Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Make it Easier to Create and Edit Pipe Network Parts

Make it Easier to Create and Edit Pipe Network Parts

The Parts Builder for Pipe Networks is far too complicated. Give us the ability to quickly and easily add custom pipe diameters, wall thicknesses and pipe materials, in a tabular format. This information should be stored inside the template. The same goes for standard structures. For custom structures, I would like to draw the part, then define which elements are variable similar to the way the AutoCAD block editor works.
15 Comments
JayVavra
Contributor

Agreed. Something better than Part Builder is greatly needed for creating custom structures.  Or Autodesk (or a third party) needs to include many more industry standard parts in a library either in Civil 3D or for sale as a separate package.

pieter_haeck
Advocate

I also agree strongly with this idea.

Autodesk already has the solution for this in another AutoCAD Vertical. AutoCAD Plant 3D has a Custom Part Builder included, which supports AutoCAD 3D Solid models to be converted to Plant Parts.

It would be nice if this technology could also be integrated in AutoCAD Civil 3D to quickly AND easily create custom parts for pipe networks from a drawn AutoCAD 3D Solid.

peter_thomson
Advocate

I also agree strongly with this. i particularly agree with Pieter's comment re 3d solids above.

 

My contention is that there could be, say, a parametric wingwall structure that hass all the elements that might be desired.  That is, a key at the front of the apron,  vertical height for front of wingwall,  headwall upstand, wall widths etc etc... and this part could be used to develop hundreds of permutations just by adding parameter values to a spreadsheet... If one of the elements is not required, then a zero value would cause it to not be included as part of the whole structure.

 

I also believe that AutoDESK should give us a much better starter with this stuff.  Drainage structures are pretty much the same the world over and they could provide a selection of common structures that users would copy and change parameters as required. I don't think this should be too difficult.  They have done ti elsewhere as  has been noted elsewhere in this post.

 

The Kameleon project for Infraworks shows promise, but there is still a complicated user interface that a user has to learn to convert these structures to work inside C3D.

 

Peter T

cstorms
Observer

Great feedback, much of it consistent with what we recognize needs to be done to improve Project Kameleon. The emphasis on providing shape templates that are easy to configure for specific part sizes is exactly the approach we aimed to support. Still working on the shape template library. The C3D converter for Project Kameleon absolutely should be automated. Working on improvements.

C3D_TomR
Collaborator
I agree with this request and the feedback provided thus far.
troma
Mentor

Why can't I just edit a pipe diameter or wall thickness on a per-pipe basis?

Why all this messing about with disjointed linked files? Just put all the data in the drawing!

Why does it take four hours of deleting, repointing, closing and opening drawings to get a d-reffed pipe network to update to the right wall thicknesses?! Smiley Mad And I still have to relabel them. And do it in the next drawing!

troma
Mentor

Basically, I think this is what I'm aiming at: along with making it easier to create and edit pipe network parts, you must make those changes propagate through the data shortcut when editing parts that are already created and data referenced.

brianchapmandesign
Collaborator

I'd like to see the existing 3d tools in autocad built into Civil 3d be used.  This way I can construct anything I want with relative ease and just choose the faces I want to stretch depending on what it references...if it's the rim, it would stretch up to the surface, etc. It would be easy to define points of connection for pipes and whatever as well, perhaps by utilizing a node.

dsimeone
Autodesk
Status changed to: Accepted

Changed status to Accepted. The Labs "Kameleon" project is clearly focused on addressing this request. Note that we've used the Kameleon project to develop both gravity and pressure content that is included in Civil 3D 2017. We're field testing it with the creation of our own content.

peter_thomson
Advocate
Many thanks for attending to this request. It really has been a long time coming so I am ecstatic that it is now being addressed.

Please Please! Create a generic inlet/outlet wingwall structure that includes all components of any wingwall that can be activated with a dimension or not included by using a zero dimension. This for items like headwall upstands or keys.

Regards,
Peter T

Peter Thomson
Senior Civil Designer - AP Delivery
Level 3, John Wickliffe House,
265 Princes Street, Dunedin 9016
Postal Address:
PO Box 13052
Christchurch 8141
Phone: +64 3 474 3098
Mobile: +64 21 255 5790
[cid:image001.jpg@01D1AB83.5D761420]
MWH, now part of Stantec
Please visit www.stantec.comto learn more about how Stantec designs with community in mind.
Status changed to: Future Consideration

This is a great idea, but the timing isn’t quite right for development consideration in the near term. As such, it is being put on the back burner to be re-visited at a later date. Please continue to comment and add your support.

 

Regards,

 

Peter Funk

Sr. Product Manager

Autodesk, Inc.

Dandman01
Participant

For the love of everything Holy sort this out.

peter_thomson
Advocate

We are now 2 years "later".  It would be great if Autodesk could let us know where they are at with this. The "interface" between Infraworks and C3D should be seamless  with this issue.

Peter T

Leutsky_VA
Collaborator

Всем привет.

 

Понимаю что я уже немного опоздал с этим комментарием, но все же напишу.

Сейчас есть два инструмента для добавление деталей к трубопроводам, это PartBuilder и Inventor, плюс PartBuilder в том, что можно сделать деталь абсолютно динамическую во всех параметрах и плоскостях, минус в том, что он достаточно сложен для работы и не хватает функционала как у Inventor. В то же время как, Inventor, очень прост и удобен в создании детали, но нет возможности передавать в "Свойства элемента" нужную информацию по параметрам, т.е. есть только ограниченное количество строк, в то время как в PartBuilder можно делать все что угодно и оно будет работать. Так же в Inventor нельзя создавать параметры со значением "интервала", а это очень усложняет работу.

 

Надеюсь я донёс смысл своего поста. Если кому-то будет интересна дополнительная информацию, готов обсудить лично.

 

Google translate

 

Hello everyone.

 

I understand that I am already a little late with this comment, but I will write anyway.

Now there are two tools for adding parts to pipelines, these are PartBuilder and Inventor, plus PartBuilder is that you can make a part absolutely dynamic in all parameters and planes, minus that it is quite complex to work with and lacks functionality like Inventor. At the same time, Inventor is very simple and convenient in creating a part, but it is not possible to pass the necessary information on parameters to the "element Properties", i.e. there are only a limited number of lines, while in PartBuilder you can do anything and it will work. Also, you cannot create parameters with the value of "interval" in Inventor, and this makes work very difficult.

 

I hope I have conveyed the meaning of my post. If someone is interested in additional information, I am ready to discuss it personally.

TimYarris
Autodesk
Status changed to: Accepted

This idea is under consideration for a future version of Civil 3D. Please visit the Autodesk Civil Infrastructure Product Roadmap for details and to vote for this idea to indicate its importance relative to other items that are under consideration.

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Submit Idea  

Answer Day

Rail Community


 

Autodesk Design & Make Report