You can try this method.
You already have the asbuilt point data.
So keep it in an excel sheet.
Then import these points into your drawing with the surface.
Select all points. (Right-click on points on the prospector and choose 'select')
All points will be selected.
Right-click and select 'elevations from the surface'.
It will set the elevations to all points from the surface.
Now export these points to csv.
Compare the elevations in the two point files at the corresponding locations.
Hi @bien.magtuto,
Welcome to the Autodesk Forums.
I think perpendicular to sloped surface would be called "normal" to the surface. An offset to sloped surface is certainly possible, although not without help from Dynamo or other custom programming. A report like you want would be difficult because as you note it's not vertical. You would need to decide how to pair up coordinates to compare.
Dave
Dave Stoll
Las Vegas, Nevada
NVIDIA Quadro P5000 16GB
Windows 10 Pro 64 / Civil 3D 2024
What you're asking for is difficult. Some function in the built-in Geometry calculator could be used. But to put it into a program you would have to be able to pick the 3DFace that a perpendicular from the point would hit. It's a Catch 22 situation. You would have to know the normal vector from the face before you could do the calculation.
I suppose you could get around that by using the vertices of the 3DFace to create a selection set. But that has it's own problems.
You might ask in the Civil 3D Customization Forum.
Functions from the Geometry Calculator.
Allen Jessup
CAD Manager - Designer
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
What do you plan to do with the points once you get the 'report?' What value does this report provide?
exsiting x1 vs. perpen x1
existing y1 vs. perpen y1
existing z1 vs. perpen z1
exsiting x2 vs. perpen x2
existing y2 vs. perpen y2
existing z2 vs. perpen z2
exsiting x3 vs. perpen x3
existing y3 vs. perpen y3
existing z3 vs. perpen z3
etc.
etc.
OK, now what?
How have you been addressing this problem since like 2010 and now?
Chicagolooper
If you were to consider third party software, DotSoft's C3DTools will report the vertical distance from CogoPoints to a selected surface.
If you truly need the distance to the normal of surface faces, we could look into adding that. Note that the tool would slow down significantly on this process as compared to a simple vertical distance.
DotSoft: The Leading Developer@bien.magtuto,
How about a Quick Profile at each Survey Point?
Dave
Dave Stoll
Las Vegas, Nevada
NVIDIA Quadro P5000 16GB
Windows 10 Pro 64 / Civil 3D 2024
@TerryDotson wrote:
If you try need the distance to the normal of surface faces, we could look into adding that. Note that the tool would slow down significantly on this process as compared to a simple vertical distance.
How about a second tool so as not to interfere with the first? If you were going to work on that. You might be able to create the Offset Normal to Surface that people have been looking for for decades.
Allen Jessup
CAD Manager - Designer
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
How would this command that has yet to be invented work in the real world? If your drawing reveals shotcrete is too thin, say one-half inch, then do you add more product to the thin area? If yes, that makes sense because you have a minimum thickness requirement.
If your drawing, however, indicates shotcrete is too thick, do you grind it down half an inch? Or do you just leave it as is? In addition to a minimum thickness, do you also have a maximum thickness? Just curious.
Chicagolooper
How about a second tool so as not to interfere with the first?
So much of the existing dialog applies that I think a radio button at the top for ...
Method: ( ) Normal
(o) VerticalChange the grid column heading to "Normal" and the coordinates would be those of the point on the triangle (not matching the CogoPoint usually). We want to keep load times as fast as possible so the add-on doesn't slow down the startup of Civil3D any more than necessary.
You might be able to create the Offset Normal to Surface that people have been looking for for decades.
That remains a difficult scenario which is why I don't think anyone has done it. Consider this image of just a few triangles.
As you can see, sometimes the resulting triangles intersect (bottom), sometimes they create a gap (top), and a depression area would be a mess. I suppose one could project all the triangle corners at the normal and throw a bunch of points at the triangulator and hope it could make something of it and heal the edges. I may try that just to see.
@TerryDotson All I can say is been there. This is one of my preliminary attempts. Probably from the '90s.
(Defun c:MassFace()
(arxload "geomcal")
(setq SEL_SET(ssget "x" (list(cons 0 "3DFACE"))) ;Set of all 3DFACES
SET_LENGTH (sslength SEL_SET) ;Set Length
TRACK 0
)
(while (< TRACK SET_LENGTH)
(setq ENTY (entget (ssname SEL_SET TRACK)) ;Get Entity
ENAM (cdr (assoc -1 ENTY)) ;Get Entity Name
PNT1 (cdr (assoc 10 ENTY)) ;Get First point of 3Dface
PNT2 (cdr (assoc 11 ENTY)) ;Get Second point of 3Dface
PNT3 (cdr (assoc 12 ENTY)) ;Get Third point of 3Dface
) ; Close setq
(command "3dface" (c:cal "pnt1 + 10*nor(pnt1,pnt2,pnt3)") (c:cal "pnt2 +
10*nor(pnt2,pnt3,pnt1)") (c:cal "pnt3 + 10*nor(pnt3,pnt1,pnt2)") (c:cal
"pnt3 + 10*nor(pnt3,pnt1,pnt2)") "")
(setq TRACK (+ TRACK 1))
) ; Close while
)
I had thought of trying to create a point average of the offset 3DFaces. But this lost priority and I never went any further with it.
BTW: I was also corresponding with Steve Cannon on this. The original post have been lost in time. See:
Allen Jessup
CAD Manager - Designer
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
This is one of my preliminary attempts. Probably from the '90s.
I had thought of trying to create a point average of the offset 3DFaces. But this lost priority and I never went any further with it.
When you run that and create the 3dFaces, how does the Triangulation from these new faces turn out. Seems like a mess waiting to happen at the edges.
@TerryDotson wrote:
When you run that and create the 3dFaces, how does the Triangulation from these new faces turn out. Seems like a mess waiting to happen at the edges.
Yes. A mess. Just like you showed in your image. I'd had a couple of thoughts on how to clean them up. But I never went any further.
The peaks weren't too bad. But the valleys were awful.
Allen Jessup
CAD Manager - Designer
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
