Match lines wrong after alignment edit

[rkmcswain]

We have created some sheets using the plan production tools, and everything was OK.

Later on, we had to edit the alignment, which changed its length slightly.

I expected the match lines to either stay put and the station numbers would change -or- the match lines would move to the new location based on their station value.

But instead, what happened was that the "diamond" grip (for the match line) moved to the new location, but the actual match line itself did not move. So now a match line that should be at station 139+00 is actually constructed at 138+85. If I were to move the grip to make up the difference, then the labels are wrong..

What is going on and how do I fix this? Thanks.

[deltacoolguy]

---

@Joe-Bouza wrote:

Hi R.K, I have been through this issue with a support request; the developers intent is that the Plans are produced once the design is complete, not for setting up sheets prior to designs commencement. I know sounds bassackwards to me too, but that is how it was explained to me. Their fix/ work-around is to recreate the sheets! God bless anyone that has 40 hrs of PS work invested.

Joe

---

The design is never complete.  (Half serious, half joking when I say that.)

I tried plan production for the first time earlier this year.  Granted, I was new to the concept, and didn't have all the nuances down, but I ended up wasting so much time it wasn't funny.  I re-created the sheets three times.  I ended up going back to my "old school" method with named views, etc., and everything has been stable since.  Any subsequent adjustments are minor and easily tweaked without redoing everything.

The plan production concept is a good concept, but I don't think it's "there" yet.  And until the software developers understand that their ideal world of a design being finished first doesn't exist, it probably never will get "there".

[mnorton]

Hi, Randy

Where are you these days?

I MUCH prefer Civil 3D over Land Desktop but I do miss two things: the point database and the sheet manager.  I think the point management tools in Land Desktop were easier and more effective than using point groups.

And as cumbersome as it was to set up, I was able to create submittal ready cross section and plan/profile sheets faster using the Sheet Manager than the Civil 3D plan production.

Mike

[rkmcswain]

What's wrong with the point database in C3D?  We use it with no issues.

[Cadguru42]

---

@deltacoolguy wrote:

---

@Joe-Bouza wrote:

Hi R.K, I have been through this issue with a support request; the developers intent is that the Plans are produced once the design is complete, not for setting up sheets prior to designs commencement. I know sounds bassackwards to me too, but that is how it was explained to me. Their fix/ work-around is to recreate the sheets! God bless anyone that has 40 hrs of PS work invested.

Joe

---

The design is never complete.  (Half serious, half joking when I say that.)

I tried plan production for the first time earlier this year.  Granted, I was new to the concept, and didn't have all the nuances down, but I ended up wasting so much time it wasn't funny.  I re-created the sheets three times.  I ended up going back to my "old school" method with named views, etc., and everything has been stable since.  Any subsequent adjustments are minor and easily tweaked without redoing everything.

The plan production concept is a good concept, but I don't think it's "there" yet.  And until the software developers understand that their ideal world of a design being finished first doesn't exist, it probably never will get "there".

---

Just a few weeks ago I started my first 2015 project. Besides the giant mess of bugs and issues I ran into, I had this exact problem. We have to create 3 sheets for every match line: a present layout, a proposed layout, and a profile sheet. I created my alignment and profile for my 2,500' long project, then created view frames for it. I then created 9 sheets in different drawings using the Plan Production tools. After a field review, we had to add additional survey, which moved the beginning of the project a couple hundred feet. All the work I did creating the 9 sheets, including adding them to the sheet set, was thrown out the window as I had to delete every one of them, recreate the sheets, and redo the profile labels since the station range changed. I then had to edit the sheet set information for each of the sheets.

After I got those setup and plotted, the boss decided he wanted to show a little more on the sheet at the beginning of the project, which meant moving the match line. That meant redoing it all over for a third time. So, I created a total 27 sheets and edited 27 sheets in the sheet set manager all because the Plan Production tools aren't truly dynamic. 

[rkmcswain]

engrtech wrote:
....... Besides the giant mess of bugs and issues I ran into, I had this exact problem.

Exactly why we've never used it (or even tried to use it) since that initial test here (4 years ago based on date on my original post)

[mnorton]

I'm all for keeping the new functionality but if it's not faster it should at least bring something else to the table to offset any loss in productivity.

[jmayo-EE]

Agreed.

[mnorton]

My memory is a little fuzzy at times but I seem to recall importing points, with a single command, and the point database being automatically created.  Then I could import points into my drawing by simply windowing the area of interest - again with a single command.  I've made several attempts with both point groups and the survey database but thus far to no avail.  I suspect it may simply be a training issue.  Can you help?

[ryanlaughlin]

This is still a major problem. I just ran into it for the first time. After adjusting the alignment, the match line and the match line grip are no longer located at the same point along the alignment. If I drag the match line grip to station 3+00, the label updates to reflect this new position, but the match line itself is located approximately 10 ft up or down the alignment. This IS a bug; why have the grips if the match line does not follow properly. It's a bug. Please fix this as this has become a big problem for us late in the game on our project.

[mjung]

I've found the easiest way to resolve this is to drag the grip at one end of the matchline almost to the centerline (zooming in helps get it closer). Then use the rotate grip to align to the centerline. then drag the endpoint grip back out. Not a perfect solution but it does get it close to where it needs to be.

[rkmcswain]

ryanlaughlin wrote:

This is still a major problem. ...... It's a bug. Please fix this as this has become a big problem for us late in the game on our project.

Unfortunately, there is nobody here that can help. Create a support ticket if you are on Subscription, and/or submit your feedback here.. It's been broken for 4+ years, and I suspect it's buried on the list. Send a feedback link every day, maybe it will eventually get some attention.

[ryanlaughlin]

Yes, I've also found this to be an acceptable work around to their bug, but
it adds time and could not possibly be the way Autodesk intended for this
to function.

*Ryan P. Laughlin*
*Design Engineer*


*526 Franklin Street*
*Michigan City, IN 46360*

*Office: 219.872.9407*
*Mobile: 260.255.1276*
*www.haasllc.com *

[Anonymous]

Add me to the list of tried it, didn't like it, and went back to a previously working manual solution.

[CADmgrMike]

Count me in as the latest victim.

I was going gangbusters on a 21 sheet plan & profile set and the alignment changes in the middle.

Now I've got 11 sheets where the match line doesn't line up correctly. GGrrrrrr!!!

[Cadguru42]

Well, I'm running into this issue again 14 years later and apparently Autodesk still has decided to not address the major problem with the plan production tools. Ten years ago I had a project that I utilized view frames and didn't use them again because of those problems. Fast forward to today and I've got a 12 mile long water project where I thought it'd help to use the view frames to create the plan & profile sheets, but the matchlines aren't working properly where a 90 deg turn happens. Editing the matchline grip for width doesn't fix it and the hatching(mask) isn't updating to match the matchline.

And we're at the prelim stage where the alignment is going to be changed many times over the following months and we'll have to recut every sheet every time the alignment changes.

Has anyone successfully used view frames from the start of a project even when the main alignment is changing?

[rl_jackson]

I've done projects similar to what you're doing and the way we resolved this is that the alignment for the sheets was static, usually the centerline of the street (downtown Miami Beach) based on the FDOT baseline. This makes the process of sheet breakup a little easier, as you're referencing the pipe alignment to the baseline (survey) alignment.

[Cadguru42]

---

@rl_jackson wrote:

I've done projects similar to what you're doing and the way we resolved this is that the alignment for the sheets was static, usually the centerline of the street (downtown Miami Beach) based on the FDOT baseline. This makes the process of sheet breakup a little easier, as you're referencing the pipe alignment to the baseline (survey) alignment.

---

I'd love to do that, but they want the pipe's centerline to be the basis for the sheets. Since the pipe will be updated during design that's why I'm having concerns about this.

[CADmgrMike]

We do hundreds of miles of plan/profile sheets using the Plan Production tools. in later releases, 2021 and 2023, issues have been very minimal. 

When you created the viewframes, did you use an additional distance for repositioning?

I find this helps when you need to reposition the match line after a minor alignment edit.

I also found when you make drastic changes to the alignment, sometimes the matchlines are not on the original stationing, and you need to move them back osnapping to the correct station. It sometimes takes a couple snaps to get it back to the original stationing.

[Cadguru42]

---

@CADmgrMike wrote:

We do hundreds of miles of plan/profile sheets using the Plan Production tools. in later releases, 2021 and 2023, issues have been very minimal. 

When you created the viewframes, did you use an additional distance for repositioning?

I find this helps when you need to reposition the match line after a minor alignment edit.

I also found when you make drastic changes to the alignment, sometimes the matchlines are not on the original stationing, and you need to move them back osnapping to the correct station. It sometimes takes a couple snaps to get it back to the original stationing.

---

I did that for the 76 sheets I created a couple of days ago. Two issues so far:

1. The next sheet label is not working properly. Probably because we're forced to use SSM for the Web on ACC. Some drawings have the matchline label style reading the next sheet properly, but the majority do not. There is no button to refresh/update the label. Regen doesn't fix it nor does closing out of C3D & the SSM and reopening them.

2. The profile views do NOT line up with the alignment at the start of the sheet like they're supposed to. It might be because of the way the profile view style is setup, but none of them line up properly even though that option was checked.

[CADmgrMike]

1. Haven't used SSM for the web, but with the std SSM, there are several ways to break the matchline fields.

I teach users to NEVER open/edit the viewframe file and a plan/profile sheet file at the same time. (We don't put all the layouts in that drawing.

If you add the plan/profile sheets to a SS, don't move or rename them or the subset with the viewframe drawing open.

2. Sounds like you have an issue with the profile view style. Also check the template used for creating the plan/profile sheets. The viewports need to be setup correctly in that template.