with feature lines or corridor targeting a profile? I've never used legends, but I presume this is the same number as '3D surface area' in the Extended Statistics. This method sounds even simpler than the one with two corridors and a volume surface.
Credit where credit is due! Give kudos or accept as solution whenever you can.
We usually use a grading object set to 1000%. Under surface analysis we set it to one range with 900%+. Under the surface style you can turn on slopes to verify you are getting the correct slopes.
You set the slope legend table style to report 3d area.
This would also work with a corridor surface if you knew the slope of the wall.
It can also be dynamic (be cautious with 2013 we have had some issues.)
Hope that helps
I presume you have the grading object targeting a surface, the feature line is the top of the wall, and the alignment is directly over the feature line.
My first thoughts when I saw this post was this method, but the information originally provided led me to my original response. Good methods either way.
We would use a grading object only when daylighting to a surface. On the interior of a site, we might just do a really tight offset. Anything to get the slope % very high.
We generally do our curbs as .5 over and .5 up (or 100%) so anything steeper than that should be a wall.
A Corrdior would work as well and might eliminate a step with the alignment.
We started doing this way back in the LDD days and had a macro that would sum a group of 3d faces. The legend just makes it easier and dynamic (when that works!!)
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register