Elevation of Point Code from Corridor Section

[Anonymous]

... sometimes I use the term Level, sometimes Elevation - my bad, sorry.

Part One (This specific Post / Question)

At our firm, it has always been policy to include Left and Right Road Edge levels in long sections (Profile Views).

To do this with Civil 3D we use Proile from Corridor Feature Line. This method has caused major problems because the resulting Profile is Static and not Dynamic. Problem being: When the source Corridor object is altered and rebuilt, the left and right Profile do not update - designers forget to delete the existing left and right Profiles and forget to create new left and right Profiles.

I have been tasked with making a dev to compare the left and right Profile elevations with the elevations actually used in the Corridor Sections within Section View Group.

I have a suspicion that the corridor section point code levels are not available in the API - correct?

I suspect that the Corridor Section objects get these numbers directly from the Corridor / Assembly - yes?

Part Two (Best Practice for road edge levels)

Maybe our method is incorrect, maybe we should not be making Profiles from Corridor Feature Lines for obtaining road edge levels for long sections.

If there is a better method, then please provide some details.

Thx for reading,

Kevin.

[Jeff_M]

Kevin, if you are only using the bands to show the Road Edge, perhaps a surface profile of the corridor Top surface would suit your needs.In my experience, it displays nearly identical to the extracted profile, but stays dynamic to the corridor.

[Anonymous]

When we first started using Civil 3D that's what we did - for road edge levels: created offset surface profiles using levels from corridor top surface.

In newer versoins of Civil 3D, it looks like it would be better to use offset alignments and generate profile from the offset alignments.

Some years back, when we did this, we sometimes encountered differences in levels of over 50mm - when comparing the section views with the road edge profiles. Thats why we stopped using Profile from Top Surface for Road Edge levels.

I believe there is something incorrect with the way we are making the top surface - the levels should match.

This is probably the perfect time to abandon the crazy additional custom app fix development idea for this - and - rather return to using top surface.

It is better to rather establish the reason why the top surface levels are incorrect - and find ways to generate a perfect top surface.

Jeff, I take it that you always use Top surface for road edge levels - correct?

Thank for your time and input,

Kevin.

[Anonymous]

Ok, here goes, Jeff and other Masters - please check this method for Left and Right road edge Profiles, I hope this is correct...

1. Make OFFSET ALIGNMENTS from the road centre-line Alignment

2. In creating the corridor, Target map the subassemblies (left and right) that have the edge of road Point in width to the respective offset alignments created in step 1

3. Create a Top Surface from the road corridor

4. Create Surface Profiles for each offset alignment on the new Top Surface created in step 3 AND make sure you create a Profile View at the same time (during creation of each Surface Profile)

5. Create Super-imposed Profiles from the Profile created in step 4 onto the road centre-line Profile View

Correct?

Thx for your help.

Kevin.

[Jeff_M · Accepted solution]

Yes, Kevin, that is what I have done. We arene't required to show the left & right eop here, but there are times I've wanted to do it just so I know everything is working as it should.

[Anonymous]

Thx Jeff ... Hopefully I can convince the drawing standards leaders here to follow your example - to exclude left and right edges from road long sections.