Hi all,
?ÿ
I was wondering if you could help me.?ÿ I realize everyone's time is precious so I will try to formulate my questions so that one can answer "yes/no."?ÿ I am interested in actual users experience as, while I can appreciate a salesperson's answers, I like to hear "boots on the ground" feedback.?ÿ?ÿ
?ÿ
Background: we are a small geomatics firm that is currently linked to a larger engineering firm.?ÿ Due to regulatory oversite in our province, we are incorporated as a separate company.?ÿ Our deliverables to the engineers (*per their request*) are typically a plan (ie. pdf), AutoCAD linework/txt (ie. dumbed-down, exported DWG), and 3d faces w/ boundaries (ie. for surface recreation).?ÿ The "powers that be" have dictated that there is to be no "server sharing" and that we act as separate companies.?ÿ Thus, no Autodesk vault, no advantage to the survey database, no "drop-in" implementation to aid the engineers w/ their design.?ÿ These deliverables are fairly typical for a geomatics firm to engineers in our area.?ÿ We only have one copy of Starnet and I am the only person capable of using it.?ÿ Purchasing it, even as a network option, is another additional cost.?ÿ?ÿ
Thus, we have an opportunity to purchase Carlson, maintain lower maintenance costs on CAD, gain additional copies of a LSA program, still provide the same deliverables, and expand our office's skillset so that others may help in prepping data.?ÿ I understand all copies of Survey to have a version of SurvNet so if every drafter has a copy, we can train certain individuals to aid w/ the adjustments/data checking. We currently generate all of our linework using a Carlson product (ie. we do not use Autodesk's FtF).?ÿ With our situation in mind:
1. If one purchases Carlson Survey OEM (ie. AutoCAD-based), the points are still LDD/AutoCAD style, correct??ÿ ie. they are not the cogo point style of Civil3d?
2. Once one defines their Survey point style template (ie. a manhole with the block and text), are they annotative??ÿ We have invested heavily in our C3D template so that a point designating a manhole comes in with the symbol and label, both being annotative in case we need to do a plan detail and greatly appreciate this.?ÿ Also, sometimes, there is a large cluster of points.?ÿ We like that we can switch to a scale of 1:50 to scale down the point size in Model, see what was going on, layer on/off certain things, and then bump the scale back up to the layouts 1:300 quickly and easily.
3. Will a template created in Carlson Survey OEM behave the same for OEM and IntelliCAD-based Carlson Survey programs??ÿ Management has proven open to the idea of an Autodesk-based product due to past bias against IntelliCAD.?ÿ If this is approved and the program implementation a success, it would be nice to know that we could also use it for the IntelliCAD version if that is then decided as an option.
4. Is there a Carlson Survey/Civil equivalent to featurelines??ÿ I see that there is a Polyline Elevation Editor, but as a heavy featureline user, quite frankly, that is not equivalent.?ÿ
5.?ÿ If there is no featureline equivalent, is there an available addon (from anyone) that adds similar functionality??ÿ Our drafters heavily rely on featurelines for lot grading design.
6. For Survey, is there an equivalent of grading tools or corridors??ÿ We use either for curb definition.?ÿ I realize one can use horizontal and vertical offsets on the points in field to finish, but this is a hassle compared to using a standard "CAD jig" and we run into point description length issues.?ÿ We have standard curb types defined provincially so that we do not need to manually enter them each time.?ÿ We use either a corridor on featureline or grading tool template so that we only need to pick up the EP, but have the 3d curb generated automatically.?ÿ We define dropped/full curb when things are picked up and use the appropriate template.?ÿ We audit the curb to make sure it was installed as per Ontario Provincial Standard Drawing (OPSD) templates.?ÿ Dotsoft Mapworks->Figures->Offsets seems similar, but I believe it only works with featurelines.
7. SurvNet's equivalent to Starnet's Aliases is the "Pt. Number Substitution String?"?ÿ So Aliases need to be done at the individual point rather than listing them all in one Alias file?
8. SurvNet does not have a Starnet Pre-Analysis equivalent, correct??ÿ?ÿ
9. SurvNet does not fail based on a lower Chi value, correct??ÿ It seems to only note if you exceed the maximum (within a certain range) and does not note if you exceed the lower based upon your instrument's entered values.
10. SurvNet does not have a cluster detect option, correct? Numbers 7-10 are extremely handy features in Starnet that, from my reading, it seems SurvNet does not have a complete equivalent to.
11. SurvNet seems to allow one to enter their total station instrument specs--is there an equivalent for GNSS equipment??ÿ There seems to be "GPS Standard Errors," but no Centering or separation of Horizontal and Vertical components like in Starnet.?ÿ Sidenote--I have based these assumptions on reading the SurvNet 5 Manual so apologies if that is out of date.?ÿ It was the most technically proficient manual I could find online.
?ÿ
On a side note, if anyone transitioned from Civil3D to Carlson Survey, I would be very interested in your experience and your advice.?ÿ Ie. what would have made it easier.?ÿ Heck, even people who went from LDD to Carlson Survey have valuable input for me.
Thanks for any and all input.
?ÿ
I recently switched from C3D 2021 and Star*Net to Carlson Survey 2022 and SurvNet.?ÿ I'll get used to it, but I consider it a step down.?ÿ Star*Net is the best least squares software I've used due to its speed, intuitive user interface, customer support, pre-analysis routine, and ability to work with a variety of data.?ÿ You will be able to accomplish your tasks, other than the pre-analysis, with SurvNet but you are not going to like it.?ÿ I am currently requesting a floating license for the current version of Star*Net.?ÿ For those who have never used Star*Net, SurvNet will seem like a decent enough tool.
1. Carlson points are more like blocks.?ÿ They put a great deal of effort into their CRD thingy but this feels like a solution in need of a problem to me.?ÿ I'm sure I'll get used to it some day.
2. I've been told they are annotative but it doesn't seems to be more of a manual process.?ÿ I still haven't figured out any method of scaling points that is a quick as C3D.
7. I'm still learning SurvNet but I believe you're correct, there is no quick and easy way to perform the .alias command.?ÿ What I really miss is the ability to select multiple rows and permanently or temporarily remove them from the solution via the pound symbol prefix.?ÿ I also miss the ease of having multiple data sets in tabs.?ÿ I'm dreading using SurvNet for a large project with data multiple forms of data from multiple crews.?ÿ I'm sure Carlson only guys have a good routine for this, but I'm unclear as to how one can easily keep the data separated.
8. Correct, it does not.
9. It does, but it doesn't spell it out for you.?ÿ We failed on the low end and you just need to look at the middle number and compare it to the others.?ÿ 0.086 <= 0.075 <= 0.15 or something similar would indicate that you failed on the low end.?ÿ 0.086 <= 0.17 <= 0.15 would indicate you failed on the high end.
10. I haven't found one yet
11. In SurvNet 2022 you can input a GPS Instrument Centering error as well as a Vector standard error.
I am in a management role and have not put enough time into learning Carlson Survey.?ÿ Most likely, I'm just resistant to change.?ÿ Point scaling and semi-annotative blocks annoy me in Carlson.?ÿ I fail to see the utility of constantly messing with a crd file since I've never had problems with inadvertently moving points.?ÿ I thought the best thing about moving from LDD to C3D was leaving behind the automatically generated file architecture.?ÿ I'm less than thrilled that Carlson still does this.?ÿ I suspect that if I were to design a subdivision I'd find some positive things to say about Carlson.?ÿ Right now I wish I was still using C3D and Star*Net.
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
SurvNet does not fail based on a lower Chi value, correct?
Neither does StarNet, really. It just says that it does.?ÿ
The points, I believe, are more analagous to Softdesk. Actual blocks, not objects.
Carlson is good software, but be forewarned that to function fully there are a number of external files that have to be kept "attached" to your drawing file. That can be a bit of an exercise.
I've used Carlson. I have both Carlson and C3d at my disposal. I use Civil 3d almost exclusively and StarNet to do adjustments / data resolutions.?ÿ?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
I've got LDD and Carlson. I encouraged my just out of College graduate to learn Carlson He got extremely discouraged trying to learn how to use it. I showed h how to do the same tasks in LDD. He gave up on Carlson and stayed with LDD. About all we use Carlson is to change different file types to use on LDD. I thought their point file system was cumbersome and trying to find a command in the menu was aggregating.
If you go to the AutoCad based Carlson you still have to get a subscription don't you? If you're going to also pay for that there probably isn't any savings.
I would definitely recommend a Carlson training course or two. Their technical support is far better than AutoCad.
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
The last time I used Star*Net was when it was written for DOS, so my basis for comparison is way out of date. Also, I only used Civil 3D 2010-2012. I love working with Carlson Survey. It does so many things, so much better. The F2F is incredibly capable. That said, I find their SurvNet program rather clunky and not nearly as capable as the user manual says it is. I can get by with it. You would probably be better off to get more licenses for Star*Net and train your staff, since you already are skilled with it.
there are a number of external files that have to be kept "attached" to your drawing file. That can be a bit of an exercise.
I haven't experienced this problem of things going unattached, that you speak of here.
You can buy Carlson with embedded ACAD, no subscription.?ÿ I think it's about $3000.
I haven't experienced this problem of things going unattached, that you speak of here.
Granted that most of my experience with Carlson was in 2011/2012. But I think that you will acknowledge that these files need to be specified in the first place. And if you need to archive the project or transfer the project offsite all those files need to be packaged together. If you are routinely concerned with just one drawing, or only a limited set of drawings, that probably isn't a big deal. But if, like me, you find yourself working in several different projects daily it can get to be a grind. With C3d (almost) everything is just in the dwg file and that is the end of that.?ÿ
Note that I do not use the Survey database, except to enable F2f in C3d. So I avoid having to track that.
It's basically the dwg and crd.?ÿ But, yeah, there are tin files, lot files, etc.?ÿ
I work on many projects too, but maybe on a smaller scale, and don't really have such issues that I can't transfer or backup all of those.
I have been using Carlson since 2007. I really like it. Civil3D seems too complicated for what I do. Our firm is 50% Carlson, and 50% or maybe a little more, Microstation Geopak, and transitioning to ORD.
That Cad Girl has a lot of good training resources, as does the Cadapult books. Once you get the hang of Carlson, it is powerful. I know Civil3D is good software, but I prefer Carlson. I send files to all types of clients, and they rarely have any issues using my data. LandXML is your friend.
I have both Carlson Survey OEM 2016, and Carlson Survey/Civil/GIS 2021 running on the Intellicad platform. The Intellicad is growing on me. I will probably upgradw my OEM license next year, just to keep it current. There are a few limitations in the Intellicad, such as plotting using pen styles and transparency as the same time.
I??m right there with ya. I have been using Carlson since 2019. I have many years of experience with Microstation/Inroads and C3D. I am currently running Carlson Survey 2020 with IntelliCAD. It was definitely an adjustment but it was worth it since I also use SurvCE in the field. The two work very well together and seem to be built for the type of?ÿwork I do. I am still learning something new weekly that makes it better and better. The support team at Carlson is top notch and That CAD Girl is also a great resource.
I like to keep things simple. Bentley and Autodesk have jumped the shark in my opinion. My customers range from individual homeowners to large engineering firms. Not one of my engineering firms has had any difficulties with my deliverables. My $0.02
2. Once one defines their Survey point style template (ie. a manhole with the block and text), are they annotative??ÿ We have invested heavily in our C3D template so that a point designating a manhole comes in with the symbol and label, both being annotative in case we need to do a plan detail and greatly appreciate this.?ÿ Also, sometimes, there is a large cluster of points.?ÿ We like that we can switch to a scale of 1:50 to scale down the point size in Model, see what was going on, layer on/off certain things, and then bump the scale back up to the layouts 1:300 quickly and easily.
Very functional, with a lot of options. Points can be screen picked, or picked individually, or by number range, description.
Use a template, create your own for a standard on import.?ÿ Scale, change color, text angles, fonts .. just anything.
Really something when you you get a handle on it.?ÿ
Labeling feature is the bomb, and they are editable.
Traverse PC.?ÿ We're not supposed to advertise here, and I'm honestly not trying to but, it's software for surveyors, built by surveyors. They should get a mention.
?ÿ
4. Is there a Carlson Survey/Civil equivalent to featurelines??ÿ I see that there is a Polyline Elevation Editor, but as a heavy featureline user, quite frankly, that is not equivalent.?ÿ
5.?ÿ If there is no featureline equivalent, is there an available addon (from anyone) that adds similar functionality??ÿ Our drafters heavily rely on featurelines for lot grading design.
On a side note, if anyone transitioned from Civil3D to Carlson Survey, I would be very interested in your experience and your advice.?ÿ Ie. what would have made it easier.?ÿ Heck, even people who went from LDD to Carlson Survey have valuable input for me.
4. No, there is no equivalent. Nothing even remotely close. Plain Jane 3d polyline is all.
5. I am aware of none.
I wouldn't say I've transitioned from C3D to Carlson, but I've used both. I'm pretty sure I've complimented you in the past. I would consider you a power user. I believe you will find yourself feeling restricted within Carlson.
