Civil 3D to Forma and Coordinate Systems

[m_kingdon]

Any update of this?  I try and bring in an object that is georeferenced and I get this error.  I was expecting the ability to choose a coordinate system when starting a project.  I don't know what useful function is available in Forma if models can't be georeferenced?

[marthe.brondbo]

@m_kingdon Sorry - this one got lost for us! 
Moved it out of the original thread as it is a different subject. I will have someone take a look at it!
Thank you for the patience! 
Marthe

[kristoffer.dyrkorn]

Hi!

We can add missing coordinate systems to this dialog. To be precise about what should be added we would need to know the EPSG codes. Would this list be a good starting point - or are there others that are more relevant?

EPSG:2105

EPSG:2193

EPSG:3851
EPSG:4167

EPSG:27200


Best regards,

Kristoffer

[m_kingdon]

Hi.  Apologies for the delay, I have had a busy few weeks.  I don't understand why this has been marked as "solved" and I feel like I need to vent some frustration now regarding this situation.  I am a Civil 3D user; this is, to my knowledge, the most widely adopted design software for all things civil engineering related.  There seems to be absolutely no integration between Civil 3D and Forma.  To begin with, there must be matching coordinate system between the applications.  I consider coordinate system harmony as an absolute non-negotiable if I am going to consider using Forma in the future.  How could I use Forma if I can’t output anything that matches my Civil 3D projects?

I don’t know what or where “EPSG:2105” is, nor should I.  I shouldn’t have to become a GIS expert in order to get Forma and Civil 3D to be looking at the same place.  If you want to know what coordinate systems are in Civil 3D, well you work at AutoDesk, so just get a version of Civil 3D.  Or better yet, work closer with the Civil 3D development team.  Consider also speaking to the Infraworks teams as well.

[marthe.brondbo]

Hi again @m_kingdon !

Apologies for not having a solution for you - my bad! Sometimes I will accept solutions fromt he product team if there is no reply from users within a certain time. I have removed the accepted solution now.

I will make sure your post gets in front of the right people! I hear your frustration, and I am not aware of everything that is in development at Forma - but I do know that we are working on making Forma relevant in more use cases and workflows. Not sure how the integration between Civil 3d / Forma is prioritized.

Forma is still a "young" product, and we are working on a lot of stuff. Part of our development process is to listen to user needs, and have a dialogue with them to understand / and offer solutions that are a quick fix that might help short term while we are working on a larger one. 

All the best, 

Marthe


Again, I will share with the team and let you know the if there is any news on the Civil 3D and Forma connections.

[hakon.fure · Accepted solution]

Hi Mike, I am a data engineer at Forma working on GIS data, file import and coordinate systems. I agree with your vision that coordinate systems (as well as project data) should flow seamlessly between softwares such as Civil3D and Forma. Right now Forma works with a bit of a simpler coordinate systems model than Civil3D and so data coming from Civil3D is not natively understandable by Forma. 
I and my team are currently looking into expanding the coordinate system model in Forma in order to precisely support this type of workflow, whether it is coming from Civil3D, Revit or any other context for that matter. It is a non trivial problem to solve unfortunately, so I can't promise any improvements in the short term here. 
I hope at least this clarifies where we stand for now.
Cheers,
Håkon 

[SteveDFThorne]

I'm glad to hear this is being worked on! I primarily use Revit but for all site matters I use Civil 3D and Infraworks so integrations with these would be very welcome. Even with the work done on Revit 2025s toposolid tools, it is still no where near civil3d and infraworks. 

[m_kingdon]

Thanks very much for the clarification Håkon